docs-review
Skill4 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Enforce documentation quality, completeness, and mutual consistency across architecture files, ADRs, runbooks, READMEs, and code-level documentation. You MUST load this skill when asked to review or check consistency of documentation (such as *.md/*.mmd files).
25 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- mintlify/docstheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- langchain-ai/docstheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- mindroom-ai/mindroomtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- NathanForster/claude-commandstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- T0mSIlver/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- microsoft/nacelletheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions25 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 25
- storybookjs/storybook★ 91ksame name
- metabase/metabase★ 50ksame name
- grafana/tempo★ 5.6ksame name
- graphistry/pygraphistry★ 2.6ksame name
- perber/leafwiki★ 1.2ksame name
- jtenniswood/espcontrol★ 1.2ksame name
- Harry-kp/vortix★ 757same name
- getsentry/sentry-rust★ 754same name
- mintlify/docs★ 465same name
- getsentry/sentry-docs★ 449same name
15 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository124 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/workflows/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .vscode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- agent-log-analysisSkill
- agent-mdSkill
- agent-md-writerSkill
- agent-skill-md-writerSkill
- agentskillsSkill
- agents-md-writerSkill
- ai-prompt-writerSkill
- ansibleSkill
- apache-airflow-apiSkill
- apache-airflow-dagsSkill
- astro-cliSkill
- astronomer-docsSkill
- awesome-copilotSkill
- brainstorm-agent-runsSkill
- brainstorm-github-prSkill
- brainstormSkill
- catSkill
- chrome-devtoolsSkill
- claude-docsSkill
- codeqlSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- code-tourSkill
- coding-standard-writerSkill
- context-aware-opsSkill
- copilot-cliSkill
- copilot-docsSkill
- critical-thinkingSkill
- datadog-agentSkill
- datadog-apiSkill
- datadog-mcpSkill
- datadog-monitorsSkill
- datadog-pulumiSkill
- devcontainerSkill
- dictationSkill
- direnvSkill
- dockerfileSkill
- dockerSkill
- docs-writerSkill
- dot-claudeSkill
- dotfilesSkill
- dot-githubSkill
- editorconfigSkill
- fact-writerSkill
- gdpr-compliantSkill
- gh-agent-taskSkill
- gh-apiSkill
- gh-aw-compileSkill
- gh-aw-firewall-debugSkill
- gh-aw-firewallSkill
- gh-aw-newSkill
- gh-awSkill
- gh-aw-troubleshootingSkill
- gh-codespaceSkill
- gh-issueSkill
- gh-modelsSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 24 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
After any significant architectural decision to verify documentation exists and is accurate.
- Distinctive: line 21
When encountering complex code to ensure it's properly documented.
- Distinctive: line 22
When verifying an operational procedure or tradeoff.
- Very specific: line 27
When the user explicitly requests purely formatting/linting fixes (use markdown or yaml skills).
- Distinctive: line 41
Look for contradictions, outdated references, missing updates, or structural mismatches between files.
- Distinctive: line 43
Check if any of the documentation lags behind the current state of the repository.
- Distinctive: line 45
CRITICAL INSTRUCTION: ONLY apply changes to these files if actual inconsistencies, contradictions, or outdated information are found.
- Very specific: line 51
Verify: Every significant decision has an ADR (typically stored in docs/decisions/).
- Distinctive: line 55
Verify: Every non-obvious code block has a "why" comment.
- Very specific: line 60
Verify: Every on-call alert has a linked runbook (typically stored in docs/runbooks/).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 24 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
<!-- markdownlint-disable MD013 MD023 MD031 MD032 -->Docs Review
Guidance for reviewing core architecture, documentation, and constraint files for mutual consistency and accuracy. Use this skill when checking repository documentation.
When to Use
- Checking core architecture files (
*.mmd,*.mzn) for consistency. - Reviewing documentation (
**/AGENTS.md,**/README.md) for outdated references. - After any significant architectural decision to verify documentation exists and is accurate.
- When encountering complex code to ensure it's properly documented.
- When verifying an operational procedure or tradeoff.
When Not to Use
- For performing deep code execution or logic validation (use
testerorcode-reviewinstead). - When the user explicitly requests purely formatting/linting fixes (use
markdownoryamlskills). - For writing completely new features from scratch without reviewing existing architecture.
Common Pitfalls
- Overzealous Editing: Modifying architectural constraint files (
CONSTRAINTS.mzn) arbitrarily without understanding the global impact, leading to runtime failures. - Surface-Level Checks: Verifying that a markdown file exists without actually reading its content to ensure it accurately reflects the current codebase.
- Ignoring Dependency Context: Updating a README file while neglecting the corresponding
AGENTS.mdor ADR, creating localized inconsistency.
Core Process
- Analyze Relationships: Cross-reference the relationships, definitions, rules, and configurations defined across these files.
- Identify Inconsistencies: Look for contradictions, outdated references, missing updates, or structural mismatches between files.
- Verify Up-to-Date Status: Check if any of the documentation lags behind the current state of the repository.
- Conditional Edits: CRITICAL INSTRUCTION: ONLY apply changes to these files if actual inconsistencies, contradictions, or outdated information are found. If all files are mutually consistent and up-to-date, do not make any edits—simply report back that the files are in order.
Architectural Decision Records (ADRs) Verification
Verify: Every significant decision has an ADR (typically stored in docs/decisions/).
Code-Level Documentation Verification
Verify: Every non-obvious code block has a "why" comment. Verify: Code-level comments don't state the obvious.
Runbooks Verification
Verify: Every on-call alert has a linked runbook (typically stored in docs/runbooks/).
README Currency Verification
Verify: README reflects current state (not v1 state). Verify: Setup instructions work on a fresh machine. Verify: Architecture diagrams are up to date.
Subdirectory Agents (AGENTS.md) Verification
Verify: Subdirectories with specific functionality have local AGENTS.md context files.
Verify: Local AGENTS.md aligns with the global repository invariants.
Verification Checklist
- ADRs written for significant architectural decisions
- Non-obvious code blocks have "why" comments
- Every production alert has a linked runbook
- README is current and setup instructions work
- Subdirectories with specific functionality have local
AGENTS.mdcontext files
Related Skills
- critical-thinking: You MUST load this skill when deconstructing complex documentation and identifying structural contradictions.
- docs-writer: Guidance for writing and maintaining documentation. You MUST load this skill when asked to write, document, or generate new documentation.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

