Name: docs
Rating: 68.8 (1 reviews)
Author: TanStack

docs

Use when writing, editing, or organizing documentation, when planning what docs a feature needs, and whenever planning or implementing a new feature or change in a repo (docs ship with the code). Also use when tempted to write docs without showing the discovered readers to the user, without asking for tone, or without loading simple-english and i-have-adhd. Triggers on "write docs for X", "document this feature", "add a guide", "update the docs", "reorganize the docs", "plan feature X", "implement X", or /docs.

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

The canonical home for this skill is docs in TanStack/ai

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

An exceptionally actionable, well-sequenced instruction skill with concrete gates, validation checkpoints, and feedback loops. Its weaknesses are length/repetition (the same rules restated in prose, examples, and a Red flags table) and a monolithic single-file structure with no progressive disclosure for a skill this long.

Suggestions

Consolidate the repeated history-leak guidance into one section and let the Red flags table reference it, cutting roughly 60-100 lines of restatement.

Move the package-manager tabs syntax detail and/or the Forbidden glyph checklist into a reference file under references/ and link to it from the body, giving a 400+ line skill proper progressive disclosure.

Trim the multi-part Bad/Good example pairs where a single example already makes the rule clear, to reduce token cost without losing the instruction.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body assumes Claude's intelligence (no basic-concept padding) but runs ~420 lines with notable repetition: the history-leak idea is restated across 'Write for the reader, not the history', 'Don't leak the build process', the Forbidden list, and a Red flags table that rehashes most prior rules, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'.	3 / 5
Actionability	Highly actionable: exact gate message formats, concrete numbered find-docs steps, a copy-paste package-manager tabs block with real package names, a concrete banned-glyph list, and specific doc-folder paths to check, covering the common cases fully.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear two-phase sequence with explicit HARD-GATE validation checkpoints ('stop', 'end the turn') and feedback loops (search added text for forbidden glyphs, re-fix, then run the simple-english self-check), so the destructive/batch cap does not apply.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and the skill is a single ~420-line file; well-organized into sections, but content like the detailed package-manager tabs syntax and the large Red flags table is inlined rather than split into one-level-deep reference files, fitting 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline'.	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

87%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, explicit description with excellent trigger coverage and a clear what/when structure written in appropriate imperative third-person voice. Its main weakness is the broad 'implement X' / 'plan feature X' triggers, which create overlap risk with general coding skills.

Suggestions

Tighten the 'plan feature X' / 'implement X' triggers to scope them to the doc-impact moment (e.g. 'plan feature X' only when listing docs the feature needs) to reduce overlap with general coding skills.

Consider trimming the secondary 'Also use when tempted to...' clause, which describes internal failure modes rather than user-facing triggers and dilutes the trigger signal.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions ('writing, editing, or organizing documentation', 'planning what docs a feature needs', 'planning or implementing a new feature or change'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the fully comprehensive 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what (write/edit/organize docs, plan doc needs, plan/implement features) and when ('Use when...', 'Triggers on...') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive natural trigger phrases including synonyms and the slash command: 'write docs for X', 'document this feature', 'add a guide', 'update the docs', 'reorganize the docs', 'plan feature X', 'implement X', and /docs.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The docs niche is clear, but 'plan feature X' and 'implement X' triggers are broad and overlap with general feature-implementation/coding skills, landing at 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills' rather than the mostly-distinct 4.	3 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: TanStack/ai
Path: .claude/skills/docs/SKILL.md
Commit: 7fb4a5f

Reviewed: 9 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

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.