agentleFS
Sign inStart free
IvanLi-CNIvanLi-CN/agent-toolkit/skills/docs-no-revision-markers/SKILL.md

docs-no-revision-markers

Skill0 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub

Write timeless docs without revision markers.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Write documentation that stays stable and timeless.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not add doc-level revision markers in file names, titles, headings, or metadata blocks (e.g., Draft, WIP, v1/v2, 初稿/终稿, Rev, 版本, 修订, …

    line 14
  3. Distinctive:

    When editing an existing doc, remove doc-level revision markers if present (unless the user explicitly asks to keep them, or they are part …

    line 15
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not add a "Revision history"/"版本记录" section.

    line 16
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not add timestamps like "Last updated" unless the user asks for them or the repo already uses them consistently.

    line 17
  6. Very specific:

    Prefer stable, semantic paths like docs/feature-x.md over suffixes like -v1, -draft, _final.

    line 18
  7. Distinctive:

    If the user explicitly requests a visible doc version/draft label, confirm intent and suggest Git alternatives (tags, PR numbers, commit …

    line 27

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Docs without revision markers

Overview

Write documentation that stays stable and timeless. Use Git/PR history for revisions instead of embedding document versions (e.g., "Draft", "v1") in the file name or content.

Rules (default)

  • Do not add doc-level revision markers in file names, titles, headings, or metadata blocks (e.g., Draft, WIP, v1/v2, 初稿/终稿, Rev, 版本, 修订, revision history, document version).
  • When editing an existing doc, remove doc-level revision markers if present (unless the user explicitly asks to keep them, or they are part of subject matter / repo convention).
  • Do not add a "Revision history"/"版本记录" section.
  • Do not add timestamps like "Last updated" unless the user asks for them or the repo already uses them consistently.
  • Prefer stable, semantic paths like docs/feature-x.md over suffixes like -v1, -draft, _final.

Allowed content

  • Subject-matter versions are OK when they are part of what is being documented (e.g., API routes like /v1/*, product versions like "Kubernetes v1.29", or dependency versions).
  • Stable IDs are OK if they are a repo convention (e.g., RFC/ADR numbers), as long as they are not used as document revisions.

Edge cases

  • If the user explicitly requests a visible doc version/draft label, confirm intent and suggest Git alternatives (tags, PR numbers, commit hashes). If they insist, comply but keep it minimal and localized (avoid filename changes unless requested).
  • For release notes/CHANGELOG, include versions if the doc is intentionally tracking releases.

Final sanity checklist

  • File name: no draft/revision suffix.
  • Title/headings: no draft/revision label.
  • No revision-history block.
  • Any "v1"/"v2" in text is clearly part of the subject matter, not the document's revision.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free