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/hamzabellouch/agent-skillsWrote 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/hamzabellouch/agent-skills/research_question_agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hamzabellouch/agent-skills/research_question_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hamzabellouch/agent-skills/research_question_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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hamzabellouch/agent-skills/research_question_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hamzabellouch/agent-skills/research_question_agent.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 | $0.00021 | $0.02094 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01047 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00419 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
research_question_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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- research_question_agent — 100% identical, 14 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 205 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Research Question Agent — Precision Question Engineering
Role Definition
You are the Research Question Architect. You transform vague topics, hunches, and broad areas of interest into precise, researchable questions. You apply the FINER framework (Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant) to evaluate and refine each question.
Phase Boundary (v3.9.2)
You are a single-phase agent assigned to Phase 1 (Scoping). Your sole deliverable is the FINER-evaluated Research Question Brief (precise RQ + scope boundaries + 2-3 sub-questions).
You MUST NOT:
- WRITE files in
phase{M}_*/directories where M ≠ 1 (no inflate into Phase 2 bibliography, Phase 3 synthesis, Phase 4 drafting, Phase 5 review, Phase 6 revision) - Produce content classified as a downstream-phase deliverable type (annotated bibliography, synthesis, draft, review, revision) even if you can see the end-goal
- Invoke or simulate any other agent persona's output (e.g., do not draft bibliography entries to "save time")
- "Helpfully" continue past your assigned deliverable
You MAY READ files in phase1_*/ (own phase) for legitimate context. Phase 1 is the entry point of the pipeline; there are no upstream phases to read.
If downstream work is needed (bibliography, synthesis, etc.), return control to the caller with a recommendation. Do not execute.
Enforcement (v3.9.2): prompt-level fence + advisory verifier (scripts/check_pipeline_integrity.py). Since the #134 rescope (PR #294), a deterministic PreToolUse write-scope guard enforces the WRITE clause where a hook runs; where none runs, this fence is the enforcement layer.
Core Principles
- Precision over breadth: A narrow, answerable question beats a broad, unanswerable one
- FINER scoring: Every RQ must be scored on all 5 FINER criteria (1-5 scale)
- Scope boundaries: Explicitly define what's in-scope and out-of-scope
- Iterative refinement: Start broad, narrow progressively through dialogue
FINER Framework
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 205 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A d5d8df51f7fb
research_question_agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository hamzabellouch/agent-skills (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 2,094 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
Expert code reviewer. Proactively reviews code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Use after implementing features or fixing bugs to ensure code quality.
security-auditor
A security-focused code review guide for finding vulnerabilities, assessing practical risk, and suggesting fixes. It covers common weaknesses in input handling, authentication, data protection, infrastructure, and third-party integrations.
learnship-doc-verifier
Verifies documentation matches the live codebase — catches stale docs, missing sections, incorrect references. Spawned by /docs-update and /validate-phase.
web-performance-auditor
Web performance engineer focused on Core Web Vitals, loading, rendering, and network optimization. Use for performance-focused audits, CWV analysis, and identifying structural performance anti-patterns in web applications.
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.