Use when formatting a full engineering spike, PRD, or design-of-record doc for review, when the reader wants the complete team-standard shape (metadata header, TLDR, background, spike goals, architecture diagrams, per-goal investigation, options with a recommendation, considered-but-rejected, database and GraphQL and query changes, migration, cross-project dependencies, testing, effort, phasing, feature-flag strategy, risks, open questions, and a verification appendix). Clean team style, no emoji or tag overload. For a short summary of a spike use readable-doc; for the content use write-spike.
68
83%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Passed
No findings from the security scan
You are a staff engineer laying out a full spike the way this team expects to read it. The reader wants the complete decision-of-record: the recommendation up front, the investigation that backs it, the technical deltas, and every open item and dependency. You make it scannable without dropping rigour.
Core principle: completeness with a readable spine. Decision first, evidence reachable but collapsed, every claim grounded.
[!IMPORTANT] This is the formatting layer for a FULL spike.
write-spikeproduces the content; this skill shapes it into the team-standard structure. For a short reviewer digest, usereadable-doc.
/devflow:readable-doc-spike <path> on a full spike doc.readable-doc) or a short plan./devflow:readable-doc-spike [path]$ARGUMENTS is the target path.
render-diagram (base how-it-works + colour-coded current-vs-options), grouped in Architecture Overview. Reuse current PNGs if present.<u> / no em-dashes / no image "title" attr / no GFM alert inside <details>; frontmatter (if any) still parses; ticket numbers are not scattered through the prose (they live in the metadata header + References).PLANNOTATOR_REMOTE=1 PLANNOTATOR_PORT=<port> plannotator annotate <path> in the background, print the http://localhost:<port> URL. Apply annotations and repeat.<details> so mid-document does not become a wall.Drop a section only if the spike genuinely has nothing for it.
code for identifiers/paths; status circles 🟢🟠🔴❓ as light scan aids in bullets and table cells. Small-caps (textstyle.py --smallcaps) sparingly for a verdict word (ʀᴇᴄᴏᴍᴍᴇɴᴅᴇᴅ / ʀᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛᴇᴅ); underline for at most one key phrase.<details> so the default read is decision → diagrams → recommendation.Same matrix as readable-doc. Key gotchas: images are plain  with no title attribute (a title breaks them; <img>/self-link/in-<details> lose zoom or break); GFM alerts render top-level only (break inside <details> → use > 🔴 risk: ... there); tables render fine anywhere; <u>/<span style>/text-colour are stripped, so underline/small-caps only via textstyle.py. Treat any new trick as a claim to probe first (verify-first).
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| No recommendation up front | Decision-of-record in the TLDR + a Recommendation on the options. |
| Investigation Results as one long wall | Per-goal subsections, each ending in a Verdict; collapse deep evidence. |
Diagrams scattered or in <details> | Group both in Architecture Overview, top-level (they lose zoom in <details>). |
| Claims not grounded | Investigation Log appendix: verified against code/prod, with sample sizes + caveats. |
| Phasing added by default | Only when genuinely multi-phase. |
| Ticket numbers through the prose | Metadata header + References only. |
| Emoji / tag / table overload | Clean team style; bold + light status circles. |
| Confusing this with the summary | This is the FULL doc; readable-doc is the short digest. |
bd4b70c
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.