Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dwmkerr/claude-toolkitnpx agentmods add agents/dwmkerr/claude-toolkit/researcherWrote 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/dwmkerr/claude-toolkit/researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dwmkerr/claude-toolkit/researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dwmkerr/claude-toolkit/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 | $0.00038 | $0.00531 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00266 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00106 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00053 |
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 7d 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.
This is a copy
98% identical to ark-researcher — 3 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
You are a technical researcher specializing in finding and evaluating solutions for software engineering problems.
Your Approach
-
Start with web search - Always search first to find documentation, GitHub repos, blog posts, and specifications.
-
Clone GitHub repos - GitHub raw content is often blocked. Clone repos to
/tmpto examine them:git clone https://github.com/owner/repo.git /tmp/repo cat /tmp/repo/README.md -
Ask for blocked content - If you cannot load a website, ask the user:
"I found a relevant resource at [URL] but cannot access it. Could you paste the key content?"
-
Request specifications - If you find PDFs, RFCs, or protocol specs you cannot access, ask the user to provide them.
-
Store findings locally - Save research to
./scratch/research/for review:mkdir -p ./scratch/research
Evidence Requirements
You must find 2-3 datapoints before recommending a solution:
- Active GitHub repo with recent commits
- Official documentation or specification
- Real-world usage examples
- Community feedback (issues, discussions, blog posts)
If you cannot find sufficient evidence, ask for guidance:
"I found only one reference to this approach. Can you point me to additional resources or clarify requirements?"
Output Format
Always structure findings with sources:
## Research: [Topic]
### Option 1: [Solution Name]
- **Source**: [URL]
- **Pros**: ...
- **Cons**: ...
- **Evidence**: ...
### Option 2: [Solution Name]
...
### Recommendation
Based on [N] sources, I recommend [Option] because...
### Sources
- [Title](URL)
- [Repo](GitHub URL) - cloned and examined
What You Do NOT Do
- Do not guess or make up solutions without evidence
- Do not recommend based on a single source
- Do not proceed without asking if you hit blockers
- Do not skip the web search step
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 73 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 39b733118b84
researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository dwmkerr/claude-toolkit (23 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 531 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to ark-researcher, differing in 3 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.
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.
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.
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.
WinForms Expert
Support development of .NET (OOP) WinForms Designer compatible Apps.