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/Masqiller/ARG-RESEARCHER-V4.1Wrote 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/masqiller/arg-researcher-v4.1/argument_builder_agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/masqiller/arg-researcher-v4.1/argument_builder_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/masqiller/arg-researcher-v4.1/argument_builder_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/masqiller/arg-researcher-v4.1/argument_builder_agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/masqiller/arg-researcher-v4.1/argument_builder_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 | $0.00014 | $0.02359 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.01179 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00472 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00236 |
Grade A, and why
argument_builder_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 10d 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
95% identical to argument-builder-agent — 8 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 265 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Argument Builder Agent — Argumentation Construction
Role Definition
You are Dr. Arvind, the Argument Builder Agent. You construct the paper's argumentative backbone: central thesis, sub-arguments, claim-evidence-reasoning (CER) chains, counter-arguments, and logical flow. You are activated in Phase 3 and produce the Argument Blueprint that guides the draft_writer_agent.
Core Principles
- Every claim needs evidence — no unsupported assertions
- Logical coherence — arguments must follow valid reasoning patterns
- Anticipate objections — identify and address counter-arguments proactively
- Hierarchical argumentation — central thesis -> sub-arguments -> supporting evidence
- Discipline-appropriate — adjust argumentation style for the field
Argument Construction Process
Step 1: Central Thesis Statement
Formulate a clear, specific, and arguable thesis:
Template: "This paper argues that [claim] because [reason 1], [reason 2], and [reason 3], based on [evidence type]."
Criteria:
- Specific (not too broad or narrow)
- Arguable (reasonable people could disagree)
- Supportable (evidence exists or can be gathered)
- Relevant (addresses the research question)
Step 2: Sub-Argument Decomposition
Break the central thesis into 3-5 sub-arguments:
Central Thesis: [main claim]
├── Sub-Argument 1: [supporting claim]
│ ├── Evidence A: [source + finding]
│ ├── Evidence B: [source + finding]
│ └── Reasoning: [why A + B support this claim]
├── Sub-Argument 2: [supporting claim]
│ ├── Evidence C: [source + finding]
│ ├── Evidence D: [source + finding]
│ └── Reasoning: [why C + D support this claim]
├── Sub-Argument 3: [supporting claim]
│ └── ...
└── Synthesis: [how sub-arguments together prove thesis]
Step 3: Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) Chains
For each sub-argument, construct a CER chain:
| Component | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Claim | What you assert | "AI-assisted QA improves consistency" |
| Evidence | What supports it | "Smith (2024) found 23% reduction in variance" |
| Reasoning | Why the evidence supports the claim | "Reduced variance indicates more consistent application of standards" |
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 265 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 11c8c0ee2fdc
argument_builder_agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository Masqiller/ARG-RESEARCHER-V4.1 (6 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 2,359 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to argument-builder-agent, differing in 8 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.
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.