docs-update
Update user-facing documentation when code changes. Use when asked to update docs, review docs, handle documentation changes, run scheduled documentation tasks, or analyze recent commits for documentation needs.
73
66%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/docs-update/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description with strong completeness and trigger term coverage, clearly stating both what the skill does and when to use it. Its main weakness is the lack of specific concrete actions—it tells you it updates documentation but not how (e.g., updating API docs, syncing changelogs, checking for stale references). The distinctiveness could also be improved by narrowing the scope or specifying the types of documentation more precisely.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'update API references, sync changelogs, flag stale documentation sections' to improve specificity.
Narrow the scope or add distinguishing details (e.g., specific doc formats, tooling, or repo structure) to reduce potential overlap with generic documentation or code review skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (user-facing documentation) and a general action (update documentation when code changes), but lacks specific concrete actions like 'update API references, regenerate changelogs, sync README files'. The actions listed are more about triggers than specific capabilities. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (update user-facing documentation when code changes) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing five distinct trigger scenarios including updating docs, reviewing docs, handling documentation changes, running scheduled tasks, and analyzing commits. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Good coverage of natural trigger terms: 'update docs', 'review docs', 'documentation changes', 'scheduled documentation tasks', 'analyze recent commits for documentation needs'. These are phrases users would naturally say when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it specifies 'user-facing documentation' and ties it to code changes, the phrase 'review docs' and 'documentation changes' could overlap with general documentation or code review skills. The commit analysis angle adds some distinctiveness but the scope is still somewhat broad. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides a solid conceptual workflow for documentation automation with good structure and clear modes of operation. However, it lacks concrete executable commands (especially git operations), validation/verification steps before PR creation, and could be more concise by removing guidance Claude can infer. The skill reads more like a process document than an actionable instruction set.
Suggestions
Add concrete git commands for each step (e.g., `git log --since='24 hours ago' --oneline`, `git diff <commit>`, `git checkout -b docs/auto-update-$(date +%Y%m%d)`) to make the workflow directly executable.
Add a validation checkpoint before PR creation: verify documentation builds successfully (e.g., platform-specific build commands) and check for broken links or formatting issues, with a fix-and-retry loop.
Consider splitting platform-specific conventions (Mintlify frontmatter format, Docusaurus sidebar config, etc.) into a separate reference file to keep the main skill lean while providing detailed guidance when needed.
Remove or condense the filter lists for significant/insignificant changes—Claude can make these judgments with a single guiding principle rather than exhaustive bullet lists.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably well-organized but includes some unnecessary elaboration that Claude would already know (e.g., listing documentation platforms, explaining what constitutes significant vs. insignificant changes at a level of detail Claude can infer). Some sections like 'Key Principles' restate what's already covered in the workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a clear process but lacks concrete, executable commands or code examples. Steps like 'Find the default branch' and 'Get recent commits' don't include actual git commands. The branch naming convention is specified but no actual git/CLI commands are provided for any step. It describes rather than instructs in many places. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is well-sequenced with numbered steps and two clear modes (testing vs execution). However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints—no step to verify documentation builds correctly, no feedback loop for checking that generated docs match the platform's requirements, and no verification that links/references are valid before creating the PR. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is structured with clear headings and sections, but it's a monolithic document with no references to external files for detailed platform-specific guidance, style examples, or configuration templates. Platform-specific conventions (Mintlify, Docusaurus, etc.) could benefit from separate reference files rather than being mentioned inline without detail. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- warpdotdev/oz-skills
- Commit
6c08c49
- 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.