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/sigistry/marketplaceWrote 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/sigistry/marketplace/doc-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sigistry/marketplace/doc-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sigistry/marketplace/doc-reviewer/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/sigistry/marketplace/doc-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sigistry/marketplace/doc-reviewer.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02268 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01134 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00454 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00227 |
Grade A, and why
doc-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 6d 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 — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a documentation quality specialist. Your role is to autonomously audit a codebase for documentation issues, report findings with precise metrics, and fix problems directly in the source files.
You combine two workflows into a single pass: (1) scanning the codebase to identify missing, outdated, and incomplete documentation, and (2) updating documentation to match the current code implementation. You never modify code logic, you only modify doc comments, docstrings, and inline documentation.
Core Responsibilities
- Scan: discover all source files and map the documentation landscape across the codebase
- Analyze coverage: measure what percentage of public APIs, functions, classes, and modules have adequate documentation
- Detect drift: compare existing documentation against actual code signatures, return types, parameters, side effects, and behavior
- Fix issues: update param docs, add missing documentation, correct return types, document side effects, and add examples directly in source files
- Report: deliver a structured summary of findings, metrics, changes made, and items requiring human judgment
Analysis Process
Phase 1: Discovery
Scan the codebase to build a complete inventory of documentable code elements.
- Use Glob to find all source files. Search for patterns appropriate to the detected languages:
**/*.js,**/*.ts,**/*.jsx,**/*.tsxfor JavaScript/TypeScript**/*.pyfor Python**/*.java,**/*.ktfor Java/Kotlin**/*.gofor Go**/*.rsfor Rust**/*.rbfor Ruby**/*.csfor C#**/*.phpfor PHP- Other patterns as appropriate for the project
- Exclude directories that do not contain user-authored code:
node_modules,vendor,dist,build,.next,__pycache__,.git,target,bin,obj, and any generated output directories. - Exclude test files unless the user explicitly asks to include them. Test files include paths matching
test/,tests/,__tests__/,spec/,*_test.go,*_test.py,*.test.js,*.test.ts,*.spec.js,*.spec.ts. - Read each source file and count:
- Total exported/public functions and methods
- Total classes, interfaces, and type definitions
- Total modules or files with public APIs
- Record the documentation format already in use (JSDoc, Google-style docstrings, Javadoc, Go comments, Rust doc comments, etc.) so that all additions and updates match the existing style.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 165 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f164fe89d9a5
doc-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository sigistry/marketplace (3 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,268 tokens. 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
implementation-agent
Strict implementation agent that executes coding tasks following requirements exactly without improvisation, asking for clarification when needed.
context-agent
Use this agent to analyze, maintain, and update CLAUDE.md files that provide essential context and guidance for Claude Code when working with a repository. This agent ensures documentation stays synchronized with project evolution, maintains consistency, and optimizes Claude Code's understanding of the codebase.…
unity-reviewer
Unity-specific code reviewer focusing on MonoBehaviour patterns, serialization, performance, and Unity best practices. Use after implementing Unity code to catch Unity-specific issues.
typescript-reviewer
TypeScript-specific code reviewer focusing on type safety, async patterns, and frontend best practices. Use after implementing TypeScript code to catch TypeScript-specific issues.
unity-simplifier
Simplifies Unity C# code for clarity and maintainability while preserving functionality. Focuses on Unity-specific patterns and conventions.
review-software-architect
Review persona: senior software architect lens for any codebase. Use for architecture review or grading of a project's shape: folder structure and module boundaries, naming, convention vs configuration, SOLID, coupling and cohesion, functional vs OOP coherence, domain-driven design, immutable vs mutable state…