Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cubetribe/ClaudeCode_GodMode-OnWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/cubetribe/claudecode_godmode-on/researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cubetribe/claudecode_godmode-on/researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cubetribe/claudecode_godmode-on/researcher.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00016 | $0.02703 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.01352 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00541 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00270 |
Grade A, and why
researcher scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 8d ago First seen · 404 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 0ba5b0ff19b1
researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository cubetribe/ClaudeCode_GodMode-On (51 stars, last pushed 4d ago), with no licence file. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 2,703 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
apex
Engineering lead that translates product briefs into scoped work, dispatches specialists, and delivers unified output. Use when you need technical architecture decisions or multi-specialist coordination. Trigger with "scope this feature", "dispatch the engineering team".
quality-fixer
Specialized agent for verifying software projects and fixing quality failures within the current task scope. Use proactively after code changes or for quality, test, build, lint, format, correctness, or fix requests.
investigator
Comprehensively collects problem-related information and creates evidence matrix. Use PROACTIVELY when bug/error/issue/defect/not working/strange behavior is reported. Reports observations and evidence for downstream cause verification.
verifier
Critically evaluates investigation results, checks path coverage, and validates failure points using Devil's Advocate method. Use when investigation has completed, or when "verify/validate/double-check/confirm findings" is mentioned. Focuses on verification and conclusion derivation.
code-reviewer
Reviews completed implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality policy, and material code correctness. Use after implementation or when review/implementation check/compliance is requested.
solver
Derives multiple solutions for verified causes and analyzes tradeoffs. Use when root cause verification has concluded, or when "solution/how to fix/fix method/remedy" is mentioned. Focuses on solutions from given conclusions without investigation.