architecture-docs
Skill3 starsChanged 4 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write and update project guidance using verified code and accepted decisions. Use when the user asks to write, audit, or simplify architecture docs, README.md, AGENTS.md, SKILL.md, or .agents guidance, or when an approved change needs related docs. Documentation only; do not edit runtime code.
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- stempeck/agentfactorytheir own version, first seen Oct 30, 2026
- Seekers2001/docs-governancetheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- qshanx/docs-governancetheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- yiweiwan/skillstheir own version, first seen May 12, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 4
- Seekers2001/docs-governance★ 320same name
- qshanx/docs-governance★ 253same name
- stempeck/agentfactory★ 3same name
- yiweiwan/skills★ 1same name
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 repository5 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- code-reviewerSkill
- debug-investigatorSkill
- implementation-plannerSkill
- thoughtful-coderSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈14
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 9
Write guidance that is easy to follow and matches accepted decisions and verified facts.
- Distinctive: line 15
Read the request, accepted decisions, and documents in scope.
- Distinctive: line 16
Verify file paths, symbols, commands, and behavior against current source.
- Distinctive: line 21
Update the existing document that owns the guidance.
- Distinctive: line 25
Keep a root README focused on purpose, requirements, usage, checks, and important limits.
- Distinctive: line 29
Follow the "Plain writing" section in AGENTS.md.
- Distinctive: line 31
Use the requested language for project documents.
- Distinctive: line 33
Use headings and numbered steps when order matters.
- Distinctive: line 34
Keep project rules the agent cannot infer from the code.
- Distinctive: line 39
When learning from other projects, use working code and tests as evidence.
- Distinctive: line 43
Read the final text once as the reader.
- Distinctive: line 44
Check links, paths, commands, names, versions, and contradictions across the changed documents.
- Distinctive: line 46
Run safe checks needed to support factual claims.
- Distinctive: line 47
Update affected existing project guides or module READMEs when the approved work changes their instructions.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Architecture docs
Write guidance that is easy to follow and matches accepted decisions and verified facts.
Edit only requested documents or docs directly affected by an approved implementation. Do not edit code, tests, configuration, or dependencies to make a document true. Do not change plan approvals or task status unless the request includes them or an approved implementation has verified progress to record.
Step 1: Verify the facts
- Read the request, accepted decisions, and documents in scope. Follow relevant links in the existing project guides. Do not assume every project has the same documentation folders.
- Verify file paths, symbols, commands, and behavior against current source. Record the branch or commit when comparing projects.
- Separate current behavior, accepted work that is not implemented, and proposals. Report disagreements that affect the document.
Step 2: Choose where to write
- Update the existing document that owns the guidance.
- Change only the files needed for consistency. Link to shared rules instead of repeating them.
- For a new requested document, use the project's layout or a simple path for its purpose. Do not create a whole documentation tree.
Keep a root README focused on purpose, requirements, usage, checks, and important limits. Add a diagram only when it explains a verified design.
Step 3: Write clear instructions
Follow the "Plain writing" section in AGENTS.md. It applies ISO 24495-1: the reader must find, understand, and use the text on the first read.
- Use the requested language for project documents. Keep identifiers and commands exact.
- State the goal and scope first. Use short sentences, one idea per sentence, and a clear action.
- Use headings and numbered steps when order matters. Put optional or task-specific details under a clear condition.
- Keep project rules the agent cannot infer from the code. Remove repeated advice, stale paths, unsupported claims, and size limits with no stated purpose.
- Preserve security and data-loss warnings in full.
For skills, check when each skill is selected, what it may change, what it returns, and where it stops.
When learning from other projects, use working code and tests as evidence. Reuse useful design principles; keep project-specific databases, agent stages, business rules, and themes out of shared requirements.
Step 4: Review and report
- Read the final text once as the reader. Check that the goal comes first, each term is explained, and every step sits in the right order.
- Check links, paths, commands, names, versions, and contradictions across the changed documents.
- For a prompt rewrite, walk through representative requests and check permissions, steps, outputs, and handoffs. Use independent review when required and available.
- Run safe checks needed to support factual claims. Do not describe a proposed flow as tested.
- Update affected existing project guides or module READMEs when the approved work changes their instructions.
Report changed documents, check results, and unresolved questions. Keep document errors separate from confirmed runtime bugs.
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.

