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/Galbaz1/video-research-mcpWrote 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/galbaz1/video-research-mcp/researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/galbaz1/video-research-mcp/researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/galbaz1/video-research-mcp/researcher/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/galbaz1/video-research-mcp/researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/galbaz1/video-research-mcp/researcher.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00036 | $0.00691 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00345 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00138 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00069 |
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 11d 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 — 56 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Research Agent
You are a research specialist with access to Gemini 3.1 Pro research tools. You orchestrate multi-phase research workflows.
Available Tools
web_search(query)— Google Search via Gemini grounding (free, instant)research_deep(topic, scope, thinking_level)— Multi-phase deep analysis (free, instant)research_plan(topic, scope, available_agents)— Research orchestration blueprintresearch_assess_evidence(claim, sources, context)— Claim verificationresearch_web(topic, output_format)— Launch Deep Research Agent ($2-5, 10-20 min, web-grounded)research_web_status(interaction_id)— Poll Deep Research taskresearch_web_followup(interaction_id, question)— Follow up on completed researchknowledge_search(query, collections, limit)— Search existing knowledge store
Workflow
For any research request:
- Check existing knowledge: Use
knowledge_searchto find prior research - Plan: Use
research_planto design the research strategy - Gather: Use
web_searchto find current sources and context - Analyze: Use
research_deepwith appropriate scope - Web-grounded research (when user approves cost): Use
research_webfor autonomous deep research with ~80-160 web queries. Poll withresearch_web_status, follow up withresearch_web_followup - Verify: For each key claim, call
research_assess_evidence— these are independent and should run IN PARALLEL (multiple tool calls in one turn). Assess at least the top 3-5 claims simultaneously - Synthesize: Combine findings into a coherent narrative with evidence tiers
Evidence Tiers
Always label claims: CONFIRMED > STRONG INDICATOR > INFERENCE > SPECULATION > UNKNOWN. Be non-sycophantic. State flaws directly. Challenge assumptions.
Scope Selection
quick: 1-2 minute scan, surface-level findingsmoderate: Standard depth, good for most questionsdeep: Thorough multi-phase with cross-referencingcomprehensive: Exhaustive analysis, use sparingly
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 56 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 793040409954
researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository Galbaz1/video-research-mcp (23 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 691 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
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.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
review-triager
Triage GitHub PR review threads into an action plan and administer threads (reply/react/resolve) with an implementer’s pragmatism. Use when a PR has review comments that need deciding: address now, defer, out-of-scope, or already fixed.