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 zgbrenner/agentcounsel --skill research-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zgbrenner/agentcounselWrote 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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/research-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/research-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/research-plan/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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/research-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/research-plan.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 | $0.00058 | $0.02311 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.01156 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00462 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00231 |
Grade A, and why
Research Plan 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 9d 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 — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Research Plan
Purpose
Produce a structured research roadmap that converts a vague legal question into a scoped, attorney-approvable plan — before any authority is gathered. The roadmap names the statute leads, regulatory leads, case-law areas, search terms, source-hierarchy targets, and out-of-scope items the research will pursue. It produces draft legal work product for attorney review; it is not legal advice, and it does not begin the research itself.
The most important discipline this skill enforces: the roadmap contains no citations. No case names, statute numbers, regulation sections, or quotations appear in the output — only leads, expressed as topics, doctrines, and search terms. The point of the plan is to surface scope and let the attorney approve or redirect it; producing citations at this stage front-runs research with the very fabrication risk the planning step exists to contain.
Use When
- A user asks to "research X" without a specific Question Presented, and the scope needs to be settled before research begins.
- A research task is broad or open-ended, and the attorney needs a written plan to approve scope, budget, or jurisdiction coverage.
- The matter involves multiple jurisdictions, overlapping doctrines, or a long time horizon, and the research strategy must be visible before resources are spent.
- A new research engagement begins and the supervising attorney wants to see leads, search terms, and source-hierarchy targets before the work starts.
- A research task has been started and produced too much off-scope material; restart with an attorney-approved plan.
Required Inputs
- The legal question(s) or research task — as stated by the user; will be refined into discrete sub-questions in the plan.
- Jurisdiction and governing law — the applicable jurisdiction(s) and the body of law (federal, state, contractual, regulatory). If unknown, flag as
[CONFIRM: jurisdiction]and produce the plan with jurisdiction-conditional branches rather than guessing. - Known facts — the facts framing the research need. Do not invent or reconstruct facts; use only what the user has provided.
- Procedural posture or transactional posture — if applicable.
- Scope and time constraints — turnaround, budget, page limits, or other constraints that should shape research depth.
- Optional: authority already in hand — any cases, statutes, or sources the user has identified. These become "starting authorities," noted by topic, not as citations to verify here.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 134 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 0d2322c39781
Research Plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 2,311 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
legal-research
A legal research skill for finding and analysing laws and court cases, including similar cases. It requires access to a reliable legal research database before producing a formal report.
document-fill
A document-filling assistant that uses a supplied template and case files to fill in forms, contracts, or legal documents. It also reports where each filled value came from and which details are missing.
contract-review
A contract-review workflow for agreements governed by Chinese law, United States law, or both. It examines clauses one by one and produces a list of legal-risk questions, with an optional marked-up Word document.
fedramp
Expert guidance for FedRAMP certification and compliance under CR26 (FedRAMP Consolidated Rules for 2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about FedRAMP authorization, ATO (Authority to Operate), cloud security for federal government, NIST SP 800-53 controls, CSP compliance, or any of the core FedRAMP document…
eu-cra
Expert EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) advisor for Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 — mandatory cybersecurity and vulnerability handling requirements for all products with digital elements (PDEs) sold in the EU. Use this skill for gap analysis, product classification (Default / Class I / Class II), conformity assessment route…
aenderungsvorbehalt-308
Für Änderungsvorbehalt 308: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt.