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/glassbead-tc/widescreen-research/collaborative-knowledge-compoundinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/glassBead-tc/widescreen-researchWrote 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/glassbead-tc/widescreen-research/collaborative-knowledge-compounding)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/glassbead-tc/widescreen-research/collaborative-knowledge-compounding"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/glassbead-tc/widescreen-research/collaborative-knowledge-compounding.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 | $0.00000 | $0.06220 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.03110 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01244 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00622 |
Grade A, and why
collaborative-knowledge-compounding 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 4d 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 — 895 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Collaborative Knowledge Compounding
Pattern: Multi-agent iterative research with shared notebook workspace Based on: AgentRxiv (arXiv:2503.18102) - "Collaborative Autonomous Research" Key Finding: Agents with shared research repository achieve 11-14% better results through compounding knowledge
Usage
/collaborative-knowledge-compounding "Research topic" [num_agents] [num_iterations]
Arguments:
$ARGUMENTS(required): Research topic or questionnum_agents(optional): Number of research agents (default: 3, max: 5)num_iterations(optional): Research rounds (default: 3, max: 7)
Architecture
Shared Workspace: Srcbook Notebook
All agents collaborate through a shared .src.md notebook that tracks:
- Research findings from each agent
- Hypotheses generated and tested
- Evidence collected
- Synthesis across iterations
- State tracker (deterministic)
Agent Specializations
Agent 1: Literature Scout
- Role: Find and retrieve academic papers
- Tools: arxiv-paper-mcp, exa (discovery), firecrawl (known URLs)
- Output: Raw paper data + metadata
Agent 2: Technical Analyst
- Role: Find implementation examples and code
- Tools: exa__get_code_context_exa, context7, firecrawl
- Output: Code examples + technical specs
Agent 3: Synthesis Specialist
- Role: Read other agents' findings, identify patterns
- Tools: Read notebook cells, compare findings
- Output: Cross-agent insights + research gaps
Agent 4: Hypothesis Generator (if num_agents > 3)
- Role: Propose testable claims based on synthesis
- Tools: Reads all prior work
- Output: Novel hypotheses to explore
Agent 5: Validation Specialist (if num_agents = 5)
- Role: Cross-check claims across agents
- Tools: Targeted searches to verify/refute
- Output: Confidence scores + contradictions
Workflow
Phase 0: Initialize Shared Notebook
Creates: .collaborative-research/research-notebook.src.md
<!-- srcbook:{"language":"typescript"} -->
# Collaborative Research: [Topic]
**Started**: [Timestamp]
**Agents**: [num_agents]
**Iterations**: 0 / [num_iterations]
---
###### package.json
\`\`\`json
{
"type": "module",
"dependencies": {
"@modelcontextprotocol/sdk": "^1.17.1"
}
}
\`\`\`
---
## Research State Tracker
###### state-tracker.ts
\`\`\`typescript
// DETERMINISTIC STATE ONLY - No intelligence
export interface ResearchState {
iteration: number;
maxIterations: number;
agents: AgentState[];
evidenceCollected: number;
hypothesesGenerated: number;
hypothesesValidated: number;
synthesisComplete: boolean;
}
export const state: ResearchState = {
iteration: 0,
maxIterations: 3,
agents: [
{ id: 'agent-1', role: 'literature-scout', status: 'pending', evidenceCount: 0 },
{ id: 'agent-2', role: 'technical-analyst', status: 'pending', evidenceCount: 0 },
{ id: 'agent-3', role: 'synthesis-specialist', status: 'pending', evidenceCount: 0 }
],
evidenceCollected: 0,
hypothesesGenerated: 0,
hypothesesValidated: 0,
synthesisComplete: false
};
// State tracker functions (deterministic only)
export function recordEvidence(agentId: string, count: number): void {
const agent = state.agents.find(a => a.id === agentId);
if (agent) {
agent.evidenceCount += count;
state.evidenceCollected += count;
}
}
export function getAgentStatus(agentId: string): string {
return state.agents.find(a => a.id === agentId)?.status || 'unknown';
}
export function canProceedToIteration(): boolean {
// Deterministic gate check
return state.evidenceCollected >= 20 &&
state.agents.every(a => a.status === 'complete');
}
console.log('State tracker initialized:', state);
\`\`\`
---
## Iteration 0: Initial Exploration
### Agent 1: Literature Scout
###### agent1-iteration0-search.ts
\`\`\`typescript
import { state, recordEvidence } from './state-tracker.js';
// LLM provides search queries (intelligence)
const queries = [
"[LLM will fill this in]",
"[LLM will fill this in]"
];
// Agent executes deterministically
const results = {
phase: 'literature-search',
agent: 'agent-1',
iteration: 0,
queries_executed: queries.length,
papers_found: 0, // Will be updated by actual MCP calls
raw_data: []
};
// State update (deterministic)
recordEvidence('agent-1', results.papers_found);
console.log('Agent 1 status:', results);
\`\`\`
###### agent1-iteration0-findings.ts
\`\`\`typescript
// AGENT 1 FINDINGS (Raw data only, no interpretation)
export const findings = {
papers: [
// Will be populated by arxiv-paper-mcp results
],
metadata: {
count: 0,
date_range: "",
categories: []
}
};
\`\`\`
### Agent 2: Technical Analyst
###### agent2-iteration0-search.ts
\`\`\`typescript
import { state, recordEvidence } from './state-tracker.js';
// LLM provides search queries (intelligence)
const codeQueries = [
"[LLM will fill this in]"
];
// Agent executes
const results = {
phase: 'technical-search',
agent: 'agent-2',
iteration: 0,
code_examples_found: 0,
libraries_found: 0
};
recordEvidence('agent-2', results.code_examples_found);
console.log('Agent 2 status:', results);
\`\`\`
### Agent 3: Synthesis Specialist
###### agent3-iteration0-synthesis.ts
\`\`\`typescript
import { findings as agent1Findings } from './agent1-iteration0-findings.js';
import { findings as agent2Findings } from './agent2-iteration0-findings.js';
// LLM provides synthesis questions (intelligence)
// Agent reads data (deterministic)
const crossAgentPatterns = {
common_themes: [], // LLM identifies
contradictions: [], // LLM identifies
gaps: [] // LLM identifies
};
console.log('Synthesis complete for iteration 0');
\`\`\`
---
## Iteration 1: Building on Prior Work
[Repeat structure with agents building on iteration 0 findings]
---
## Final Synthesis
###### final-report.ts
\`\`\`typescript
// Aggregates all iterations
import { state } from './state-tracker.js';
const report = {
research_topic: "[Topic]",
iterations_completed: state.iteration,
total_evidence: state.evidenceCollected,
validated_findings: [], // LLM provides
novel_insights: [], // LLM provides
recommendations: [] // LLM provides
};
console.log('Research complete:', report);
\`\`\`
\`\`\`
---
## Execution Flow with Sub-Agents
### Iteration 0: Parallel Agent Deployment
**Claude Code spawns 3 sub-agents**:
```bash
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 895 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A aeaf38d058b4
collaborative-knowledge-compounding is a command published in the GitHub repository glassBead-tc/widescreen-research (6 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 6,220 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.