code-documentation-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

55%

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

Quality

Content

50%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.

The body is well-structured and token-efficient, but guidance stays abstract without concrete commands or examples, validation is only vaguely mentioned, and the sole external reference points to a missing file.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable guidance, e.g. specific doc-tool commands or a worked example of extracting an API endpoint signature into a doc stub.

Turn 'Add automation (linting, CI) and validate accuracy' into an explicit validation checkpoint with a feedback loop (generate -> lint -> fix -> re-lint).

Either create resources/implementation-playbook.md or remove the two references to it so no navigation link is dangling.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with no concept explanations or library introductions Claude already knows; the only removable padding is the intro paragraph duplicating the frontmatter description, fitting 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed'.	4 / 5
Actionability	Instructions are high-level hints ('Extract information from code, configs, and comments', 'Add automation (linting, CI) and validate accuracy') with no concrete commands, tools, or executable examples, matching 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints'.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough sequence exists (identify types, extract, generate, automate/validate) but validation is a single vague bullet with no checkpoint or feedback loop, fitting 'steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints missing or implicit'.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well organized and a one-level reference is signaled, but the referenced file resources/implementation-playbook.md does not exist in the bundle, so the navigation target is broken, fitting 'references present but not clearly deliverable / could be better organized'.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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.

The description clearly states what the skill produces but omits any explicit trigger ('Use when...') guidance and uses second-person voice, which together cap completeness and specificity. Trigger-term quality and distinctiveness are solid.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause naming concrete trigger phrases (e.g., 'Use when generating API docs, architecture diagrams, or user guides from a codebase').

Rewrite in third person to avoid the voice penalty (e.g., 'Generates API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references from code').

Trim the fluffy closer 'using AI-powered analysis and industry best practices' in favor of an explicit when-to-use clause.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete deliverables ('API docs, architecture diagrams, user guides, and technical references') which would be a 4, but the second-person phrasing 'You are a documentation expert...' triggers the voice penalty, reducing specificity by 1.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear (generate documentation from code) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a user would say are present ('API docs', 'architecture diagrams', 'user guides', 'technical references', 'documentation from code'), with only minor synonyms missing, matching the 'good keyword coverage' anchor.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'documentation generation from code' niche is mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against general writing/doc skills, fitting the 'mostly distinct' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Path: skills/code-documentation-doc-generate/SKILL.md
Commit: 5cf4dfe

Reviewed: 1 day 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.