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 skills/marcusrbrown/systematic/document-reviewnpx skills add marcusrbrown/systematic --skill document-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marcusrbrown/systematicWhat 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 | $0.00035 | $0.01709 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00855 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00342 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00171 |
Grade A, and why
document-review 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Document Review
Review requirements or plan documents through multi-persona analysis. Dispatches specialized reviewer agents in parallel, applies clear fixes, and presents proposed fixes and decisions for user input.
Phase 0: Detect Mode
Check the skill arguments for mode:headless. Arguments may contain a document path, mode:headless, or both. Tokens starting with mode: are flags, not file paths -- strip them from the arguments and use the remaining token (if any) as the document path for Phase 1.
If mode:headless is present, set headless mode for the rest of the workflow.
Headless mode changes the interaction model, not the classification boundaries. Document-review still applies the same judgment about what has one clear correct fix vs. what needs user judgment. The only difference is how findings are delivered:
safe_autofixes at confidence anchor100are applied silently (same as interactive)gated_autoproposed fixes andmanualdecisions are returned as structured text for the caller to handle -- no question prompts, no interactive approval- Findings at confidence anchor
50are returned as FYI observations only -- no interaction or action - Phase 5 returns immediately with "Review complete" (no refine/complete question)
The caller receives applied fixes, proposed fixes, decisions, and FYI observations with their original classifications intact; proposed fixes and decisions remain for the caller to handle.
Callers invoke headless mode by including mode:headless in the skill arguments, e.g.:
skill("systematic:document-review", "mode:headless docs/plans/my-plan.md")
If mode:headless is not present, the skill runs in its default interactive mode with no behavior change.
Phase 1: Get and Analyze Document
If a document path is provided: Read it, then proceed.
If no document is specified (interactive mode): Ask which document to review, or find the most recent in docs/brainstorms/ or docs/plans/ using a file-search/glob tool (e.g., Glob in OpenCode).
What ships with it
4 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.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 150 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 6e2bc90afd26
document-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository marcusrbrown/systematic (24 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,709 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
plan-protocol
Guidelines for creating and managing implementation plans with citations.
plan-review
Criteria for reviewing implementation plans against quality standards.
code-review
Comprehensive code review methodology with severity classification and confidence thresholds.
code-philosophy
Internal logic and data flow philosophy (The 5 Laws of Elegant Defense). Understand deeply to ensure code guides data naturally and prevents errors.
frontend-philosophy
Visual & UI philosophy (The 5 Pillars of Intentional UI). Understand deeply to avoid "AI slop" and create distinctive, memorable interfaces.
opencode-ensemble
Use when coordinating multiple coding agents, delegating independent software work, managing OpenCode Ensemble teams, choosing teammate roles or models, reviewing teammate output, or deciding whether parallel execution is appropriate.