doc-coauthoring

A guided process for writing documents together, including documentation, proposals, technical specifications, and decision records.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to gather background, shape the document, revise its sections, and test the finished text with a reader.
Why use it?
It helps turn scattered context into a clear document and checks whether the result makes sense to its readers.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Part of the ccsci plugin — 8 skills, 2 agents shipped together

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/emaballarin/ccplugins/doc-coauthoring
Any agent
npx skills add emaballarin/ccplugins --skill doc-coauthoring
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/emaballarin/ccplugins

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install ccsci, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 8 skills, 2 agents.

Per session 77 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,330 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 94% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00077 $0.03330
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.01665
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00666
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00333

Measured 2d ago against content hash d16d2f8cbb72, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

doc-coauthoring 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 2d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

94% identical to doc-coauthoring — 30 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

plugins/ccscience/skills/doc-coauthoring/SKILL.md · 398 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 398 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Doc Co-Authoring Workflow

This skill provides a structured workflow for guiding users through collaborative document creation. Act as an active guide, walking users through three stages: Context Gathering, Refinement & Structure, and Reader Testing.

Claude Code mapping: "create an artifact" ≈ write a Markdown file in the working directory with Write; all edits use Edit; "test with a fresh Claude / sub-agent" uses the Task tool. Claude Code has no claude.ai-style inline document artifacts, so follow the file-based branches throughout.

When to Offer This Workflow

Trigger conditions:

  • User mentions writing documentation: "write a doc", "draft a proposal", "create a spec", "write up"
  • User mentions specific doc types: "PRD", "design doc", "decision doc", "RFC"
  • User seems to be starting a substantial writing task

Initial offer: Offer the user a structured workflow for co-authoring the document. Explain the three stages:

  1. Context Gathering: User provides all relevant context while Claude asks clarifying questions
  2. Refinement & Structure: Iteratively build each section through brainstorming and editing
  3. Reader Testing: Test the doc with a fresh Claude (no context) to catch blind spots before others read it

Explain that this approach helps ensure the doc works well when others read it (including when they paste it into Claude). Ask if they want to try this workflow or prefer to work freeform.

If user declines, work freeform. If user accepts, proceed to Stage 1.

Stage 1: Context Gathering

Goal: Close the gap between what the user knows and what Claude knows, enabling smart guidance later.

Initial Questions

Start by asking the user for meta-context about the document:

  1. What type of document is this? (e.g., technical spec, decision doc, proposal)
  2. Who's the primary audience?
  3. What's the desired impact when someone reads this?
  4. Is there a template or specific format to follow?
  5. Any other constraints or context to know?

Read the full file on GitHub · 398 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 398 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A d16d2f8cbb72

Subscribe to this mod's changes

doc-coauthoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository emaballarin/ccplugins (3 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 3,330 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 94% identical to doc-coauthoring, differing in 30 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

auto-perf-optimize

Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens