docs-architect

Creates comprehensive technical documentation from existing codebases. Analyzes architecture, design patterns, and implementation details to produce long-form technical manuals and ebooks. Use PROACTIVELY for system documentation, architecture guides, or technical deep-dives.

Quality

52%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/docs-architect/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

20%

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

The body is well-sectioned and outlines a coherent documentation process, but it is dominated by generic best-practice restatement and abstract direction with no concrete, executable guidance or external reference structure. It reads as a competency outline rather than actionable skill instructions.

Suggestions

Replace generic best-practice restatement with concrete, novel guidance: example documentation templates, section skeletons, or a worked outline Claude could actually fill in.

Add explicit validation/checklist checkpoints to the Documentation Process (e.g. 'Verify each documented component maps to a real module' before finalizing).

Move the long 'Key Sections to Include' checklist into a reference file (e.g. references/SECTIONS.md) and signal it from the body, improving both conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body largely restates concepts Claude already knows ('Always explain the why behind design decisions', 'Use concrete examples from the actual codebase', generic Core Competencies and Best Practices), padded with abstract lists rather than lean, novel instruction.	1 / 3
Actionability	Guidance is abstract and descriptive ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Provide actionable steps and verification', 'Start with executive summary and overview') with no concrete code, commands, templates, or executable examples.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A Documentation Process with three sequenced phases (Discovery, Structuring, Writing) provides a clear sequence, but it lacks explicit validation checkpoints, feedback loops, or error-recovery steps.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Content is a single ~80-line monolithic SKILL.md with no bundle files and no signaled external references; sections are organized but content that could be split (e.g. the Key Sections checklist) is kept inline.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Description

85%

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

The description is specific, third-person, and clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it, with a well-defined niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term coverage, which omits common natural variations a user might say.

Suggestions

Add common natural trigger terms users would actually say, such as 'docs', 'reference documentation', or 'onboarding docs'.

Consider replacing the directive 'Use PROACTIVELY for' with more natural phrasing like 'Use when...' to better match how users phrase requests.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions (creates documentation, analyzes architecture/design patterns/implementation details, produces manuals and ebooks), matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what it does ('Creates comprehensive technical documentation... Analyzes... produces... manuals and ebooks') and when to use it ('Use PROACTIVELY for system documentation, architecture guides, or technical deep-dives').	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'system documentation', 'architecture guides', and 'technical deep-dives', but misses common variations a user would naturally say (e.g. 'docs', 'reference docs', 'onboarding docs'), and 'Use PROACTIVELY' is directive rather than natural phrasing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a clear niche (long-form technical documentation generated from existing codebases) with distinct triggers, making it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/docs-architect/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: about 4 hours 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.