跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

documentation-verification

Validate documentation before merging - check completeness, broken links, code example accuracy, and factual correctness. Use when reviewing docs for quality gates or running pre-merge doc validation.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(3)

  • SKILL.md4.7 KB
  • CHANGELOG.md4.6 KB
  • LICENSE.txt1.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Documentation Verification

Use this skill when a docs change needs evidence, not just a writing pass.

  • Leverage native parallel subagent dispatch and 200k+ context windows where available.

Activation Conditions

Use symptom -> action triggers: when one matches, apply this skill and verify with the protocol below.

  • Reviewing docs before merge or release
  • Checking README, setup, or config accuracy
  • Verifying local links, commands, and code samples
  • Confirming docs changed alongside user-facing behavior

Verification Workflow

  1. Confirm the docs cover the changed behavior.
  2. Check relative links and referenced files.
  3. Validate commands and snippets where feasible.
  4. Report missing coverage and stale claims explicitly.

Documentation Stack Reference

Inherit the shared stack from documentation-patterns: source-of-truth discovery, audience framing, structure selection, verification, and freshness checks. Keep this skill focused on final evidence checks instead of restating the full stack.

Anti-Patterns

  • Writing for the author instead of the reader: It bakes in unstated context and leaves the actual audience unsure what to do next.
  • Skipping concrete examples or commands: Abstract guidance is easy to approve and hard to apply correctly.
  • Letting links, screenshots, or versions drift: Polished formatting does not help if the instructions are no longer true.

Verification Protocol

Before claiming "skill applied successfully":

  1. Pass/fail: The Documentation Verification output identifies audience, purpose, source of truth, and freshness requirements.
  2. Pass/fail: Shared documentation-stack guidance is referenced instead of duplicating another documentation skill.
  3. Pass/fail: Claims, links, commands, examples, and screenshots are verified or explicitly marked unverified.
  4. Pressure-test scenario: Apply the skill to a doc request with a stale command, missing owner, and conflicting audience.
  5. Success metric: Zero undocumented assumptions; every reader-facing claim is sourced or scoped.

Review Checklist

  • Public behavior changes are documented
  • Local links resolve
  • Examples and commands still make sense
  • Setup steps reflect current tool versions
  • README and CHANGELOG were updated when required

References & Resources

Documentation

Scripts

  • Doc Link Check - Validate relative Markdown links across one file or an entire docs tree
<!-- MCP:START --> <!-- PORTABILITY:START -->

Cross-Client Portability

This skill is written to stay usable across GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and Codex.

  • GitHub Copilot: keep the folder in a Copilot-visible skill path or wrap the workflow in project instructions when folder discovery is unavailable.
  • Claude Code: keep the folder in a local skills directory or a compatible plugin source.
  • Codex: install or sync the folder into $CODEX_HOME/skills/documentation-verification and restart Codex after major changes.
<!-- PORTABILITY:END -->

MCP Availability And Fallback

Preferred MCP Server: None required

  • Fallback prompt: "Use the Documentation Verification skill without MCP. Rely on the local SKILL.md, bundled references or scripts, and manual verification. Show the exact commands, evidence, and final checks you used before concluding."
  • If the current host does not expose a matching server, use the bundled references, scripts, native toolchain, and manual workflow already described in this skill.
  • Treat direct local verification, rendered output, logs, tests, or screenshots as the fallback evidence path before completion.
<!-- MCP:END -->

Related Skills

  • documentation-authoring: Use it when the workflow also needs drafting structured technical or product documents.
  • documentation-patterns: Use it when the workflow also needs reusable documentation structures and templates.
  • documentation-quality: Use it when the workflow also needs documentation review standards and quality gates.
  • notion-docs: Use it when the workflow also needs Notion page and database publishing workflows.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Improve the clarity and voice of AI-assisted academic writing (papers, theses, rebuttals) and

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 11 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure/rebuttal-audit). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, audit my rebuttal, check my response draft, AI disclosure, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見, 評估回覆, 논문 작성, 초록 작성, 논문 수정, 논문 계획을 도와줘, 심사 의견 반영, 답변서 점검, AI 사용 고지.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

查看 bg-szy 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题