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-health-auditgit 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-health-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-health-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-health-audit/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/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-health-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nickcrew/claude-cortex/doc-health-audit.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 | $0.00062 | $0.01771 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00886 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00354 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00177 |
Grade A, and why
doc-health-audit 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 6d 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 — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documentation Health Audit
Orchestrate a comprehensive documentation assessment across five dimensions. Each phase builds on the previous — structural issues are found before accuracy is checked, accuracy before completeness, and so on.
This skill does not duplicate any phase logic. It defines the run order, phase gating, and combined summary. Each phase delegates to its dedicated skill.
When to Use
- Pre-release audit — full pass before shipping
- Periodic health check — monthly or quarterly
- After a major refactor that touched many docs
- When documentation quality is unknown or untrusted
- First-time assessment of a doc set
For single-dimension checks, use the individual skills directly.
Pipeline
Phase 1: Structure → doc-maintenance
Phase 2: Accuracy → doc-claim-validator
Phase 3: Completeness → doc-completeness-audit
Phase 4: Quality → doc-quality-review
Phase 5: Architecture → doc-architecture-review
Why This Order
Each phase depends on the prior phase being reasonably healthy:
| Phase | Depends on | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | — | Foundation. Broken links and orphans must be visible before anything else |
| Accuracy | Structure | Can't verify claims in docs you can't find or that have broken references |
| Completeness | Accuracy | No point inventorying gaps if existing docs contain false claims |
| Quality | Completeness | Review prose quality only on docs you intend to keep |
| Architecture | Completeness | Need to know what's missing before evaluating whether the structure can hold it |
Execution
Step 1: Determine Scope
Before running phases, establish what to audit:
- Full audit — all documentation (
docs/,site/,README.md) - Scoped audit — specific directory or doc set (e.g., "just the reference section")
- Changed-only audit — docs modified since a git ref (
git diff --name-only main...HEAD -- '*.md')
Pass the scope to each phase so they operate on the same set.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 232 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 60a7db2f95a7
doc-health-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository NickCrew/Claude-Cortex (39 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 1,771 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
dispatch
Use when a task file exists in .hyperflow/tasks/ and workers need dispatching. Fans out parallel workers under per-batch Reviewers, runs a final integration review, and commits per sub-task. Endpoint of the auto-chain — no auto-deploy. Trigger with /hyperflow:dispatch, "run the plan", "execute the task", "build it"…
workflow-review
Critically review a Stencila workflow and suggest improvements. Use when asked to review, audit, critique, evaluate, or improve a workflow directory or WORKFLOW.md file. Covers frontmatter validation, DOT pipeline quality, workflow structure, agent selection quality, discovery metadata, ephemeral workflow conventions…
agent-review
Critically review a Stencila agent and suggest improvements. Use when asked to review, audit, critique, evaluate, or improve an agent directory or AGENT.md file. Covers frontmatter validation, system instruction quality, configuration correctness, and adherence to the Agent schema.
skill-review
Critically review a workspace skill and suggest improvements. Use when asked to review, audit, critique, evaluate, or improve a SKILL.md file or skill directory. Covers frontmatter validation, instruction clarity, completeness, and adherence to the Agent Skills Specification.
quality-gate
Orchestrates the QUALITY pipeline stage for egregore work items, running code review, unbloat, and test updates. Use when running quality checks before a PR.
silicon-auditor
A review skill that checks writing, plans, or processes against a fictional set of “silicon civilization” rules and agent-first principles. It identifies deviations and proposes wording or process changes.