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 openshift-eng/ai-helpers --skill review-docsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/openshift-eng/ai-helpersWrote 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/openshift-eng/ai-helpers/review-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/openshift-eng/ai-helpers/review-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openshift-eng/ai-helpers/review-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/openshift-eng/ai-helpers/review-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openshift-eng/ai-helpers/review-docs.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.05786 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.02314 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.01157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00579 |
Grade A, and why
review-docs scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 15d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- [ ] Verify external HTTPS links with curl (timeout 10s). Some sites return non-200 for automated requests — GitHub rate-limits, `docs.openshift.com` blocks curl. Treat 403/429 as "needs manual check" not automatic fail How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 471 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Documentation Review & Verification
Reviews agentic documentation using two-tier verification: local codebase checks first, then authoritative cross-repository sources for claims that cannot be resolved locally.
Prerequisites
Verify cross-repository facts against authoritative sources, such as upstream
GitHub sources or Chai Bot's configured CodeRAG. Claims that cannot be
checked remain unverified; local verification still runs fully.
Tribal knowledge: When running inside an environment with access to researcher and knowledge-source callbacks (e.g. Chai Bot), query the researcher and configured knowledge sources (Slack, Jira) directly for tribal knowledge about this repository. Cross-reference generated documentation against discovered tribal knowledge during verification — particularly for undocumented conventions, common pitfalls, and historical context that may not appear in source code.
When to Use
- After
/component-docsor/update-platform-docs - Before documentation PRs
- When docs may contain outdated/incorrect information
Limitations
This skill verifies factual accuracy of what's documented. It does NOT detect:
- Missing documentation — incomplete coverage, absent sections
- Low information density — generic placeholders instead of repo-specific details
- Misleading by omission — technically correct but useless (e.g., "uses controllers" without specifying which framework)
For completeness and specificity, rely on the Implementation Pattern Discovery checklist in /component-docs and SME review.
Review mode and immutable evidence
Follow Claim cache below for snapshots, evidence,
review planning, and cleanup. Resolve scripts/claim_cache.py from this skill.
Keep the cache outside the doc scope; delegated reviewers never delete it.
After each report, compact verified observations into aggregate receipts while
retaining failed and unresolved evidence.
Without a valid independent baseline, review the full scope. Otherwise, check affected claims and their dependencies, reusing valid independent evidence. Use a fresh context with immutable evidence and the diff, not the fixer's chat. Check reviewer independence and inventory coverage; cache entries prove neither.
What ships with it
2 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.
- 15d ago Changed · +6 lines 1e8b1902b19a
- 1mo ago Changed · +228 lines · +19 tokens per session 62467d9eb6cc
- 1mo ago Changed · -28 lines 386391379a3b
- 1mo ago First seen · 265 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A f44d0716cf90
review-docs is a skill published in the GitHub repository openshift-eng/ai-helpers (121 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 5,786 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…