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 NickCrew/Claude-Cortex --skill doc-architecture-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NickCrew/Claude-CortexWrote 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/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-architecture-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-architecture-review.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 5.1 | $0.00049 | $0.04732 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.02366 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00946 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00473 |
Grade A, and why
doc-architecture-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 5d 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 — 599 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documentation Architecture Review
Evaluate whether documentation is organized so that readers can find what they need, understand where they are, and navigate efficiently. The output is an architecture assessment with specific restructuring recommendations — not new content.
When to Use
- When restructuring or reorganizing documentation
- When adding a new section or doc type to an existing set
- When users report "I know it's documented somewhere but can't find it"
- When the doc set has grown organically and needs rationalization
- After
doc-completeness-auditidentifies gaps — before filling them, ensure the structure can accommodate new content - Periodic review of navigation and discoverability
Quick Reference
| Resource | Purpose | Load when |
|---|---|---|
references/personas.md |
Six concrete reader personas with eval signals | Always (Phase 0) |
scripts/link_graph.py |
Mechanical link-graph analyzer (orphans, reciprocity, broken links, hubs) | Always (Phase 1) |
references/ia-heuristics.md |
Doc-type-aware IA evaluation heuristics | Always (Phase 2) |
Workflow Overview
Phase 0: Personas → Establish the doc set's primary 1-3 personas
Phase 1: Map → Build the current doc structure map (incl. link graph)
Phase 2: Evaluate → Score against IA heuristics, parameterized by personas + doc type
Phase 3: Model → Compare structure to user mental models per persona
Phase 4: Report → Produce the architecture review with per-persona findings
Phase 0: Establish Personas
A "good" architecture is good for someone specific. Without personas, the heuristics apply a default standard that systematically misjudges docs serving non-default audiences (a flat reference doc scored as "poorly hierarchical" because it doesn't follow Quick Start → advanced).
Step 0a — Identify the doc set's audiences
Read the doc set's entry pages (README, index.md, landing pages) and
the highest-traffic top-level docs. Identify which 1–3 personas from
references/personas.md are the primary readers. Common patterns:
What ships with it
3 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.
- 5d ago First seen · 599 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A cc5754230489
doc-architecture-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository NickCrew/Claude-Cortex (38 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 4,732 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.
init-workspace-documentation
Skill "init-workspace-documentation" from griddynamics/rosetta, covering agent memory.md, agent memory, preventive rules, what worked and what failed.
architecture-decision-record
ADR templates in the Nygard format with context, decision, consequences, and alternatives. Use when writing ADRs, recording an architectural decision, or evaluating options.
release
Guide through the Cortex TMS release process — version bump, changelog, sync, tag, publish. Every step requires user approval.
new-command
Scaffold a new CLI command for Cortex TMS following the existing codebase patterns.
plan
Research the codebase and create an implementation plan following Propose/Justify/Recommend. Use this before any feature, fix, or refactor.