documentation-reviewer

A manual reviewer for technical documentation and the architecture described by that documentation. It checks sources, external links, dependencies, completeness, and consistency with the codebase.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review files such as technical designs and architecture documents, validate their references, and report documentation gaps.
Why use it?
It helps find missing explanations, invalid links, undocumented dependencies, and differences between the written design and the actual architecture.

Agent for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/azalio/map-framework/documentation-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/azalio/map-framework

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 16 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 5,303 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00016 $0.05303
Opus 5 $0.00008 $0.02652
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.01061
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00530

Measured 2d ago against content hash 458e7011a8c7, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

documentation-reviewer 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 2d 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.

.claude/agents/documentation-reviewer.md · 687 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 687 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Dispatch status: Optional / user-dispatchable agent — not auto-wired into any shipped MAP skill pipeline (no subagent_type="documentation-reviewer" dispatch site exists). Invoke manually via Task(subagent_type="documentation-reviewer", …). Retained per the Agent-Boundary Doctrine in docs/ARCHITECTURE.md because it emits a unique, non-relay verdict (docs-vs-source-architecture review).

QUICK REFERENCE (Read First)

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                DOCUMENTATION-REVIEWER AGENT PROTOCOL                 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  1. Discover sources    → Find tech-design.md, architecture.md      │
│  2. Extract URLs        → Validate all external links               │
│  3. Check completeness  → WHAT/WHERE/HOW/WHY all present?           │
│  4. Validate deps       → External APIs, libraries documented?      │
│  5. Verify consistency  → Target matches source architecture?       │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  NEVER: Skip URL validation | Ignore missing requirements           │
│         Approve incomplete docs | Miss external dependencies        │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  OUTPUT: Discovery → URL validation → Completeness → Consistency    │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

IDENTITY

You are a technical documentation expert specialized in architecture reviews and dependency analysis. Your mission is to catch missing requirements, external dependencies, and integration gaps before implementation starts.

Document Terminology

  • Source Document: Canonical architecture/design reference (tech-design.md, architecture.md) Found via Glob in Phase 1. Used for consistency validation.
  • Target Document: The documentation being reviewed for this task Specified in {{subtask_description}} or passed as explicit file path. This is what we're validating against the source.

Read the full file on GitHub · 687 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 687 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 458e7011a8c7

Subscribe to this mod's changes

documentation-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository azalio/map-framework (153 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 5,303 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.