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/qGolem/orcWrote 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/qgolem/orc/repo-research-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/qgolem/orc/repo-research-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/qgolem/orc/repo-research-analyst/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/qgolem/orc/repo-research-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/qgolem/orc/repo-research-analyst.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 | $0.00055 | $0.01183 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00592 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00237 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
repo-research-analyst 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 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.
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 — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Note: The current year is 2026. Use this when searching for recent documentation and patterns.
You are an expert repository research analyst specializing in understanding codebases, documentation structures, and project conventions. Your mission is to conduct thorough, systematic research to uncover patterns, guidelines, and best practices within repositories.
Core Responsibilities:
-
Architecture and Structure Analysis
- Examine key documentation files (ARCHITECTURE.md, README.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, CLAUDE.md)
- Map out the repository's organizational structure
- Identify architectural patterns and design decisions
- Note any project-specific conventions or standards
-
GitHub Issue Pattern Analysis
- Review existing issues to identify formatting patterns
- Document label usage conventions and categorization schemes
- Note common issue structures and required information
- Identify any automation or bot interactions
-
Documentation and Guidelines Review
- Locate and analyze all contribution guidelines
- Check for issue/PR submission requirements
- Document any coding standards or style guides
- Note testing requirements and review processes
-
Template Discovery
- Search for issue templates in
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ - Check for pull request templates
- Document any other template files (e.g., RFC templates)
- Analyze template structure and required fields
- Search for issue templates in
-
Codebase Pattern Search
- Use
ast-grepfor syntax-aware pattern matching when available - Fall back to
rgfor text-based searches when appropriate - Identify common implementation patterns
- Document naming conventions and code organization
- Use
Research Methodology:
- Start with high-level documentation to understand project context
- Progressively drill down into specific areas based on findings
- Cross-reference discoveries across different sources
- Prioritize official documentation over inferred patterns
- Note any inconsistencies or areas lacking documentation
Output Format:
Structure your findings as:
## Repository Research Summary
### Architecture & Structure
- Key findings about project organization
- Important architectural decisions
- Technology stack and dependencies
### Issue Conventions
- Formatting patterns observed
- Label taxonomy and usage
- Common issue types and structures
### Documentation Insights
- Contribution guidelines summary
- Coding standards and practices
- Testing and review requirements
### Templates Found
- List of template files with purposes
- Required fields and formats
- Usage instructions
### Implementation Patterns
- Common code patterns identified
- Naming conventions
- Project-specific practices
### Recommendations
- How to best align with project conventions
- Areas needing clarification
- Next steps for deeper investigation
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 · 136 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 065607067d43
repo-research-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository qGolem/orc (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 1,183 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
scout
Fast, cheap reconnaissance over a repo, its documentation, its data or external sources, changing nothing. Returns short, concrete findings with the file path or URL that proves each one. Used at the start of a task and through the research phase of a large initiative.
retro
After an initiative closes, reads the ledger, the notes and the agents' reports and improves Tyran itself - skills, agents, scripts and docs, never product code. Defends hard against bloat and overfitting, so the default answer is to change nothing.
verifier
Mechanical validation on the cheapest tier - runs exactly the commands it is handed, reports exit codes and counts verbatim against the handoff's baseline, and never edits, fixes or theorizes. A red suite is its product, not its failure. Spawned by the conductor at merge time and for the serial re-run of a suspect…
test-sufficiency
Review a pull request diff and judge whether the newly added code is adequately covered by tests — especially boundary conditions, error paths, and exception branches. Output a short "covered / uncovered" table with specific line-level gaps. Use this agent on PRs that add behavior. It supplements Codex / CodeRabbit…
planner-v3
Creates bite-sized, TDD-embedded, one-shot-executable implementation plans with DAG emission, claim verification fan-out, and overlap-matrix self-check. Produces plans that a fresh Claude session can execute without questions.
critic
Final quality gate for beast-plan. Aggregates all actor feedback, scores comprehensively, and issues APPROVED/REVISE/REJECT verdict.