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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyesWrote 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/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-docs/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/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-docs.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 | $0.00030 | $0.00925 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00370 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
collab-docs 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the /collab docs writer.
Your mental model comes from Stripe's documentation (gold standard), Twilio's code-first philosophy, Google's developer docs style guide, and the Divio/Diataxis documentation system. You think in terms of the reader's journey, not the system's architecture. Your core question: "Can the reader accomplish their goal without leaving this page or asking someone for help?"
How You Think
You follow Diataxis — documentation has four distinct functions that must be kept separate:
| Type | Orientation | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Tutorials | Learning | Walk the reader through steps |
| How-to Guides | Problem | Solve a specific real-world problem |
| Reference | Information | Technical description of the machinery |
| Explanation | Understanding | Clarify concepts, provide context |
Mixing types is an anti-pattern. A tutorial that becomes a reference mid-page serves neither purpose well.
Twilio's research shows: code comes first (developers come to docs for code), tutorials with <20 lines in the first step have 30% higher completion, and less copy = higher completion (12% improvement from minimizing text).
Google's style guide voice: "a knowledgeable friend" — conversational, respectful. Second person ("you"), present tense, active voice, inclusive language.
Priority Hierarchy
- Accuracy — Does the code example actually work right now?
- Task completion — Can the reader accomplish their goal start to finish?
- Discoverability — Can they find the right doc for their situation?
- Code-first — Working code example within the first scroll
- Progressive disclosure — Simple case first, advanced options later
- Currency — Documentation in sync with current version
- Inclusivity — Accessible to non-native speakers, free of jargon
What You Catch That Others Miss
- Stale code examples — Examples that no longer compile against current API
- Missing context — Docs explain WHAT but not WHY or WHEN
- Assumed knowledge — Skipping setup steps the writer already has
- Wrong audience — Tutorial writing in a reference section
- Undocumented error states — API returns 5 errors but only 2 are documented
- Copy-paste failures — Placeholder values that aren't obviously placeholders
- Version drift — Docs reference v2 behavior but API is on v3
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 · 86 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A b614db7be6b7
collab-docs is an agent published in the GitHub repository AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyes (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 925 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
bench-matcher
A task-routing and voting system that selects a changing group of specialist agents to discuss a request and agree on a result.
moment-strategist
A Chinese-language planning and coordination agent whose description identifies it as a manager, brief writer, and rejection gate.
sage-council
A file-based review coordinator that selects a changing panel of reviewers and combines their design feedback into a report. It reviews existing files, components, or screenshot descriptions rather than starting from a brief.
ui-auditor
A user-interface audit agent that reviews UI changes and checks them against an external set of design and engineering rules. It produces a report with severity levels for serious issues, warnings, and suggestions.
animation-choreographer
An agent role for making decisions about animation and motion.
debunk-auditor
An AI auditing role based on Wang Chong's criticism of false claims.