docs
Skill19 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Update documentation to match implementation
165 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Adelie-Squad/solosquadtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- hhtower/price-comparisontheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- vladtrc/iw4Ltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- igorkasyanchuk/diffnotestheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- tiankonglan/TomeWikitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Canonry/aeo-audittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use import-memory, incident and 5 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
amirbironSkillimport-memory
Import a memory export from another AI assistant into Claude's memory — conversationally, additively, and with the content treated as data.
Also in 3 projects that use this
JkudjoSkillincident
Production incident response — structured triage, hypothesis tree, safe remediation, incident record
Also in 4 projects that use this
vbrevikSkillwork
Use when the user says 'plan', 'todo', 'copy plan', 'append plan', 'resume plan', 'priorities', or 'what's next'.
Also in 7 projects that use this
mbwsimsSkillimpact
This skill should be used when the user asks to "check the impact", "what will break if I change this", "blast radius", "impact analysis", "what depends on this", "who imports this", "is it safe to change this", mentions "/impact", or wants to understand the consequences of modifying a specific file or function before making changes.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Google CloudSkillfix
Plan a remediation strategy after a test failure.
Also in 7 projects that use this
synaptiaiSkillgate
Create a BDSK review_gate artifact. Defines a checkpoint that controls whether generated output may proceed toward acceptance. Use when defining quality, security, or scope gates for execution plans.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions165 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 165
- remotion-dev/remotion★ 72ksame name
- PrefectHQ/fastmcp★ 28ksame name
- jlowin/fastmcp★ 28ksame name
- ccusage/ccusage★ 19ksame name
- ryoppippi/ccusage★ 19ksame name
- micronaut-projects/micronaut-core★ 6.4ksame name
- latitude-dev/latitude-llm★ 4.7ksame name
- samuelgursky/davinci-resolve-mcp★ 4ksame name
- TanStack/ai★ 3.3ksame name
- patrykandpatrick/vico★ 3.2ksame name
155 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 repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- assess-findingsSkill
- autopilotSkill
- build-fixSkill
- code-searchSkill
- context-usageSkill
- debugSkill
- decideSkill
- designSkill
- forgetSkill
- gitSkill
- implementSkill
- memoriseSkill
- patternsSkill
- perfSkill
- plan-swarmSkill
- recallSkill
- reflectSkill
- reviewSkill
- semgrepSkill
- surveySkill
- swarmSkill
- swarm-statusSkill
- testSkill
- verifySkill
- worktree-resolveSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
21 rules. 0 are common, 19 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 129 edited versions we read keep these.
19
Distinctive
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
- Distinctive: line 16
Update documentation to accurately reflect the implemented code.
- Distinctive: line 26
If the feature affects how users interact with the project:
- Distinctive: line 34
If public APIs were added or changed:
- Distinctive: line 42
If code needs explanation:
- Distinctive: line 70
Read current docs that might be affected:
- Distinctive: line 82
Read the new code files
- Very specific: line 83
Use mcp__plugin_aide_aide__decision_get with the feature topic to check design decisions
- Very specific: line 84
Use mcp__plugin_aide_aide__decision_list to see all decisions
- Distinctive: line 90
Add/update sections as needed:
- Distinctive: line 136
Add comments for non-obvious code:
- Distinctive: line 169
If code changes, docs must change
- Distinctive: line 170
Never document aspirational features
- Distinctive: line 174
Use examples over explanations
- Distinctive: line 184
Add to table of contents
- Distinctive: line 219
If this is a new project without docs structure:
- Distinctive: line 221
Document the feature inline
- Distinctive: line 226
If docs build fails:
- Distinctive: line 228
Document what was attempted
- Distinctive: line 234
Document what a new user would need
- Distinctive: line 236
When in doubt, add an example
- Distinctive: line 249
When documentation is complete:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 129 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
Documentation Mode
Recommended model tier: balanced (sonnet) - this skill performs straightforward operations
Update documentation to accurately reflect the implemented code.
Purpose
This is the DOCS stage of the SDLC pipeline. Implementation is complete and verified. Your job is to ensure documentation matches reality.
What to Document
1. README Updates
If the feature affects how users interact with the project:
- Installation steps changed?
- New commands or options?
- New configuration?
- New dependencies?
2. API Documentation
If public APIs were added or changed:
- Function/method signatures
- Parameters and return types
- Usage examples
- Error conditions
3. Inline Documentation
If code needs explanation:
- Complex algorithms
- Non-obvious design decisions
- Integration points
- Edge cases
4. Architecture Docs
If structure changed:
- New components
- Changed data flow
- New dependencies between modules
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Changed Files
# See what was changed
git diff --name-only HEAD~5 # or appropriate range
# Find related docs
Glob for **/*.md
Glob for **/docs/**/*Step 2: Check Existing Documentation
Read current docs that might be affected:
Read README.md
Read docs/api.md # if exists
Read CHANGELOG.md # if existsStep 3: Read the Implementation
Understand what was built:
- Read the new code files
- Use
mcp__plugin_aide_aide__decision_getwith the feature topic to check design decisions - Use
mcp__plugin_aide_aide__decision_listto see all decisions
Step 4: Update Documentation
README.md Updates
Add/update sections as needed:
## New Feature
Description of what it does.
### Usage
\`\`\`bash
command --new-flag
\`\`\`
### Configuration
| Option | Type | Default | Description |
|--------|------|---------|-------------|
| newOption | string | "default" | What it does |API Documentation
Document public interfaces:
### functionName(param1, param2)
Brief description.
**Parameters:**
- `param1` (string): What it is
- `param2` (number, optional): What it does. Default: 10
**Returns:** `Promise<Result>`
**Example:**
\`\`\`typescript
const result = await functionName("input", 20);
\`\`\`
**Throws:**
- `ValidationError`: When param1 is emptyInline Comments
Add comments for non-obvious code:
// Use exponential backoff to handle rate limiting
// Starts at 100ms, doubles each retry, max 5 retries
async function fetchWithRetry(url: string): Promise<Response> {
// ...
}Step 5: Verify Documentation
# If docs have a build step
npm run docs:build
# Check for broken links (if tool available)
npm run docs:check
# Manual review - read what you wroteStep 6: Commit Documentation
git add -A
git commit -m "docs: document <feature>"Documentation Standards
Be Accurate
- Documentation must match code exactly
- If code changes, docs must change
- Never document aspirational features
Be Concise
- One sentence per concept
- Use examples over explanations
- Bullet points over paragraphs
Be Complete
- Cover happy path AND error cases
- Include all public API
- Document breaking changes
Be Findable
- Use clear headings
- Add to table of contents
- Cross-reference related sections
What NOT to Document
- Internal implementation details (unless complex)
- Obvious code (self-documenting)
- Temporary workarounds (use TODO instead)
- Aspirational features (only document what exists)
Output Format
## Documentation Updates
### Files Modified
- `README.md` - Added new feature section
- `docs/api.md` - Documented new endpoints
- `src/service.ts` - Added inline comments for complex logic
### Summary of Changes
1. Added usage instructions for `--new-flag`
2. Documented `createUser` API with examples
3. Updated configuration table with new options
### Verification
- [ ] Docs build successfully
- [ ] Examples are copy-pasteable and work
- [ ] No broken internal linksFailure Handling
No Documentation Exists
If this is a new project without docs structure:
- Create minimal README.md
- Document the feature inline
- Note: "Recommend creating docs/ structure in future"
Documentation Tool Broken
If docs build fails:
- Fix the build issue if simple
- Document what was attempted
- Note: "Docs build issue - needs separate fix"
Unclear What to Document
- Focus on public API only
- Document what a new user would need
- Skip internal details
- When in doubt, add an example
Verification Checklist
Before completing:
- All new public APIs are documented
- README is updated if user-facing changes
- Examples are tested and work
- Docs build (if applicable)
- Changes are committed
Completion
When documentation is complete:
Documentation complete.
- Updated: [list of files]
- Added: [new sections/files]
SDLC pipeline complete for this story.Integration with SDLC Pipeline
[DESIGN] → [TEST] → [DEV] → [VERIFY] → [DOCS]
↑
YOU ARE HERE- Input: Verified, working implementation
- Output: Updated documentation
- Next: Story complete, ready for merge
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.

