documentation-generation-doc-generate

You are a documentation expert specializing in creating comprehensive, maintainable documentation from code. Generate API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references using AI-powered analysis and industry best practices.

Quality

50%

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/documentation-generation-doc-generate/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

The skill body is well-organized into clear sections but the guidance stays largely abstract, with no concrete tooling or executable examples and a broken resource reference. Workflow sequencing exists but lacks the validation checkpoints that would make it robust.

Suggestions

Provide concrete, executable guidance for the abstract steps, e.g. specific linters (e.g. `markdownlint`, `vale`) or CI snippets and example commands instead of "Add automation (linting, CI)".

Create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` or remove both references to it so progressive-disclosure pointers resolve to real files.

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints to the workflow, such as "verify generated docs reference symbols that still exist in the source" with a fix-and-retry loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is reasonably lean and well-sectioned, but it duplicates the description's opening line ("You are a documentation expert...") and retains buzzwords ("AI-powered analysis and industry best practices"), and the Context section restates the skill's purpose, so it could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	The instruction list ("Extract information from code, configs, and comments", "Add automation (linting, CI) and validate accuracy") is concrete enough to direct a process, but offers no specific tools, commands, or executable examples, leaving it incomplete rather than copy-paste ready.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps are sequenced (identify types -> extract -> generate -> add automation -> validate), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops, and "validate accuracy" is mentioned without a concrete mechanism.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body has a clean section structure and points to a single one-level reference, but that referenced file `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle, so the pointer is broken.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

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 reasonably specific what-description naming several concrete doc types, but it is held back by a missing explicit use-when trigger and second-person voice. Distinctiveness is moderate rather than strong because no trigger phrasing differentiates it from adjacent writing skills.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause with natural phrasings users would say (e.g., "Use when generating API docs, architecture diagrams, or user guides from a codebase", "document my code", "write technical references").

Rewrite in third-person voice ("Generates comprehensive documentation from code...") to match the expected description style and recover the specificity penalty.

Trim buzzwords like "AI-powered analysis and industry best practices", which add fluff without increasing specificity or trigger quality.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Generate API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references" lists several concrete actions (a 3), but the second-person opening "You are a documentation expert..." triggers the rubric's prescribed -1 specificity penalty for non-third-person voice.	2 / 3
Completeness	It clearly answers what the skill does, but provides no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It uses relevant terms ("documentation", "API docs", "architecture diagrams", "user guides") but omits common natural phrasings a user would actually say, such as "document my code" or "generate docs", leaving coverage partial.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The "documentation from code" framing is a fairly specific niche, but the description could still overlap with general writing or doc-formatting skills since no distinct triggers are given.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 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: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/documentation-generation-doc-generate/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: about 3 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.