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 skills add flonat/flonat-research --skill replication-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/flonat/flonat-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/skills/flonat/flonat-research/replication-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/flonat/flonat-research/replication-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/flonat/flonat-research/replication-audit/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/skills/flonat/flonat-research/replication-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/flonat/flonat-research/replication-audit.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00056 | $0.02228 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01114 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00446 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00223 |
Grade A, and why
replication-audit 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 8d 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 — 211 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Replication Audit
Examine which findings in a literature have been replicated, failed to replicate, or never been tested. Flag papers that build on non-replicated foundations.
Don't build your dissertation on a foundation made of sand.
Output Path
Per rules/review-artefact-routing.md (auto-loads in research projects (path-scoped to paper-*/ and paper/)):
- Source slug:
replication-audit - Write reports to:
reviews/<scope>/replication-audit/<YYYY-MM-DD-HHMM>.mdinside the project, where<scope>is the paper slug (e.g.,paper-jtp) for paper-level reviews or_projectfor project-level reviews. Path is relative to the research project root, not the Task-Management repo. - Never at project root (
./CRITIC-REPORT.md-style filenames are forbidden — pre-rule layout). - Idempotency: if the run timestamp already exists, append a same-run descriptor (
{timestamp}-revision.md,{timestamp}-r2.md) — never overwrite the same<YYYY-MM-DD-HHMM>path. - Index update: if
reviews/INDEX.mdexists, write a one-line entry under "Latest per source" pointing at the new file. Otherwisereview-recapwill rebuild the index next time it runs. - Infrastructure repos (Task-Management, atlas-workspace, etc.): this section does not apply — the path-scoped rule won't load there.
When to Use
- Before committing to a theoretical framework — is the evidence solid?
- Writing a literature review — need to distinguish robust from fragile findings
- Preparing a replication study — need to know what's already been tested
- Evaluating a paper for peer review — are its cited foundations sound?
When NOT to Use
- Your own results — use the
referee2-revieweragent - Methodological comparison — use
method-audit - Finding papers — use an installed scholarly-search workflow first
Input
A .bib file, PDF directory, topic, or list of key findings to audit. Works best with a focused set of influential papers whose findings underpin a line of research.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 211 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A f4d5504f0008
replication-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository flonat/flonat-research (133 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 2,228 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
latex-compile
Compile a LaTeX document and fix every error plus aesthetic issue (overfull/underfull boxes, widows, alignment, fonts) for a clean PDF and log. Use this instead of running pdflatex/latexmk manually — it avoids the latexmk stale-log trap and silent grep failures on binary log output, and it reformats rather than…
nb-to-wolfbook
Convert Mathematica .nb or .m files to Wolfbook .wb format so they open and run in VS Code. Use when bringing existing .nb/.m files into Wolfbook, or to make an existing .wb bridge-safe.
sync-wb-nb
Propagate a change made in a Wolfbook .wb notebook into the paired .nb notebook so the two stay identical. Use immediately after every .wb edit.
wolfram-headless
Run heavy Wolfram Language (wolframscript) computations from Claude Code reliably, and diagnose the misleading "The product exited because of a license error". Use whenever invoking wolframscript on a non-trivial computation, when a wolframscript job dies with a "license error" despite a valid license, or when Wolfram…
cross-validate
Format a result, derivation, or numerical value for independent verification by a second model. Use when you want a cross-check on an important or contested result.
verify-citation
Confirm a paper actually exists (arXiv / Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex) before citing it. Use before writing any new citation.