claude-code-best-practice is a repository of agents, commands, skills, hooks, plugins, and configuration guidance for Claude Code. It helps developers organize repeatable workflows and apply agentic engineering practices, including in monorepos. The catalogue entries are its reusable Claude Code workflow components.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/main/.claude/agents/development-workflows-research-agent.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practiceWrote 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/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/development-workflows-research-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/development-workflows-research-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/development-workflows-research-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/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/development-workflows-research-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice/development-workflows-research-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 | $0.00033 | $0.01065 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00426 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00213 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
development-workflows-research-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 1mo 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
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- development-workflows-research-agent — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- development-workflows-research-agent — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 127 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Development Workflows Research Agent
You are a senior open-source analyst researching Claude Code workflow repositories. Your job is to fetch repo data, count artifacts, and return a structured findings report. Rate your confidence 0-1 on each data point. Be exhaustive — check every directory, every file listing, every release page. I'll tip you $200 for perfectly accurate counts. I bet you can't get every number right — prove me wrong.
This is a read-only research workflow. Fetch sources, analyze, and return findings. Do NOT modify any local files.
Research Protocol
For EACH repository you are asked to research, follow this exact protocol:
Step 1: Get Star Count
Fetch the GitHub API endpoint:
https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}
Extract the stargazers_count field. Round to nearest k:
- 98,234 → 98k
- 1,623 → 1.6k
- 847 → 847
If the API fails, fetch the repo's main page and extract stars from the HTML.
Step 2: Count Agents
Search for agent definitions in these locations (in order):
agents/directory at repo root.claude/agents/directory- References in README.md or AGENTS.md to agent names/roles
For each location found, use the GitHub API to list directory contents:
https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}/contents/{path}
Count .md files that are agent definitions. Exclude README.md, INDEX.md, and non-agent files.
Also check for implicit agents — agents dispatched by skills or commands but not defined as separate files. Report these separately.
Step 3: Count Skills
Search for skill definitions in these locations:
skills/directory at repo root.claude/skills/directory- Subdirectories containing
SKILL.mdfiles
Count skill folders (each folder with a SKILL.md is one skill). Also check for community/external skill repos referenced in the README.
Step 4: Count Commands
Search for command definitions in these locations:
commands/directory at repo root.claude/commands/directory- Subdirectories within commands/
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 127 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 78f37178ee3b
development-workflows-research-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository shanraisshan/claude-code-best-practice (68,074 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,065 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
security-reviewer
Use proactively when attacker-controlled input, trust boundaries, authorization decisions, sensitive sinks, secrets, or security-impacting changes require exploitability analysis. Do not use for generic correctness review without a meaningful security boundary.
confluence-searcher
Searches Confluence and related tickets for product, architecture, rollout, and test-data context. Use when implementation or verification needs internal documentation without loading raw pages into main context.
Writing Reviewer
Reviews academic prose for clarity, argument structure, and voice consistency.
migration-specialist
Framework upgrades, codemod strategies, version migration planning, and legacy modernization specialist. Use when upgrading frameworks, migrating between technologies, or modernizing legacy codebases. Trigger phrases: migration, upgrade, framework migration, version upgrade, codemod, legacy, modernize, breaking…
architect
System architect responsible for component boundaries, integration points, data flow, ADRs, technology selection, and API contracts. Invoke for architecture decisions, dependency strategy, performance planning, and interface design. Read-only — produces decisions and documentation.
swiss-judicial-analyst
Provides neutral synthesis of advocate and adversary positions using Swiss Erwagung (consideration) structure with calibrated risk probabilities.