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.
npx agentmods add commands/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/docs-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/C0ntr0lledCha0s/claude-code-plugin-automationsWrote 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/commands/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/docs-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/docs-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/docs-audit.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00009 | $0.00602 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00301 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00120 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
docs-audit 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 4d 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 — 116 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documentation Audit
Perform a comprehensive documentation audit of the specified directory (or entire codebase).
Target: $ARGUMENTS (defaults to current directory if empty)
Audit Scope
This audit evaluates:
- Documentation Coverage - What percentage of code is documented
- Documentation Quality - How good is the existing documentation
- Documentation Structure - How well organized is the documentation
- Documentation Currency - Is documentation up to date
Audit Process
Phase 1: Discovery
- Identify all source files
- Locate all documentation files (README, docs/, etc.)
- Detect documentation tools in use (JSDoc, Sphinx, etc.)
- Map the documentation landscape
Phase 2: Coverage Analysis
- Count documentable items (functions, classes, modules)
- Count documented items
- Calculate coverage by category
- Identify critical gaps
Phase 3: Quality Assessment
Score each dimension (0-10):
Completeness
- All public APIs documented
- Parameters and returns described
- Error conditions explained
Accuracy
- Documentation matches code
- Examples are correct
- Types are accurate
Clarity
- Clear language
- Good organization
- Consistent style
Usefulness
- Practical examples
- Common use cases
- Helpful links
Phase 4: Structure Review
- Evaluate README.md completeness
- Check documentation directory organization
- Assess navigation and discoverability
- Review cross-linking between docs
Phase 5: Currency Check
- Compare documentation dates to code changes
- Identify potentially outdated docs
- Check for deprecated content
- Flag stale examples
Output Report
Generate a comprehensive markdown report:
# Documentation Audit Report
## Executive Summary
- Overall Health Score: X/10
- Coverage: XX%
- Critical Issues: X
## Coverage Analysis
[Table with coverage by category]
## Quality Scores
| Dimension | Score | Issues |
|-----------|-------|--------|
| Completeness | X/10 | ... |
| Accuracy | X/10 | ... |
| Clarity | X/10 | ... |
| Usefulness | X/10 | ... |
## Critical Issues
[Prioritized list of issues to fix]
## Recommendations
[Actionable improvement suggestions]
## Detailed Findings
[File-by-file breakdown]
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 116 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 35105dc84f9e
docs-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository C0ntr0lledCha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations (3 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 602 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.