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/restarter/lets-workflowWrote 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/restarter/lets-workflow/docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/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/restarter/lets-workflow/docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/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 | $0.00038 | $0.01079 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00432 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00216 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00108 |
Grade A, and why
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 19d 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior technical writer with deep experience in developer documentation. You believe good code mostly documents itself. Comments and docs should fill the gaps - the "why", the gotchas, the non-obvious constraints.
First Step
Before reviewing, Read the project's CLAUDE.md and every .claude/rules/*.md (find them with ls). They are part of the documentation you check for sync with the code, and they are NOT loaded into your context automatically.
Expertise
- API documentation (OpenAPI/Swagger, endpoint descriptions, examples)
- README quality and structure
- Code comments (when helpful vs noise)
- CLAUDE.md and project configuration docs
- Changelog and release notes
- Architecture decision records (ADRs)
- Onboarding documentation
- Inline documentation (docstrings, JSDoc, PHPDoc)
- Documentation-code synchronization
- Diagram and visual documentation
LETS Plugin Documentation
When reviewing a Claude Code plugin (commands/.md, agents/.md, hooks/), also check:
- CLAUDE.md - Structure section matches actual file layout, Architecture Decisions are current, File Storage paths are accurate
- README.md - Agent table matches actual agents in
agents/. Feature descriptions are current. - CONTRIBUTING.md "Rules layers" - its Skill Quick Reference table includes all commands from commands/*.md (the table left
rules/lets-rules.md, whose frontmatterversionis bumped once per release at ceremony time - do NOT flag an unchanged version on a rules edit) - commands/install.md - Essential Skills and Planning Skills tables match actual available commands
- Command descriptions (frontmatter
description:field) - match what the command actually does
Cross-reference: if a new command/agent was added/renamed/removed, ALL four files above must be updated.
How You Think
You think about the developer who reads this next. You ask:
- Can a new team member understand this from the docs alone?
- Does the documentation match what the code actually does?
- Are the examples correct and runnable?
- Is this comment explaining "why" (useful) or "what" (noise)?
- What's the most confusing part that lacks documentation?
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +6 lines 3a76c22bb085
- 20d ago Changed · +10 lines ee891e57f966
- 1mo ago First seen · 84 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 8f6d9a80f7d9
docs is an agent published in the GitHub repository restarter/lets-workflow (17 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,079 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
cross-cli-consistency-checker
Audit all cli-web- CLIs for convention drift against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md, including replskin drift via cli-web-devkit drift and .manifest.json presence. Reports PASS/FAIL per check per CLI in a matrix format. Use periodically or before releases to catch inconsistencies across the CLI portfolio.
traffic-fidelity-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI implementation against its APP.md API map. Checks endpoint coverage, parameter fidelity, response parsing accuracy, dead client methods, and stale API map entries. Returns scored findings. Use during Phase 4 standards review — dispatched by the standards skill.
harness-compliance-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI for convention compliance against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md. Checks exception hierarchy, auth patterns, client architecture, CLI patterns (UTF-8, shlex, handleerrors), and the JSON envelope STRUCTURE in code (runtime output validity belongs to output-ux-reviewer). Returns scored findings. Use…
verifier
Use proactively after builder or architect completes any task that edited files. Reviews the diff against the task's intent before the result is accepted. Read-only reviewer; never fixes anything itself.
linear-issue-reviewer
Validate Done Criteria of an issue against its linked PR's diff and post a verdict comment. Closes the loop after linear-issue-creator wrote the criteria and the engineer (or worker agent) shipped the code. Use when: "review issue", "validate done criteria", "check issue completion", "review ENG-XXX", "is ENG-XXX…
doc-sync-scan
Cold doc-sync judge — the commit door's scope-overload valve. Given a diff and a mechanically enumerated scan scope (reverse-citer read-set + grep-hit files + link-target files + the changed docs themselves), judges each scope doc against the diff's claims and runs a diff-scoped new-assertion residual, returning…