Doc Co-Authoring

Turn partial context into a clear document by following a staged workflow. Keep the user in control of decisions, and optimize for a doc that works for readers who do not share the author’s context.

Triggers

Use this workflow when the user asks to:

• write or refine documentation, proposals, RFCs, PRDs, decision docs, specs
• “summarize our discussion into a doc”
• “make this readable for others” / “share with the team”
• create a template or standard for recurring documents

If the user explicitly wants freeform writing, keep the workflow lightweight (ask fewer questions; draft faster).

---

The Workflow (3 stages)

Stage 1 — Context Capture (close the gap)

Goal: collect the minimum context required to write a doc that is correct, scoped, and actionable.

Ask for:

1. Doc type + goal: what is this document for, and what decision/action should it unlock?
2. Audience: who will read it, and what do they already know?
3. Constraints: deadlines, non-goals, dependencies, security/compliance, platform limits.
4. Current state: what exists today? what’s broken? what’s missing?
5. Options considered: at least 1–2 alternatives and why they may/ may not work.
6. Success criteria: how we know it worked (metrics, user outcomes, acceptance tests).
7. Open questions: unknowns that block writing certain sections.

Output of Stage 1:

• a short “context snapshot”
• a list of open questions (ranked by importance)
• a proposed doc outline (1 screen)

Stage 2 — Outline-First Drafting (iterate by section)

Goal: draft a document in layers without losing coherence.

Rules:

• Outline before prose. Do not write full paragraphs until the outline is agreed.
• One section at a time. Draft → review → revise, then move on.
• Maintain a decision log (small bullet list) so changes are explicit.
• Keep unknowns visible: unresolved items stay in an “Open Questions / Risks” section, not hidden.

Recommended iteration loop per section:

1. Write a 3–7 bullet “section intent” (what this section must answer).
2. Draft the section (short, concrete).
3. Ask the user for a quick pass: “What’s wrong / missing / too detailed?”
4. Revise and update the decision log.

Stage 3 — Reader Testing (catch blind spots)

Goal: validate readability and completeness for a reader without the author’s context.

Method:

• Prepare a clean-context review prompt: “You are a reviewer with no prior context. Read this doc and identify: missing context, unclear terms, ambiguous decisions, hidden assumptions, and where you’d ask questions.”
• If sub-agents are available, run the review in a fresh agent session. Otherwise, run the review yourself by explicitly pretending you have no access to prior conversation.

Output of Stage 3:

• a short list of fixes (highest leverage first)
• revised doc with clarified assumptions, terms, and decisions

---

Default Section Templates

Load references/templates.md and pick the closest template:

• Decision record (ADR-lite)
• Product requirements (PRD-lite)
• Technical design / RFC
• Proposal / pitch

Quality Bar (what to optimize for)

The doc should make it easy for a reader to answer:

• What problem are we solving, for whom, and why now?
• What are we proposing, and what are we not doing?
• What options did we consider, and what tradeoffs drive the choice?
• What are the risks, unknowns, and mitigations?
• What are the next steps and owners?