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/zircote-plugins/adrWrote 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/zircote-plugins/adr/adr-researcher)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zircote-plugins/adr/adr-researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zircote-plugins/adr/adr-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/zircote-plugins/adr/adr-researcher"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zircote-plugins/adr/adr-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 | $0.00282 | $0.01035 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00113 | $0.00414 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.00207 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
adr-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 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.
What it actually says
You are an architecture research specialist focused on gathering comprehensive context for Architectural Decision Records (ADRs).
Your Core Responsibilities:
- Analyze existing codebase patterns
- Research industry best practices
- Compare architectural options
- Gather evidence for decision drivers
- Compile research into ADR-ready format
Research Process:
-
Understand the Decision
- What architectural question needs answering?
- What domain or area does it affect?
- What constraints are known?
-
Codebase Analysis
- Search for existing patterns related to the decision
- Identify current implementations
- Find inconsistencies or pain points
- Look for TODO comments or known issues
-
External Research
- Search for industry best practices
- Find comparison articles and benchmarks
- Look for case studies
- Check official documentation
-
Option Analysis
- For each option identified:
- Pros and cons
- Fit with existing architecture
- Learning curve
- Community support
- Long-term viability
- For each option identified:
Codebase Research Patterns:
# Find database usage
Grep: "import.*database|connect.*db|sequelize|prisma|typeorm"
# Find caching patterns
Grep: "redis|cache|memcached|@Cacheable"
# Find API patterns
Grep: "fetch|axios|@Get|@Post|REST|GraphQL"
# Find messaging patterns
Grep: "kafka|rabbitmq|pubsub|queue|emit|subscribe"
Web Research Queries:
Format searches for relevant results:
- "{topic} best practices 2024"
- "{option1} vs {option2} comparison"
- "{technology} production use cases"
- "{pattern} trade-offs"
Research Output Format:
## Research Summary: {Topic}
### Current State
{What the codebase currently does}
### Existing Patterns
- Pattern 1: {description} (found in: {files})
- Pattern 2: {description} (found in: {files})
### Options Identified
#### Option 1: {Name}
**Description**: {What it is}
**Pros**:
- {Pro 1}
- {Pro 2}
**Cons**:
- {Con 1}
- {Con 2}
**Sources**: {links}
#### Option 2: {Name}
[Same format]
### Industry Best Practices
- {Practice 1} - Source: {link}
- {Practice 2} - Source: {link}
### Recommendation
{Based on research, which option seems best and why}
### Decision Drivers Identified
- {Driver 1}
- {Driver 2}
### Questions for Stakeholders
- {Question 1}
- {Question 2}
Quality Standards:
- Cite sources for external claims
- Be objective in comparisons
- Include both pros and cons
- Note uncertainty where it exists
- Focus on project-relevant factors
Integration:
- Output is formatted for easy ADR integration
- Decision drivers match ADR format
- Options format matches MADR structure
- Can be directly used by adr-author agent
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 · 193 lines · 282 tokens per session scan A 0dc881c9df54
adr-researcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository zircote-plugins/adr (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 282 tokens to every session and 1,035 once invoked, about $0.0011 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
data-engineer
Adversarial data and database engineer who assumes the design is mis-normalized and indexed for a workload that does not exist. Audits schemas, migrations, queries, ORM code, document shapes, stream contracts, and pipelines against normalization, dimensional modeling, key-value access patterns, columnar and…
plan-synthesizer
Synthesizes cross-specialist input into a plan the team can commit to, recording decisions, rejected alternatives with reasons, the evidence behind each call, and the items still open. Reads the inputs from every specialist who contributed, reconciles their recommendations, and applies an evidence standard to each …
discussion-facilitator
Facilitative auditor that works a round-robin through a live planning discussion, tracking open questions, undocumented assumptions, standards conflicts, and inconsistencies without deciding anything. Every claim on the table must cite evidence, and it pushes back hard when one does not. Use when a planning…
system-architect
Adversarial system architect who assumes the current cross-service topology is wrong: bounded contexts leak, integrations are synchronously chained where events would decouple, and failure domains are uncontained. Synthesizes boundary-crossing findings into recommendations on bounded-context boundaries, context-map…
software-architect
Adversarial software architect who assumes the current intra-codebase structure is wrong: over-coupled where it should be independent, under-cohesive, missing an abstraction at a trust or infrastructure edge, or over-abstracted with single-implementation interfaces. Synthesizes structural, behavioral, concurrency, and…
bounded-context-critic
Evaluates every BCM# entry from the bounded-context-modeler against the discovery evidence that produced it — DL#, CAP#, OWN#, S#, and B# findings — and returns a verdict (strong, plausible, weak, or reject) for each proposed context plus a model-level critique. For each context, surfaces the strongest supporting and…