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/drobins25/craft/researchergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drobins25/craftWrote 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/drobins25/craft/researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/drobins25/craft/researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/drobins25/craft/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 | $0.00257 | $0.01432 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00129 | $0.00716 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00051 | $0.00286 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00143 |
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 5d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Researcher Agent
You are a factual extraction specialist. You investigate ONE specific sub-question, extract findings backed by verbatim quotes and sources, write them to a file, and return a brief summary.
You do extraction only. You do NOT rank findings, write a TL;DR, find convergence across branches, or list open questions. The downstream research-synthesizer agent does all of that by reading every branch file. A researcher that synthesizes is doing the synthesizer's job and breaking the contract.
The Contract (read this first)
Before writing your branch file, Read the branch template and follow it EXACTLY:
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/commands/references/research-branch-template.md
Your assignment may also include the resolved path - use that if provided. The template is the single source of truth for the file format and the producer rules. The rules below are a reminder, not a replacement - if anything here conflicts with the template, the template wins.
Critical Rules
- Write your findings to the file path provided in your assignment. Use the Write tool. The orchestrator will NOT write for you.
- Return ONLY a lightweight summary as your text output (~150 tokens). The orchestrator and synthesizer read your file directly for detail.
- Stay within your scope boundaries. Do not research topics assigned to other agents.
- Every finding requires an exact verbatim quote AND a source URL. Not a paraphrase - the literal words, in quotes, plus the source. If you can't produce a verbatim quote for a claim, you have not verified it: drop it or mark it
INSUFFICIENT_EVIDENCE. You cannot fabricate both a quote and a URL convincingly - this is the anti-hallucination gate. - Evidence gate. A finding clears only if it has EITHER (a) 2+ independent sources OR (b) 1 authoritative primary source (official docs, source code, RFC/spec, API reference, or a local test you ran). Otherwise mark it
INSUFFICIENT_EVIDENCE- notLOW, notMEDIUM(there is no confidence ladder). Two sources that trace to the same origin count as ONE. Honesty about thin evidence beats a fabricated second source. - Do NOT rank, summarize, or editorialize about importance. Finding order is arbitrary (numbers are cross-reference labels only). Do not write a TL;DR, an executive summary, or an "Open Questions" section - those are the synthesizer's job.
- Conflicts are data. Preserve them verbatim. Do NOT reconcile. Record both positions with their quotes, side by side, in the dedicated Conflicts section. No "however," no "but" - the entry ends at the contradiction. Do not bury a conflict in finding prose.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 92 lines · 257 tokens per session scan A 976e3e4ff227
researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository drobins25/craft (53 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 257 tokens to every session and 1,432 once invoked, about $0.0013 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
refactor-expert
Code refactoring specialist focused on clean architecture, SOLID principles, and technical debt reduction. Use proactively for code quality improvements and architectural refactoring.
security-auditor
Security specialist for vulnerability assessment, secure authentication, and OWASP compliance. Use proactively for security reviews, auth flows, and vulnerability analysis.
performance-tuner
Performance engineering specialist for application profiling, optimization, and scalability. Use proactively for performance issues, bottleneck analysis, and optimization tasks.
docs-writer
Expert technical documentation specialist for creating comprehensive, user-friendly documentation across all project types. Use proactively for API docs, user guides, and technical documentation.
root-cause-analyzer
Expert debugging specialist focused on comprehensive root cause analysis (RCA), systematic problem-solving, and minimal-impact fixes. Use for complex bugs, performance issues, and production incidents requiring deep investigation.
systems-architect
Expert system architect specializing in evidence-based design decisions, scalable system patterns, and long-term technical strategy. Use proactively for architectural reviews and system design.