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 LMDHQ-0420/ResearchPilot-Skills --skill research-g.6-conclusiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LMDHQ-0420/ResearchPilot-SkillsWrote 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.
![agentmods badge for research[G.6]-conclusion](/badge/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion/github.svg?v=0-22-A){kind=icon}
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion/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.
![agentmods 80×15 button for research[G.6]-conclusion](/badge/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion.svg?v=A-x){kind=icon}
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lmdhq-0420/researchpilot-skills/research-g.6-conclusion.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 | $0.00022 | $0.00850 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00425 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
research[G.6]-conclusion 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 13d 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.
This is a copy
86% identical to research[G.2]-experiments — 34 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Phase G.6: Conclusion + References
user_requirements.md priority: All user constraints in
docs/user_requirements.mdtake precedence over any default instruction in this skill. Always read it before generating output.
Overview
Paper Writing Stage Chain
| Skill | Responsibility |
|---|---|
/research[G.0]-plan |
Update idea_report → plan structure/figures → select format |
/research[G.1]-method |
Write / revise Method |
/research[G.2]-experiments |
Write / revise Experiments |
/research[G.3]-abstract |
Write / revise Abstract |
/research[G.4]-introduction |
Write / revise Introduction |
/research[G.5]-related |
Write / revise Related Works |
/research[G.6]-conclusion |
Write / revise Conclusion + References |
/research[G.7]-review |
Full-paper review (five dimensions + claim-evidence) |
Command
/research[G.6]-conclusion
An optional natural-language instruction may follow the command. The AI will treat it as an additional constraint or supplement for this invocation.
Prerequisite: G.5 Related Works written
Before Writing: Required Steps
- Read the full manuscript (avoid disconnection from already-written sections)
- Read all existing references (References section or .bib file)
- Read the
=== Paper Architecture ===comment block at the top of the manuscript - Read
docs/idea_report.mdanddocs/dev_log.md(find answers to writing questions here first) - Read example analysis if
docs/manuscripts/examples/style-notes.mdexists - Scan all annotations in the manuscript, list pending ones
- Confirm writing plan with user before writing anything
See references/common-writing-constraints.md for full details.
Conclusion Section-Specific Requirements
Four-Step Conclusion (Master-cai conclusion.md):
- Restate the research problem (1 sentence, echo Introduction Part 2)
- Summarize key evidence (reference contribution list, cite experiment numbers)
- State broader impact or application value (1–2 sentences)
- Limitations (honest, 1–2 sentences) + Future work (specific, 1–2 sentences)
What ships with it
4 files 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.
- 13d ago First seen · 117 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 41305e6246d0
research[G.6]-conclusion is a skill published in the GitHub repository LMDHQ-0420/ResearchPilot-Skills (284 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 850 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to research[G.2]-experiments, differing in 34 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
instrument-data-to-allotrope
Convert laboratory instrument output files (PDF, CSV, Excel, TXT) to Allotrope Simple Model (ASM) JSON format or flattened 2D CSV. Use this skill when scientists need to standardize instrument data for LIMS systems, data lakes, or downstream analysis. Supports auto-detection of instrument types. Outputs include full…
matlab
Build, review, migrate, and safely plan MATLAB or GNU Octave numerical workflows, including arrays, tabular/time data, tests, projects, graphics, MAT files, and explicit Python interoperability.
exploratory-data-analysis
Perform bounded, local exploratory analysis of explicitly supported scientific files. Use for redacted CSV/TSV/JSON profiles; optional NumPy, HDF5, FASTA/FASTQ, and basic image metadata inspection; missingness/leakage audits; outlier and transformation sensitivity; and rigorous EDA report scaffolds. Other domain…
phylogenetics
Build and analyze phylogenetic trees using MAFFT (multiple alignment), IQ-TREE 2 (maximum likelihood), and FastTree (fast NJ/ML). Visualize with ETE3 or FigTree. For evolutionary analysis, microbial genomics, viral phylodynamics, protein family analysis, and molecular clock studies.
research-engineer
An uncompromising Academic Research Engineer. Operates with absolute scientific rigor, objective criticism, and zero flair. Focuses on theoretical correctness, formal verification, and optimal implementation across any required technology.
mapping-to-snomed
Maps clinical concept spans extracted by OpenMed to SNOMED CT concepts through a USER-SUPPLIED terminology server (the user's own Ontoserver, Snowstorm, or UMLS/UTS), never a bundled vocabulary. Use when the user wants to code findings, disorders, procedures, body structures, or substances to SNOMED CT, run an ECL…