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 uqeu/estelle-cli --skill deep-searchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/uqeu/estelle-cliWrote 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/uqeu/estelle-cli/deep-search)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/uqeu/estelle-cli/deep-search"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/uqeu/estelle-cli/deep-search/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/uqeu/estelle-cli/deep-search"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/uqeu/estelle-cli/deep-search.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01057 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00423 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00211 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
deep-search 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 1mo 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 — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
deep-search
Estelle's Deep Search — the grounded, cited, BYOK answer to Sourcegraph's Deep Search. Sourcegraph's Deep
Search takes a natural-language question about a codebase and returns an answer with a sources list, but it
is walled (it runs on their model provider; BYOK is excluded) and its answer is cited yet never
certified: an answer that drifts off the retrieved sources still ships with plausible-looking citations.
Estelle packages the pieces it already has — retrieve_cited / recall_cited (serve/memory_pipeline.py,
serve/memory_facade.py, hybrid RRF), cite_block, and the deterministic grounding gate check_grounding
(agent/grounding.py) — into POST /deep-search (handle_deep_search, serve/api.py), and ADDS the two
things Sourcegraph's lacks:
- a grounding certificate — the finished answer is run through the deterministic gate against the repo's
real symbol graph, so an answer that references an API the repo does not define is FLAGGED
(
grounded=Falseplus theungroundedsymbols), not shipped as fact; and - BYOK — the answer is produced on the CALLER's own model, not a provider they are locked into.
The pure core is deep_search_prompt + deep_search_result (serve/deep_search.py); the model call is
injected, so the whole capability is grounded and tested without a GPU. Distinct from /search (raw recall +
grep, no answer) and /verify (grounds code the caller supplies): this ANSWERS an NL question and certifies
the answer in one call.
When to run
When an engineer (or an agent) asks a natural-language question about a codebase — "where is auth enforced?",
"how does the retry loop work?", "what calls charge?" — and needs an answer they can trust enough to act on,
not just a ranked file list. Reach for it over a bare recall whenever the answer will be quoted, pasted into a
PR, or fed to another agent: the certificate is what lets the answer cross that trust boundary.
Procedure
- Recall the cited evidence, question-keyed. Retrieve the top cited chunks over the caller's swept
namespace with
recall_cited(serve/memory_facade.py→retrieve_cited, hybrid RRF + selective rerank), keyed on the QUESTION. Each chunk carries itssource_file, so every claim can be traced to a repo location — provenance is the trust half of a grounded answer. - Answer grounded ONLY in that evidence, on the caller's model. Build the focused prompt with
deep_search_prompt— the recalled chunks rendered throughcite_block(each headed by its[source]), with the instruction to answer using ONLY that context, cite the file per claim, and say so plainly when the context does not contain the answer rather than answer from the model's own memory. Call the CALLER's own backend (BYOK) — their tokens, never ours. - Certify with the deterministic grounding gate. Run
check_grounding/memory.checkon the answer against the repo's real symbol graph plus exactly the recalled context the model saw. A repo-scoped symbol the repo never defines is a hallucinated API — the single failure that erodes trust fastest — so a drifted answer comes backgrounded=Falsewith the offending symbols inungrounded. The gate costs zero model calls on a clean answer; it fires only when the answer went off-source. - Return the certified result. Emit
deep_search_result:{answer, sources:[{file, line?}], grounded, ungrounded, citations}— the answer, the sources it was grounded in, the certificate, and the raw cited block. Ship the answer only whengroundedis true; when it is false, surface the flag and the ungrounded symbols so the caller sees the answer drifted rather than acting on it.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 59 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 3dc81827677b
deep-search is a skill published in the GitHub repository uqeu/estelle-cli (0 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,057 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 2026-09-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
cocosearch-review-pr
Use when reviewing a GitHub PR or GitLab MR by URL. Fetches diff and metadata via API, then uses CocoSearch for blast radius analysis, dependency impact, pattern consistency, and test coverage assessment. Read-only by default; optionally pushes findings back as inline PR/MR comments after your confirmation.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
swarm-pr-review
Run a graph-guided, tool-augmented PR review using context packing, parallel exploration, mandatory repository-agnostic risk-family coverage with dispatch scaled to diff size and risk, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and metrics writeback. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive…
code-review
You are a senior code reviewer. You receive diffs via stdin.
include-test-files-that-assert-on-behavior-being-changed-in-decl
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.
review
Adversarial fresh-context review and risk check of an increment before it ships; every finding cites path:line and is re-verified. Use for "review", "qa", "quality check", "critique this".