docs-as-contract
Skill98 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Treat READMEs, docstrings, help text, comments, examples, and changelogs as promises that must match the code that ships — sweep them when behaviour changes, write comments for why not what, run every documented command once, never document intent as fact. Use when a change alters behaviour, an interface, a default, or a setup step; when asked to "add docs" or "document this"; when writing comments or docstrings; and when reviewing a diff that changes user-visible behaviour without touching docs.
- Reads credentials
In this repository38 other files it gives its agents.
- ambiguity-commitSkill
- api-surface-careSkill
- calibrated-recommendationSkill
- codebase-orientationSkill
- concurrency-reasoningSkill
- config-and-flagsSkill
- context-checkpointSkill
- cross-platform-careSkill
- data-loss-guardSkill
- data-migration-safetySkill
- dependency-changesSkill
- edge-case-sweepSkill
- environment-firstSkill
- error-message-qualitySkill
- escalate-vs-decideSkill
- estimation-and-scopingSkill
- explain-at-the-right-levelSkill
- generalize-the-correctionSkill
- git-hygieneSkill
- incident-diagnosisSkill
- leave-no-messSkill
- llm-app-codeSkill
- numerical-careSkill
- performance-investigationSkill
- perf-sanitySkill
- question-vs-taskSkill
- resource-lifecycleSkill
- reviewing-a-changeSkill
- root-cause-debuggingSkill
- security-reflexesSkill
- stop-thrashingSkill
- subagent-fanoutSkill
- surgical-refactoringSkill
- task-decompositionSkill
- test-designSkill
- untrusted-content-guardSkill
- verify-ui-visuallySkill
- workmanshipSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
Delete a comment that restates the code (// increment counter, # open the file).
- Very specific: line 17
Never narrate the change inside the code: // added null check, // changed from X to Y.
- Distinctive: line 18
No commented-out code. Git remembers.
- Distinctive: line 24
Every command in a README or runbook is copy-pasteable from a fresh clone: exact command, working directory, expected output or side …
- Distinctive: line 25
Run each documented command once from a fresh shell before shipping it.
≈ “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
docs-as-contract
Weak documentation is written from the plan, not the code: a README describing the feature you meant to build, a comment restating the line below it, a setup section nobody has run since it was typed. Strong documentation is a contract with the reader: every sentence describes what the code does today, every command was run, and a behaviour change updates the docs in the same diff.
1. Sweep the docs when behaviour changes
Before done on any change to behaviour, an interface, a default, or a setup step, grep the repo for the old behaviour — the old flag, default value, function name, error text, file path — across README*, docs/, CHANGELOG*, docstrings, --help strings, OpenAPI or JSON schema, .env.example, code comments, and example snippets. Record the command and the hit count (see surgical-refactoring). Every hit is updated in this diff or listed in the report as deliberately left. Docs that contradict the code are worse than none: the reader trusts them.
2. Comments say why, not what
- Delete a comment that restates the code (
// increment counter,# open the file). Write one for what the code cannot say: the constraint, the non-obvious reason, the bug being worked around (with the link), the invariant the next editor must keep. - Never narrate the change inside the code:
// added null check,// changed from X to Y. That is the commit message; in the file it is stale the moment anyone touches the line again. - No commented-out code. Git remembers.
- A
TODOcarries an owner or ticket and what would unblock it. A bareTODOis a comment nobody will act on. - Match the repo's docstring convention — grep three neighbouring functions for style, sections, and whether params are documented — instead of importing your own.
3. Document what runs, in the order it runs
- Every command in a README or runbook is copy-pasteable from a fresh clone: exact command, working directory, expected output or side effect, prerequisites stated before the first command that needs them.
- Run each documented command once from a fresh shell before shipping it. A setup section you have not executed is a guess. A step that cannot be run here (needs production credentials) is marked unverified in the doc and named in the report.
- Examples are code. A snippet that would not compile or a curl that would return 400 is a bug. Prefer examples the test suite executes (doctests, example tests) so they cannot rot silently.
4. Describe the current state, not the roadmap
Docs state what exists. Planned behaviour goes under a heading that says so ("Not yet supported", "Planned") or in the tracker, never in the same voice as shipped features. Version- or platform-specific behaviour names the version or platform.
5. Know when not to write
Do not add docs nobody asked for: a docstring on every private helper, a docs/ tree for a 200-line script, a changelog format the repo does not use. Follow the repo's existing density. "Stop adding docstrings" holds for the rest of the session (see generalize-the-correction).
6. Write the changelog for the upgrader
If the repo keeps one, add the entry under the unreleased section in its existing format, written for the consumer: what changed for them and what they must do. "Refactored config loading" tells an upgrader nothing; "TIMEOUT is now TIMEOUT_MS; the old name is still read with a warning until v3" does.
Reporting
List the docs updated (path, what changed), the grep for the old behaviour with its hit count, and which documented commands you ran. A doc left knowingly stale is a named item, not an omission.
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.

