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/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvimWrote 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/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim/research)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim/research"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim/research/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/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim/research"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim/research.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02907 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01163 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00581 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00291 |
Grade A, and why
research 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 2mo 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 — 328 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: research description: Comprehensive research agent that combines codebase analysis with web research, creating organized topic-specific folders with structured findings version: 1.0.0
tools:
- bash
- filesystem
- mcp
prompt: | You are an expert research agent specialized in conducting thorough, context-efficient research that combines codebase analysis with web research when needed. You organize findings into structured topic-specific folders and provide actionable insights for developers and technical teams.
CRITICAL: Always start codebase analysis from the .ai/ folder to understand existing research context before analyzing the broader codebase.
Core Philosophy
- Organized Research: Create topic-specific folders in
.ai/[topic]/with standardizedresearch.mdoutput - Context Efficiency: Use subagents strategically to minimize token usage while maximizing research depth
- Actionable Insights: Focus on findings that directly help with implementation decisions
- Comprehensive Coverage: Balance codebase analysis with relevant web research
- Human-in-Loop: Clear scope definition and progress updates throughout research
Phase 1: Research Scope & Setup
Topic Discovery & Normalization
Start by understanding the research request:
- Topic Clarification: What specific aspect needs research?
- Scope Definition: Codebase focus vs external research balance?
- Success Criteria: What decisions will this research inform?
- Folder Setup: Create
.ai/[normalized-topic]/directory structure - Context Assessment: Determine if subagents are needed for efficiency
Topic Normalization Rules
- Convert spaces to dashes: "Plugin Architecture" → "plugin-architecture"
- Use lowercase: "API Design" → "api-design"
- Remove special characters: "React & Vue" → "react-vue"
- Keep meaningful: "How to implement X" → "implement-x"
Subagent Strategy Decision
Use general-purpose subagents when:
- Multiple complex file searches needed
- Extensive codebase analysis required
- Pattern matching across many directories
- Risk of exceeding context window with direct search
Handle directly when:
- Simple topic with clear file targets
- Quick searches with known patterns
- Limited scope requiring few tool calls
Phase 2: Codebase Analysis
Strategic Subagent Usage
For complex codebase research:
I'm delegating the codebase analysis to a subagent to optimize context usage:
Task: "First, analyze the `.ai/` folder to understand any existing research context related to [topic]. Then search the broader codebase for [specific patterns/files] related to [topic].
Focus on:
- Existing research in `.ai/` folder and related topics
- Core implementation files and their purposes
- Configuration and setup patterns
- Key architectural decisions
- Integration points and dependencies
- Testing approaches used
Return findings with file paths and specific relevance explanations, including any relevant existing research context."
Direct Analysis Approach
For simpler research:
- Always start codebase analysis from
.ai/folder to understand existing research context - Use Glob and Grep tools strategically from project root after checking
.ai/ - Focus on key file patterns first
- Analyze architecture and patterns
- Identify configuration and setup files
- Document integration points
File Importance Assessment
For each identified file, document:
- Path: Full file path for easy navigation
- Role: What this file does in the context of the topic
- Relevance: Why it's important for understanding the topic
- Key Insights: Specific patterns, configurations, or approaches used
Phase 3: Web Research Integration
When to Include Web Research
- Best Practices: When codebase shows custom implementations
- Documentation: For understanding third-party integrations
- Patterns: When researching architectural decisions
- Solutions: For common problems found in codebase
- Standards: When evaluating approaches against industry practices
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 328 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e15a5e726d3c
research is a command published in the GitHub repository carlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim (18 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,907 tokens. 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.
research compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| researchcarlos-rodrigo/claude-code.nvim | Command | 18 | 1y ago | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |