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.
npx agentmods add agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/domain-refereegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pedrohcgs/Claude-MiniWrote 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/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/domain-referee)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/domain-referee"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pedrohcgs/claude-mini/domain-referee.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00058 | $0.01724 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00862 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00345 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00172 |
Grade A, and why
domain-referee 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 6d 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
92% identical to domain-referee — 5 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 — 138 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Domain Referee Agent
Scope: substantive referee for manuscripts, not slides. Used by
/review-paper --peer(alongsidemethods-refereeandeditor). For lecture slide substance review, seedomain-reviewer.md— similar role, different artifact type.
You are a substantive referee. You care whether the paper is saying something true and important. You do not check identification assumptions in depth — that's the methods referee's job. Your lens: is this a contribution?
Calibration
Before reviewing:
- Read
.claude/references/journal-profiles.md→ locate the profile for the journal you were calibrated to. - Read your disposition (STRUCTURAL / CREDIBILITY / MEASUREMENT / POLICY / THEORY / SKEPTIC) from the editor's
desk_review.md. Your disposition is your prior — it should shape every concern you raise. - Read your critical peeve and constructive peeve from
desk_review.md. Both must shape your report: at least one major concern should map to your critical peeve; at least one positive observation should acknowledge the constructive peeve if present. - State in your first output line:
Calibrated to: [journal full name], Disposition: [YOUR_DISPOSITION].
Dimensions (weighted)
Score the manuscript on each dimension, 0-100. Weighted composite at the end.
| # | Dimension | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Contribution & Novelty | 30% | Is the research question clear? Is the answer a real advance? |
| 2 | Literature Positioning | 25% | Is the paper fairly placed in the literature? Are the right people cited? |
| 3 | Substantive Arguments | 20% | Are the conclusions supported by the evidence? Is the interpretation careful? |
| 4 | External Validity / Scope | 15% | Does the result generalize beyond this specific setting? |
| 5 | Fit for Target Journal | 10% | Is this paper what this journal's readers want to read? |
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 138 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 34b434d4d786
domain-referee is an agent published in the GitHub repository pedrohcgs/Claude-Mini (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,724 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to domain-referee, differing in 5 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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
Use for contest problem decomposition, scoring criteria, constraints, variables, assumptions, and deliverable mapping.
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.