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 skills add alexei-led/cc-thingz --skill documenting-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alexei-led/cc-thingzWrote 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/skills/alexei-led/cc-thingz/documenting-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alexei-led/cc-thingz/documenting-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexei-led/cc-thingz/documenting-code/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/skills/alexei-led/cc-thingz/documenting-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexei-led/cc-thingz/documenting-code.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00108 | $0.01357 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00043 | $0.00543 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00271 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00136 |
Grade A, and why
documenting-code 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 15d 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documenting Code
Turn implementation facts into docs that a named reader can use. Every claim in the result matches the code, and every visual renders cleanly.
Pick the mode
- Update: a code change made docs stale. Change the smallest set of docs. Done when each changed behavior is documented where its reader looks, and nothing unrelated changed.
- Overhaul: the user asks to rewrite, restructure, or improve a doc set, for
example a README front page, guides, or an architecture doc. Done when:
- each doc has one reader and one job, and each fact has one owner
- every claim matches the code, and every visual passes its render check
- the gate passes
- A named doc or a named change is enough scope; start work. Ask only when the request names neither, with one question and these options: auto-detect from recent changes, README, API docs, or the full doc set.
Readers
Decide the reader before writing.
- Human: short, scannable text. Use a diagram, table, or chart when it
answers a question faster than prose. Load
references/doc-set.mdonly for doc-set structure or Overhaul mode,references/style.mdwhen rewriting prose, andreferences/visuals.mdonly when changing diagrams or charts. - Agent (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, skills, prompts): terse operational text with
headers, bullets, numbered steps, exact contracts, and a table where it is the
clearest form. No diagrams or rationale that a model already knows. To score
or lint instruction files, use
reviewing-instructions. - Code: comments and docstrings state contracts, invariants, side effects,
errors, and non-obvious decisions. Delete comments that restate the code.
Load
references/code.mdfor shared comment rules and per-language doc checks.
Workflow
- Scope the work from the request and the changed files (
git diff --name-only), and find the existing docs that cover them. - List the doc files, the reader and the job of each, and the facts that more
than one doc states. In Overhaul mode, write the ownership map from
references/doc-set.mdbefore editing. - Read the code, tests, and configuration that each doc describes. When docs and code conflict, report it and update the docs to the code, unless the user says that the doc is the intended contract.
- Write. Keep each fact in one place and link to it from the others. Replace adjectives with measured facts. Name actors, conditions, and referents; use one term per concept. Cut words only when meaning and necessary context survive.
- Check changed claims against their source; use
references/claims.mdfor configuration, API, or measured-performance claims. Generate sample output when changing examples. Mark unconfirmed claims and say where you looked. - If visuals changed, load
references/visuals.md, render them, inspect the images, and fix the faults. - Run the gate once. Run it again only after further edits.
- Report with the output contract.
What ships with it
14 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- .agentbundler/targets/claude.json 561 B
- assets/examples/decision-outcomes.mmd 572 B
- assets/examples/lifecycle.mmd 271 B
- assets/examples/pipeline.mmd 329 B
- assets/examples/request-flow.mmd 376 B
- assets/examples/system-context.mmd 670 B
- references/claims.md 2.6 KB
- references/code.md 1.5 KB
- references/doc-set.md 4.5 KB
- references/style.md 2.6 KB
- references/visuals.md 5.3 KB
- scripts/check-links.py 4.0 KB runs code
- scripts/prose-lint.py 4.4 KB runs code
- scripts/render-mermaid.sh 2.6 KB runs code
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.
- 15d ago Changed · +1 lines · +7 tokens per session 84cc8f875244
- 16d ago Changed ac051092cf34
- 22d ago Changed · -18 lines f7e67bbbb3f6
- 26d ago Changed · -3 lines · +36 tokens per session db4b549d45ed
- 1mo ago First seen · 153 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 405e11d394cf
documenting-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository alexei-led/cc-thingz (38 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 1,357 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-delta
Review only changes since last commit using impact analysis. Token-efficient delta review with automatic blast-radius detection.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
cross-model-review
A second-opinion code review that asks a different AI model to independently inspect a change, then compares both reviews. It focuses on logic, security, consistency, and omissions.
swarm-pr-review
Run a graph-guided, tool-augmented PR review using context packing, parallel exploration, mandatory repository-agnostic risk-family coverage with dispatch scaled to diff size and risk, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and metrics writeback. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive…
pre-landing-review
Pre-landing PR review. Analyzes diff against the base branch for SQL safety, LLM trust boundary violations, conditional side effects, and other structural issues. Use when explicitly asked for the specialized pre-landing workflow. Product /review requests are handled by OpenBitFun's unified Review mechanism instead.…
include-test-files-that-assert-on-behavior-being-changed-in-decl
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.