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 codybrom/clairvoyance --skill comments-docsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/codybrom/clairvoyanceWrote 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/codybrom/clairvoyance/comments-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/codybrom/clairvoyance/comments-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/codybrom/clairvoyance/comments-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/skills/codybrom/clairvoyance/comments-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/codybrom/clairvoyance/comments-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 | $0.00063 | $0.01518 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00607 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
comments-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 1mo 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 — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comments & Documentation Review Lens
When invoked with $ARGUMENTS, focus the analysis on the specified file or module. Read the target code first, then apply the checks below.
Comments are not recording a design that already exists. They are the medium in which the design is discovered. Code captures mechanism. Comments capture meaning. Even a perfect programming language could not replace them. The information types are distinct.
When to Apply
- Reviewing code with comments (or conspicuously lacking them)
- When writing new interfaces and considering documentation strategy
- When comments feel useless or redundant
- When a module is hard to use despite having documentation
Core Principles
The Guiding Principle
"Comments should describe things that aren't obvious from the code." — John Ousterhout, A Philosophy of Software Design
"Obvious" is from the perspective of someone reading the code for the first time, not the author. If a reviewer says something isn't obvious, it isn't. Don't argue, clarify.
Four Comment Types
1. Interface Comments
What and why for callers. Must be sufficient to use the interface without reading implementation. Operate at two levels: intuition (a sentence giving the mental model) and precision (argument/return docs more specific than the code). A comment that says "offset" does not specify inclusive vs exclusive.
2. Implementation Comments
What a block does (high-level) and why, not line-by-line how. For variable comments, think nouns, not verbs: describe what the variable represents, not how it's manipulated.
3. Cross-Module Comments
Document dependencies spanning module boundaries. Place at a convergence point, or maintain a central designNotes file with labeled sections per topic and short pointer comments in the code (// See "Zombies" in designNotes). Neither approach is perfect. This is a genuinely unsolved problem.
4. Data Structure Member Comments
Each field should have a comment capturing what's not obvious from the type or name: what it represents, units, valid ranges, boundary conditions (inclusive/exclusive), nullability, resource ownership (who frees/closes), invariants and relationships to other fields.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 106 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A c3e26c87a88c
comments-docs is a skill published in the GitHub repository codybrom/clairvoyance (12 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,518 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
neo-code-review
Use this skill when the user asks to review or audit source code, a PR, diff, commit, or recent changes for bugs, security, performance, tests, compatibility, or maintainability, duplicated code or logic across files, or hard-coded values. Also use it after an AI agent finishes modifying code to inspect the current…
neo-pr
Use this skill when the user asks to create, draft, review, format, or generate a Pull Request (PR) title and description, specify target or source branches for a repository, or convert git branch diffs into concise, high-impact, non-AI-slop PR content.
neo-rust
Use this skill when writing, refactoring, debugging, or auditing Rust code. Trigger for .rs files, Cargo projects, ownership/borrowing/lifetime issues, Result/Option error handling, unnecessary clone/performance work, unsafe code review, or modern Rust architecture.
iso-review
Take the work sitting on this branch and make it better, then check it. Three phases, in one order.
code-review
Use this skill when you need a risk-driven code review of a PR/diff with severity-ranked findings and actionable fixes; triggers include code review, PR review,.
technical-quality-perspective
Use this skill when a technical quality perspective is needed for requirements, strategy, code, test cases, or reports; triggers include technical quality review, architecture review, and code review.