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 commands/abhinavbwj/aec-scholar/ethics-applicationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Abhinavbwj/AEC-ScholarWrote 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/commands/abhinavbwj/aec-scholar/ethics-application)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/abhinavbwj/aec-scholar/ethics-application"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/abhinavbwj/aec-scholar/ethics-application.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 | $0.00019 | $0.00405 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00202 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00081 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
ethics-application 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.
What it actually says
Help draft a research-ethics / IRB / REB application for: $ARGUMENTS
Use the research-ethics-integrity and research-methods skills.
Many AEC studies involve people — surveys, interviews, site observation, worker wearables/physiological sensing, VR experiments, video on site — and therefore need ethics approval before data collection.
Draft application content covering:
-
Study overview — aim, design, and what participation involves.
-
Participants — who, how many, recruitment, and inclusion/exclusion. Flag any power imbalance (employees, students, site workers) and how voluntariness is protected.
-
Informed consent — how consent is obtained (draft a participant information sheet + consent form outline), voluntariness, and the right to withdraw.
-
Data & privacy — what personal/sensitive data are collected (note wearables/biometrics/video as sensitive), how they are anonymized/pseudonymized, stored, secured, retained and destroyed, and the GDPR/data-protection lawful basis.
-
Risks & benefits — physical (site/PPE), psychological, privacy risks and mitigations; benefits.
-
Site/organizational permissions — access agreements, gatekeeper consent, and confidentiality/NDAs for project data.
-
Conflicts & funding — declarations.
Produce the drafted sections plus a checklist of attachments the user must provide (information sheet, consent form, instruments, risk assessment). This is drafting support, not ethical or legal approval — tell the user to follow their institution's specific ethics process and forms, which govern.
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 · 38 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 9d9affbcfa6a
ethics-application is a command published in the GitHub repository Abhinavbwj/AEC-Scholar (18 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 405 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 commands, from other repositories
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
voice-compliance
Voice/telephony compliance check — invokes voice-ai-reviewer to produce TM-voice-{slug}.md with TCPA, STIR/SHAKEN, state recording-consent, EU AI Act Art. 50, and synth-voice deepfake-law gaps.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
at-dsgvo
You are helping an enterprise architect generate an Austrian Data Protection Assessment — the Austrian-specific GDPR layer applied by the Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) under the Datenschutzgesetz (DSG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 as amended). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add Austrian obligations that go beyond the EU…
au-pspf
You are an enterprise architect generating a Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) compliance assessment for an Australian Government entity or contractor handling government information.
compliance-audit
Full regulatory compliance audit for GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, and other frameworks with gap analysis, remediation planning, and evidence collection.