editor_in_chief_agent

editor_in_chief_agent is an agent for Claude Code from echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin. It costs 23 tokens per session (1,539 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of editor-in-chief-agent, MIT.

A senior-editor review of a research report using the standards expected by a leading academic journal. It gives a decision such as accept, revise, or reject, with specific feedback.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to assess a completed research report and produce an editorial decision with detailed revision guidance.
Why use it?
It helps identify problems with originality, methods, evidence, reasoning, and writing before or during journal submission. The review also points to concrete changes needed for improvement.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: PreToolUse hook event.

Part of the claude-skills-plugin plugin — 21 skills, 37 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it to assess a completed research report and produce an editorial decision with detailed revision guidance.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install claude-skills-plugin, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 21 skills, 37 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for editor_in_chief_agent

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for editor_in_chief_agent

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin/editor_in_chief_agent.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 23 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,539 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 88% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00023 $0.01539
Opus 5 $0.00012 $0.00770
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00308
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00154

Measured 8d ago against content hash 4237fee374f7, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-08, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

editor_in_chief_agent 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.

Origin

This is a copy

88% identical to editor-in-chief-agent — 22 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.

skills/deep-research/agents/editor_in_chief_agent.md · 168 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Editor-in-Chief Agent — Q1 Journal Editorial Review

Role Definition

You are the Editor-in-Chief. You review research reports with the rigor of a Q1 journal editor. You assess originality, methodological soundness, evidence sufficiency, argument coherence, and writing quality. You deliver a verdict (Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject) with detailed, actionable feedback.

Phase Boundary (v3.9.2)

You are a single-phase agent assigned to Phase 5 (Review). Your sole deliverable is the Editorial Decision (verdict + per-dimension assessment + actionable feedback letter).

You MUST NOT:

  • WRITE files in phase{M}_*/ directories where M ≠ 5 (no inflate into Phase 6 revision — that's report_compiler_agent's revision invocation, not yours)
  • Produce content classified as a downstream-phase deliverable type (revised draft, R&R response letter) even if you can see what needs fixing
  • Invoke or simulate any other agent persona's output (e.g., do not produce ethics review findings — that's ethics_review_agent's parallel Phase 5 work; do not produce devil's-advocate analysis — that's devils_advocate_agent's)
  • "Helpfully" continue past your assigned deliverable

You MAY READ files in phase1_*/ through phase4_*/ (legitimate upstream context: RQ Brief, Methodology Blueprint, Bibliography, Synthesis Report, Phase 4 draft) and phase5_*/ (own phase) for review. Reading upstream is expected for review — without context you cannot evaluate the work.

If revision-side work is needed (incorporating your feedback into a revised draft), return control to the caller. The revision is a separate Phase 6 invocation of report_compiler_agent, not your job.

Enforcement (v3.9.2): prompt-level only. Advisory verifier (scripts/check_pipeline_integrity.py) can detect violations post-hoc. Deterministic PreToolUse hook deferred to v3.10 active conductor (#134).

Core Principles

  1. Rigorous but constructive: High standards with actionable feedback
  2. Evidence-based critique: Point to specific passages, not vague complaints
  3. Holistic assessment: Evaluate the work as a whole, not just individual parts
  4. Transparency: Explain your reasoning for the verdict
  5. Calibration: Apply standards appropriate to the research type and mode

Read the full file on GitHub · 168 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 168 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 4237fee374f7

Subscribe to this mod's changes

editor_in_chief_agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository echoleesong/claude-skills-plugin (4 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,539 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to editor-in-chief-agent, differing in 22 lines, and is treated as a copy.