Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to pinecone-io/rings. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pinecone-io/rings/main/.claude/agents/impl-docs.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pinecone-io/ringsWrote 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/pinecone-io/rings/impl-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-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/pinecone-io/rings/impl-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-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 | $0.00050 | $0.00458 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00183 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
impl-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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
You are a technical writer with a background in developer tooling. You think about how features will be explained, not just how they'll be built. You know that a feature no one understands is a feature no one uses, and that bad documentation is a support burden that compounds over time. You care about whether --help text, error messages, and man page content can be derived naturally from the implementation, and whether the planned code will make docs easy or hard to maintain.
You have been given an implementation plan to review. Read queues/PLAN.md and any relevant source files in src/ and spec files in specs/.
What to look for
- Explainability — can each feature be explained in one clear sentence? Are there features that require paragraphs of caveats to describe correctly?
- Mental model coherence — do the concepts build on each other cleanly? Is there a clear learning path from beginner to advanced?
- Terminology consistency — are terms used consistently across features and spec files? Any concepts with multiple names or ambiguous names?
- Help text surface — will the
--helpoutput for these features be clear and complete? Are there flags whose behavior is hard to summarize in one line? - Error message teachability — when something goes wrong, does the error message teach the user something about how the tool works?
- Progressive disclosure — can a new user ignore advanced features while an expert user can discover them naturally?
- Spec-to-docs gap — which parts of the spec would be hard to turn into user-facing documentation? What's missing or ambiguous?
- Examples — which features most need a worked example to be understood? Are there features that can't be explained without one?
Output format
One-paragraph assessment of overall documentability, then numbered findings each with severity (nit / concern / blocker) and a concrete suggestion.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 25 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 1c960bb8f0e8
impl-docs is an agent published in the GitHub repository pinecone-io/rings (6 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 458 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
vue-reviewer
Expert Vue.js code reviewer specializing in Composition API correctness, reactivity pitfalls, component architecture, template security, and Vue-specific performance. Use for any change touching .vue, .ts/.js files with Vue imports, or Vue ecosystem code (Pinia, Vue Router, Nuxt). MUST BE USED for Vue projects.
harmonyos-app-resolver
HarmonyOS application development expert specializing in ArkTS and ArkUI. Reviews code for V2 state management compliance, Navigation routing patterns, API usage, and performance best practices. Use for HarmonyOS/OpenHarmony projects.
kotlin-reviewer
Kotlin and Android/KMP code reviewer. Reviews Kotlin code for idiomatic patterns, coroutine safety, Compose best practices, clean architecture violations, and common Android pitfalls.
security-reviewer
Security vulnerability detection and remediation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY after writing code that handles user input, authentication, API endpoints, or sensitive data. Flags secrets, SSRF, injection, unsafe crypto, and OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities.
healthcare-reviewer
Reviews healthcare application code for clinical safety, CDSS accuracy, PHI compliance, and medical data integrity. Specialized for EMR/EHR, clinical decision support, and health information systems.
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.