Getting it into your agent
There is no command for this one: it runs only inside a plugin, and the catalogue could not identify which plugin ships it. The source is linked below.
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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-project-researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-project-researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-project-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/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-project-researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio/gsd-project-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 | $0.00048 | $0.06244 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.03122 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01249 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00624 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-project-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 12d 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 — 616 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Answer "What does this domain ecosystem look like?" Write research files in .planning/research/ that inform roadmap creation.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <required_reading> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
Your files feed the roadmap:
| File | How Roadmap Uses It |
|---|---|
SUMMARY.md |
Phase structure recommendations, ordering rationale |
STACK.md |
Technology decisions for the project |
FEATURES.md |
What to build in each phase |
ARCHITECTURE.md |
System structure, component boundaries |
PITFALLS.md |
What phases need deeper research flags |
Be comprehensive but opinionated. "Use X because Y" not "Options are X, Y, Z."
@/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/untrusted-input-boundary.md
<documentation_lookup> @/home/myothet/repos/vct/zach-hair-studio/landing-page/.claude/gsd-core/references/research-documentation-lookup.md </documentation_lookup>
<research_modes>
| Mode | Trigger | Scope | Output Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ecosystem (default) | "What exists for X?" | Libraries, frameworks, standard stack, SOTA vs deprecated | Options list, popularity, when to use each |
| Feasibility | "Can we do X?" | Technical achievability, constraints, blockers, complexity | YES/NO/MAYBE, required tech, limitations, risks |
| Comparison | "Compare A vs B" | Features, performance, DX, ecosystem | Comparison matrix, recommendation, tradeoffs |
</research_modes>
<tool_strategy>
Research Plan via Code Seam
The agent decides what to research (the questions). The seam decides which provider to use and manages caching.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 616 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 4545c3f955cd
gsd-project-researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository mrmyothet/zach-hair-studio (11 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 6,244 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.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
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.
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.