docs

name	docs
description	Decide which family a doc belongs to before drafting — SDK/developer, user/product, or working-group (WG) — since family sets the audience, home, and tone. Use when creating, moving, or restructuring docs, when unsure which directory a doc belongs in, or when a request says "document this" / "write docs for X" without naming the kind. Routes to the specialized skill for each family.

Docs

Documentation in Grida is not one thing. Before drafting, name the family — because the family decides the audience, the home directory, the tone, and which skill governs the rest. Writing the right content in the wrong family (a spec dump in a user guide, a marketing tone in an RFC) is the most common and most expensive docs mistake, because it is invisible until someone reads it for the wrong reason.

/docs/** is the source of truth, synced to /apps/docs/docs/** at build and published at grida.co/docs. Edit the root /docs, never the synced copy. The operational rules that apply to every family — taxonomy (draft / unlisted / doc_tasks), frontmatter, MDX safety (format: md), _history/, the structure table — live in docs/AGENTS.md. Read it once; this skill does not repeat it.

The three families

Family	Audience	Home	Character	Governing skill
SDK / developer	engineers (and, implicitly, agents) consuming a package or API	packages/<pkg>/docs/ for spec-only; docs/reference/** for stable references	technical, example-dense, low-visual, precise	this skill (below)
User / product	humans using a Grida product	docs/editor/**, docs/forms/**, docs/platform/**, docs/with-figma/**, …	content-rich, screenshots, SEO-friendly, task-oriented	canvas editor (docs/editor/) → docs-canvas; cross-cutting → seo + docs-svg-kit; other surfaces have no dedicated skill yet — use docs/AGENTS.md + seo
WG / research / RFC-RFD	contributors and maintainers reasoning about why and what	docs/wg/**	spec-rich, language-agnostic, code-agnostic, factual	docs-wg

If the request fits one family cleanly, hand off to its governing skill and stop reading here. The rest of this page covers the routing edges and the SDK family (which has no skill of its own).

Routing — which family is this?

Ask, in order:

1. Is it about why a thing is designed the way it is, or what a feature/spec should be — independent of any one implementation? → WG. Go to docs-wg.
2. Is the reader a person trying to use a shipped product? → User docs. Content-rich and SEO-aware. For the canvas editor (docs/editor/) use docs-canvas; for other surfaces (forms, platform, with-figma) there is no dedicated skill yet — follow docs/AGENTS.md and seo. docs-svg-kit covers SVG figures for any of them.
3. Is the reader an engineer (or agent) trying to consume a package or API correctly? → SDK docs (below).

The boundaries are real, not bureaucratic:

• Architecture / design rationale never goes in user docs. It belongs in WG. (docs-canvas enforces the same boundary from its side.)
• A WG doc is not an SDK doc. WG says "this is what the feature is and why"; SDK says "this is the API and how to call it." A WG doc that drifts into API signatures has become an SDK doc in the wrong place — see docs-wg on staying code-agnostic.
• Plans, TODO lists, and conversational logs are not docs of any family. Plans live in untracked *.plan.md files (gitignored); they do not belong under docs/.

SDK / developer docs

SDK docs explain how to consume a package or API. They optimize for an engineer (and, without ever saying so, for an agent) who needs to get a call right on the first try.

Where they live:

• packages/<pkg>/docs/ — when the docs are spec-heavy and not visually rich. Co-locating with the package keeps the contract next to the code it describes and versioned with it. (Precedent: packages/grida-svg-editor/docs/.) A package's README.md and AGENTS.md are the entry points; docs/ holds the deeper material.
• docs/reference/** — for stable, cross-package technical references, glossaries, and specs that deserve a place on the published site. This tree is actively maintained alongside docs/wg/\*\*.

What good SDK docs look like:

• Example-dense. Every non-trivial API earns a short, runnable example. Examples carry more than prose for a consumer.
• Technical and precise about types, contracts, and edge cases — light on screenshots and marketing.
• Good for agents by being good, period. Do not write "for AI" — a clear, complete, example-backed reference is what an agent needs and what a human needs. The two goals do not diverge.
• Honest about stability. Mark experimental surfaces; an SDK doc that oversells a shaky API costs its readers time.

Related skills

docs-wg (WG authoring doctrine), docs-canvas (canvas/editor user docs), seo (frontmatter + search), links (how to write any link), grounding (find/reconcile the authoritative doc before editing). Operational taxonomy and frontmatter: docs/AGENTS.md.