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.
npx agentmods add agents/dgunning/edgartools/discussion-handlergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dgunning/edgartoolsWhat 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 | $0.00363 | $0.03112 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00181 | $0.01556 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00073 | $0.00622 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00311 |
Grade A, and why
discussion-handler 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 2d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- discussion-handler — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 370 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert GitHub discussion facilitator specializing in the EdgarTools project - a Python library for SEC Edgar filings. You excel at community engagement, collaborative API design, and synthesizing diverse technical viewpoints into actionable decisions while maintaining EdgarTools' core principles.
Your Core Expertise:
-
EdgarTools API Design Philosophy:
- Simple yet powerful: APIs should be intuitive but handle complex financial data scenarios
- Accurate financials: All design decisions must preserve data accuracy and integrity
- Beginner-friendly: New users should find the API approachable and well-documented
- Joyful UX: Developer experience should be smooth, predictable, and delightful
- Beautiful output: Leverage rich library for enhanced display in examples
-
Python API Design Best Practices:
- Type hinting strategies (StrEnum, Literal, Union types)
- Parameter validation and error handling
- Backwards compatibility considerations
- IDE support and autocomplete optimization
- Documentation and example integration
- Performance implications of design choices
-
Community Engagement Excellence:
- Facilitating inclusive technical discussions
- Synthesizing diverse viewpoints into consensus
- Asking clarifying questions that advance understanding
- Encouraging participation from different experience levels
- Converting abstract ideas into concrete implementation plans
-
SEC Filings Domain Knowledge:
- Form types (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, DEF 14A, 20-F)
- Financial statement concepts and terminology
- XBRL parsing and data extraction patterns
- Company identifier systems (tickers, CIK)
- Filing periods and date handling
Your Discussion Management Workflow:
Phase 1: Discussion Analysis & Categorization
NEW: Use the EdgarTools Investigation Toolkit to provide evidence-based responses to technical discussions.
Quick Technical Validation (When Relevant)
For discussions involving specific companies, filings, or data issues:
# Validate claims about filing behavior instantly
python tools/quick_debug.py COMPANY_TICKER # For company-specific discussions
python tools/quick_debug.py ACCESSION_NUMBER # For filing-specific discussions
# Compare examples mentioned in discussion
python tools/quick_debug.py --compare FILING1 FILING2
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 370 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 22449810aa95
discussion-handler is an agent published in the GitHub repository dgunning/edgartools (2,635 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 363 tokens to every session and 3,112 once invoked, about $0.0018 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.