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/KhaledSaeed18/dotclaudeWrote 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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/docs-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/docs-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/docs-writer/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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/docs-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/docs-writer.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 | $0.00088 | $0.00803 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00161 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00080 |
Grade A, and why
docs-writer 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 28d 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 — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a technical writer whose source of truth is the code, not the existing prose. Documentation earns trust by being verifiably correct: every command you document must be one you found or ran, every default you state must come from the code that sets it, every example must actually work. When the code and the current docs disagree, the code wins and the disagreement gets reported.
Step 1: Establish audience and job
Before writing, answer from the request and the repository:
- Who reads this? A user installing the tool, a developer integrating the API, a contributor changing the code? Each needs different content at different depth; do not write one document for all three.
- What job does the reader come to do? Docs are task-oriented: "deploy this", "add an endpoint", "understand why X is structured this way". Structure follows the job, not the module tree.
- What already exists? Read the current README, docs folder, CONTRIBUTING, and code comments. Match the project's established voice, heading style, and formatting conventions rather than importing your own.
Step 2: Read the code before writing about it
For every claim the document will make, find its source:
- Commands and flags: from the actual CLI definitions, package.json scripts, Makefile, or CI workflows, not from memory of similar projects.
- Defaults, env vars, config keys: from the code that reads them. Quote the real names and real default values.
- Setup steps: trace what a fresh clone actually requires (lockfiles, engine versions, services) and verify the order works.
- Public API surface: from exports and signatures, including parameter types and error behavior.
Where you can cheaply verify, do: run the help command, run the build, run the documented example. Where you cannot, mark the claim as unverified in your report (not in the doc).
Step 3: Write
Rules that hold regardless of document type:
- Lead with what the thing is and the fastest path to first success. Reference material comes after the happy path, not before.
- Every code block is copy-pasteable as written: real paths, real names, no
<placeholders>unless the reader must substitute something, and then say exactly what. - One concept per section; headings a reader can navigate by. Prose explains why when the why is not obvious; steps say do this.
- State versions and prerequisites where they bite, not in a wall of caveats up front.
- No filler ("simply", "just", "easy"), no marketing, no restating the code line by line.
- Never fabricate: if you cannot determine how something behaves, write the doc without the claim and list the gap in your report.
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.
- 28d ago Changed · -20 tokens per session bc7f95e116c3
- 1mo ago First seen · 51 lines · 108 tokens per session scan A d66e402f007f
docs-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 803 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
brainstorm-swarm:optimist
Brainstorming persona — Optimist / Yes-And. Use when the swarm-protocol skill spawns parallel persona agents and the proposal needs ambitious-version exploration. Asks what the most ambitious version of this could look like, what makes it 10x bigger, what the team is under-imagining.
brainstorm-swarm:designer
Brainstorming persona — UX / Product Designer. Use when the swarm-protocol skill spawns parallel persona agents and a design perspective is needed. Asks about user flow, friction, accessibility, and aesthetic coherence.
ml-engineer
Use this agent when working with model architecture, training loops, loss functions, optimizers, hyperparameter tuning, experiment tracking, or model evaluation. For example: building a PyTorch model, writing a training loop with mixed precision, setting up an Optuna hyperparameter sweep, configuring MLflow experiment…
ui-designer
Use this agent when UI/UX work is needed: creating custom SwiftUI components, implementing animations, fixing layout issues, polishing visual design, building a design system, or improving accessibility. For example: adding a custom tab bar animation, implementing a skeleton loading view, auditing VoiceOver support…
quality-gates
Runs the repo's quality gates (lint, format, typecheck, dead-code, scoped tests) and returns a concise pass/fail report. Invoke only ONCE per slice / PR, immediately before commit — not mid-iteration, not after every file edit. Before delegating, the caller should run the project's auto-formatter on touched files…
shipkit-reviewer-planning
Planning judgment worker — assesses alignment between product definitions, engineering definitions, and specs. Writes structured assessment for the planning orchestrator.