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/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peerWrote 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/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer/0-osp-onboarding)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer/0-osp-onboarding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer/0-osp-onboarding/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/commands/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer/0-osp-onboarding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer/0-osp-onboarding.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 | $0.00014 | $0.01390 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00695 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00278 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00139 |
Grade A, and why
0-osp-onboarding 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 12d 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/0-osp-onboarding — Stage 0: Onboarding
Prepares the review environment. Must run before any other numbered step.
Activation
Invoke the osp-orchestrator skill (no domain persona needed for this step).
Steps
1. Read session state
- Read
.brain/session.json. If missing, runscripts/init_brain.shfirst or initialize a default per the v2 schema. - If
phases.onboarding.status == "completed"andqa_criteriais non-empty, ask the user whether to re-run (which would overwrite00_review_guidelines.mdand any pre-scaffolded05_qa_*.mdfiles). If they decline, exit.
2. Locate the paper and ensure a readable text version
- Check
.brain/input/for a paper file. Common extensions:.pdf,.md,.tex,.docx. - If empty, ask the user where the paper is. Help them collaboratively — accept any path, then copy the file into
.brain/input/. - Always produce
.brain/input/paper.md(the canonical readable form):- If the original is
.md, ensure it's namedpaper.md(rename if necessary). - If the original is
.pdf/.docx/.tex, attempt conversion with themarkitdownMCP tool (markitdown.convert). Save output to.brain/input/paper.md. - If
markitdownis unavailable, do not silently advance. Tell the user explicitly that downstream phases requirepaper.mdand offer two options: (a) install markitdown (uvx markitdown-mcp), or (b) provide a manual markdown conversion. Pause until one is in place.
- If the original is
- Save
paper.path(original) andpaper.parsed_path(the canonical.brain/input/paper.md) intosession.json.
3. Identify the venue
- Always ask the user explicitly, even if the paper's title page, header, or metadata already shows a venue. Do not auto-fill from the paper.
- Use your tool's native ask/input mechanism if one is available (e.g. ask_user, an interactive prompt, or a confirmation dialog). If no native ask exists, print the question and wait for a reply before continuing.
- Ask: "Which venue or journal are you reviewing for? (e.g. ICLR 2026, NeurIPS 2025, Nature Machine Intelligence, arXiv-only)"
- If the paper appears to list a venue, show what you found and ask the user to confirm or correct it: "The paper mentions [venue]. Is that the submission venue you want to review against, or a different one?"
- Save
venue.nameandvenue.yeartosession.json.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 100 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 308b2c166d85
0-osp-onboarding is a command published in the GitHub repository amirkiarafiei/open-scholar-peer (28 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,390 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
ars-mark-read
ARS /ars-mark-read — record a user-attested reading signal for one or more citation keys.
ars-cache-invalidate
ARS /ars-cache-invalidate — drop cached verification entries for a citation key.
ars-unmark-read
ARS /ars-unmark-read — rescind a user-attested reading signal for one or more citation keys.
ars-disclosure
ARS academic-paper disclosure mode — venue applicability/status bundle or policy-anchor render.
ars-revision-coach
ARS academic-paper revision-coach — peer-review roadmap or source-accounted real-committee response skeleton.
ars-rebuttal-audit
ARS academic-paper rebuttal-audit mode — QA an existing rebuttal draft against reviewer comments.