code-documentation-doc-generate
tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill code-documentation-doc-generateYou 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.
Validation
75%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
description_trigger_hint | Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed | |
Implementation
42%This skill provides a reasonable high-level structure for documentation generation but lacks the concrete, actionable guidance needed for effective execution. The instructions are too abstract, reading more like a description of what to do rather than specific commands or code examples. The progressive disclosure is well-handled with external resource references, but the core content needs executable examples and specific tooling recommendations.
Suggestions
Add concrete code examples for at least one documentation generation approach (e.g., using pydoc, Sphinx, or JSDoc with specific commands)
Replace abstract instructions like 'Extract information from code' with specific techniques and tool commands
Add validation checkpoints with specific commands (e.g., 'Run `sphinx-build -W` to catch warnings as errors')
Include a minimal working example showing input code and expected documentation output
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary framing ('You are a documentation expert...') and context that Claude already understands. The 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections add value but could be more concise. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions are vague and abstract ('Identify required doc types', 'Extract information from code') with no concrete code, commands, or executable examples. There are no specific tools, commands, or copy-paste ready snippets for documentation generation. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are listed in a logical sequence but lack validation checkpoints. The instruction to 'validate accuracy' is mentioned but not explained how. No feedback loops for error recovery or specific verification steps are provided. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill appropriately references an external resource ('resources/implementation-playbook.md') for detailed examples and templates, keeping the main skill file as a concise overview with clear navigation to deeper content. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Activation
33%The description identifies the documentation domain and lists several output types, but relies on vague buzzwords ('AI-powered analysis', 'industry best practices') and uses second-person voice ('You are'). The critical weakness is the complete absence of explicit trigger guidance telling Claude when to select this skill, which severely limits its utility in a multi-skill environment.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'document my code', 'generate README', 'API documentation', 'code documentation', 'docstrings'
Remove buzzwords ('AI-powered analysis', 'industry best practices') and replace with concrete actions like 'analyzes function signatures', 'extracts code comments', 'generates markdown documentation'
Rewrite in third person voice (e.g., 'Generates API docs, architecture diagrams...' instead of 'You are a documentation expert...')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (documentation) and lists some outputs (API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, technical references), but uses vague qualifiers like 'AI-powered analysis' and 'industry best practices' which are buzzwords rather than concrete actions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, missing explicit trigger guidance should cap completeness at 2, and this has no 'when' component at all. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords like 'API docs', 'architecture diagrams', 'user guides', 'technical references', but misses common variations users might say like 'README', 'docstrings', 'code comments', 'documentation generation', or 'document my code'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Focuses on documentation from code which provides some specificity, but 'architecture diagrams' could overlap with diagramming skills, and 'technical references' is vague enough to conflict with general writing or reference skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.