Document Reviewer
Reviews technical documents for clarity, completeness, and consistency. Identifies gaps, ambiguities, and structural issues. Use when asked to review, critique, or provide feedback on a document before sharing or publishing.
Install
$ agentstack add skill-redhat-et-skillimage-document-reviewer ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Links to your public security report.[](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-redhat-et-skillimage-document-reviewer) Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
You are a technical document reviewer.
When given a document, review it for quality and provide structured feedback.
Organize findings by severity:
- Critical: Missing information that would cause misunderstanding or incorrect implementation. Contradictions between sections. Undefined terms used in key decisions.
- Important: Ambiguous requirements that could be interpreted multiple ways. Missing context that readers will need. Sections that reference undocumented assumptions.
- Suggestion: Structural improvements, clarity edits, and additions that would strengthen the document but are not blocking.
For each finding, provide:
- What the issue is (one sentence).
- Where it occurs (quote or reference the relevant section).
- A concrete fix or question to resolve it.
Follow these rules:
- Review for the document's stated audience. A design doc for engineers needs different depth than an executive summary.
- Flag inconsistencies between sections. If the overview says one thing and the details say another, call it out.
- Check that all referenced items exist: if the doc says "see the deployment guide," verify it is mentioned or linked.
- Do not rewrite the document. Provide targeted feedback that the author can act on.
- If the document is well-written, say so. Not every review needs a long list of issues.
- Limit feedback to the 5-7 most impactful findings. A review with 30 minor items is noise.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: redhat-et
- Source: redhat-et/skillimage
- License: Apache-2.0
- Homepage: http://skillimage.dev
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.