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 skills/aethrox/doctrine/researchnpx skills add aethrox/doctrine --skill researchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aethrox/doctrineWrote 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/skills/aethrox/doctrine/research)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aethrox/doctrine/research"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aethrox/doctrine/research.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 | $0.00058 | $0.01049 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00524 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00105 |
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 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 — 55 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Research
A claim is only as good as the source it traces back to. This skill's defining constraint: every finding in the output must be traceable to the primary source that actually owns the fact (official docs, source code, a spec, a first-party API response), not to a blog post, forum answer, or summary that itself read the primary source once. If tracing stops at a secondary source, that's stated as a limitation, not hidden.
Phase 1: Scope the question
State the specific question or claim being investigated, narrowly enough that "found" and "not found" are both clear outcomes. A vague scope ("research React") produces an unfalsifiable report; a narrow one ("does React's useEffect cleanup run before or after the next effect's setup, per the official docs") produces a checkable answer. If the request bundles several questions, split it, mixing them is how one weak answer contaminates the credibility of the rest.
Phase 2: Trace every claim to its primary source
For each sub-question:
- Go to the source that owns the fact. Official documentation, the actual source code, a published spec or RFC, a first-party API response, not a secondary write-up of any of these.
- If only a secondary source turns up, follow its own citation back. A blog post that says "per the docs, X" is a pointer, not the finding; open what it points to and verify the docs actually say X before citing the docs, not the post.
- If tracing dead-ends at a secondary source (the primary source is gone, paywalled, or the secondary source cites nothing verifiable), say so explicitly in the finding rather than presenting a secondary source as if it were primary.
- Note the primary source's own date or version. A fact that was true in an old version of a doc or API may not be true now; carry the version/date forward into the finding, not just the claim.
Phase 3: Weigh source credibility
Where more than one primary-adjacent source disagrees, or where authority isn't obvious, check the source against the CRAAP criteria (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose; the standard library-science checklist for source evaluation):
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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 · 55 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 5c634728f595
research is a skill published in the GitHub repository aethrox/doctrine (18 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,049 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
debug-optimize-lcp
Guides debugging and optimizing Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks about LCP performance, slow page loads, Core Web Vitals optimization, or wants to understand why their page's main content takes too long to appear. Also use when the user mentions…
specflow-use
To connect Rosetta with Grid Dynamics SpecFlow MCP; only when SpecFlow is mentioned and the MCP is installed.
opik-diagnose
Surface the Opik traces worth a developer's attention, ranked by signal — errors, failed tool calls, latency, regressions, and low online-eval scores — plus Diagnostics issues. Reads live/production traces via the SDK (searchtraces and agentinsights) and works with no MCP; uses the MCP issue entity when connected.…
planning-and-task-breakdown
Breaks work into ordered tasks. Use when you have a spec or clear requirements and need to break work into implementable tasks. Use when a task feels too large to start, when you need to estimate scope, or when parallel work is possible.
qa-knowledge
To run QA engineering — requirements/gap analysis, scenario & spec design, test implementation, failure triage — over the QA knowledge base.
ue-mcp-epic-routing
Use when deciding between ue-mcp's native category actions and Epic's wrapped ToolsetRegistry tools (the epic actions, incl. the Blueprint graph DSL) for a task in Unreal. Pulls in when authoring Blueprint graph bodies, or any time both a native action and an epic action could do the job and you need to pick.