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/juliusbrussee/cavekit/researchnpx skills add JuliusBrussee/cavekit --skill researchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/cavekitWrote 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/juliusbrussee/cavekit/research)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/juliusbrussee/cavekit/research"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/juliusbrussee/cavekit/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 | $0.00116 | $0.00804 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00058 | $0.00402 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00161 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00080 |
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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
research — external knowledge → §R
Every finding cites a source. No source → flag it ?, never write a guess as fact.
"Process without library context gives you well-organized hallucinations." Build invents a plausible-but-wrong API & §B fills with avoidable bugs. Research is the external oracle: pull the real fact once, log it caveman, never re-derive.
WHEN TO RESEARCH
- A §C/§I/§V decision hinges on a lib, API, version, or pattern you are unsure of.
- You are about to assume how an external dependency behaves.
- The idea touches a domain with real prior art (auth, payments, crypto, rate-limit).
/grillparked a?that the outside world must answer.
Skip when the build touches only code you already wrote. Research scales to the unknown, ⊥ to habit.
FOUR STEPS
1. SCOPE
Turn the unknown into 1-3 concrete questions. Vague "research auth" → "JWT lib for Node ESM, maintained?" + "refresh-token rotation: current best practice?". A scoped question gets a citable answer; a vague one gets an essay.
2. GATHER
Use web search / docs tools. Prefer primary sources: official docs, the repo, the RFC, the paper. Two independent sources beat one confident blog. For a big sweep, spawn a sub-agent so the raw pages never touch this context — it returns only the distilled finding + source.
3. DISTILL
Crush each answer to one caveman line + its source. Drop the prose. The §R row is the memory; the tab you read is not.
R3|refresh token|rotate on use, revoke family on reuse-detect|datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6819#section-5.2.2.3
4. HAND OFF
Emit the §R rows & hand to the spec skill to append. If a finding changes a constraint or interface, note the §C/§I edit for spec too. Research proposes; spec writes.
SOURCE DISCIPLINE
- Cite a URL, repo, RFC, or paper per row. Verbatim identifiers/versions.
- Could not verify → write the row but flag
?in the finding & say so. An unverified claim labeled honestly is fine; one disguised as fact is a future §B. - Conflicting sources → log both, let the user pick. ⊥ silently average them.
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 · 73 lines · 116 tokens per session scan A 35aefc7b84f7
research is a skill published in the GitHub repository JuliusBrussee/cavekit (1,142 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 116 tokens to every session and 804 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
build-executor
Govern implementation from an approved execution contract. Invoke when execution-contract.md is approved and the user wants disciplined build work, TDD execution, or guarded batch-by-batch implementation.
workflow-start
Primary entry point for the spec-superflow state-machine workflow. Invoke when the user is inside an active spec-superflow change directory (look for .spec-superflow.yaml, changes/ /, proposal.md, specs/, design.md, tasks.md, or execution-contract.md) and asks to start, continue, resume, implement, plan, or figure out…
release-archivist
Close out a spec-superflow change with verification, summary, and archive readiness. Invoke when implementation is complete, verification is underway, or the user asks for a final wrap-up.
bug-investigator
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes. Invoked automatically when build-executor hits a blockage.
spec-writer
Create or refine spec-superflow planning artifacts. Invoke when the change is understood well enough to write proposal.md, specs/, design.md, and tasks.md.
contract-builder
Convert approved planning artifacts into an execution contract. Invoke when the user wants to start building, asks to move from planning to implementation, or when execution-contract.md is missing or stale.