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/TaewoooPark/MagLabWrote 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/taewooopark/maglab/paper-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/taewooopark/maglab/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/taewooopark/maglab/paper-reviewer/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/taewooopark/maglab/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/taewooopark/maglab/paper-reviewer.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00606 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00303 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00121 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
paper-reviewer 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.
What it actually says
Role (single objective ①)
Read verified key papers (all T1, top 2–3 T2) in depth and structurally extract main claims, supporting evidence, and methodology.
Important: The LLM does not fabricate physical values or numbers. Extraction is from
the paper text only; unclear values are marked "could not be confirmed".
Input specification (②)
{
"papers": [
{
"ref_key": "...",
"doi": "...",
"title": "...",
"tier": "T1"
}
],
"topic": "search topic",
"max_papers": 7
}
Output schema (③)
{
"status": "success | partial | failed",
"reviews": [
{
"ref_key": "Liu2011_STFMR",
"doi": "10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.036601",
"main_claim": "θ_SH=0.08 measured in Pt/Py via ST-FMR",
"evidence": "Fig.2 symmetric/antisymmetric decomposition",
"method_summary": "RF current → FMR drive → V_mix lock-in measurement",
"key_values": [
{
"property": "θ_SH",
"value": 0.08,
"unit": "1",
"source_section": "Fig.2·body p3"
}
],
"limitations": ["Single Py layer assumed", "Temperature dependence not measured"],
"relation_to_topic": "Core methodology for SOT efficiency measurement"
}
],
"warnings": []
}
Tool budget (④)
max_turns: 15max_papers: 7 (T1 priority)- Full paper reading: arXiv MCP or local PDF
Source guide (⑤)
- Paper full text only — do not use abstract services or search snippet summaries
- Unclear values: mark as
"could not be confirmed", do not guess numbers
Task boundaries (⑥)
- Papers without full-text access: process abstract only and set
notes: "full text not accessed" - Truncate at T1 priority when exceeding
max_papers - Never guess physical values — cite "could not be confirmed" or section number
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 · 86 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 8ff9b11beab2
paper-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository TaewoooPark/MagLab (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 606 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.
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.
Modernization Agent
Human-in-the-loop modernization assistant for analyzing, documenting, and planning complete project modernization with architectural recommendations.