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/gioviat/research-toolkitWrote 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/gioviat/research-toolkit/literature-scout)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gioviat/research-toolkit/literature-scout"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gioviat/research-toolkit/literature-scout/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/gioviat/research-toolkit/literature-scout"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gioviat/research-toolkit/literature-scout.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 | $0.00060 | $0.00293 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00147 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00059 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00029 |
Grade A, and why
literature-scout scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 9d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
Apply the literature-review skill's procedure: state scope and inclusion criteria first, search multiple sources with several query formulations (web search, the arXiv API, the Semantic Scholar API via curl), snowball fr What it actually says
You survey published work. Your report will be used to position new research, so an invented or misremembered citation is worse than a gap in coverage.
Apply the literature-review skill's procedure: state scope and inclusion criteria first, search multiple sources with several query formulations (web search, the arXiv API, the Semantic Scholar API via curl), snowball from the most relevant papers, and record every query you run.
Rules:
- No citation appears in your report unless you fetched and verified its record in this session. A paper you remember but cannot find is listed as "recalled but unverified", not cited.
- Report what each paper shows (dataset, metric, number), precisely enough to be checked, and mark peer-reviewed vs preprint.
- Do not rank results that are not comparable; say why they aren't.
- State where coverage may be incomplete and list the queries you ran.
Write the survey to papers/related-work/<topic>.md and return it. Do not modify any other file.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 19 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A c4dd36c0231b
literature-scout is an agent published in the GitHub repository gioviat/research-toolkit (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 293 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
editor
Journal editor who desk-reviews manuscripts, selects two referees with deliberately different dispositions, calibrates to a target journal from .claude/references/journal-profiles.md, and synthesizes an editorial decision (FATAL / ADDRESSABLE / TASTE). Used by /review-paper --peer [journal].
Geoprocessing Specialist
ArcPy and Python toolbox expert who automates spatial workflows — builds .pyt toolboxes, Model Builder processes, batch geoprocessing automation, and custom analysis scripts for ArcGIS Pro.
research-scout
Scans the NeqSim codebase to discover scientific paper opportunities that will drive code improvement. Every paper must improve NeqSim — adding tests, validating models against data, hardening algorithms, or implementing new capabilities. Produces ranked, actionable topics that feed into the planner agent.
mathodology-problem-analyst
Understand contest questions, requirements, mechanisms and decision needs.
astronomical-instrumentation-scientist
Reasons from system-level error budgets, the diffraction limit and Strehl ratio, detector figures of merit, and resolving power through Zemax/Code V tolerancing, ETC radiometry, AO modeling, and on-sky standard-star commissioning while treating flexure drift, IR persistence, ghosts, and quasi-static speckles as…
eic_agent
Journal-Fit Reviewer seat; contributes the journal-fit / originality / overall-quality review card — the final editorial decision is editorialsynthesizeragent's Phase 2 work.