| name | dify-docs-format-check-en |
| description | Check formatting compliance in changed English documentation against writing-guides/formatting-guide.md. Use after finalizing a draft, or when the user says "check formatting", "format audit", "format check" on English content.
|
English Formatting Check
Purpose
Verify English documentation against every rule in writing-guides/formatting-guide.md. Mechanical rules are enforced by a linter script (check-format-en.py); judgment-call rules are checked by reading the file.
Before Starting
Audit the entire file, not just the diff. Default to files currently under review, detected via:
git diff --name-only (unstaged changes in tracked files)git diff --cached --name-only (staged changes)- Untracked files from
git status --porcelain (lines starting with ??)
Filter for .mdx and .md files under en/. If no files are detected, ask the user which files to check.
Checks
Part 1 — Deterministic (run the linter, paste the output)
Run the linter and paste its output into your report:
python3 .claude/skills/dify-docs-format-check-en/check-format-en.py <file> [<file> ...]
The script is the authoritative rule list. It prints one line per violation, grouped by file, as line [rule-id] message; the messages are self-describing, so do not re-summarize each rule. Rule IDs are prefixed by family: F- frontmatter, H- headings, B- bold/italic, L- lists, C- code, Li- links, I- images, M- Mintlify components, U- UI element references, S- spacing, P- punctuation.
Two IDs need context the message alone does not give:
H-ing-verb: section-name gerunds (Troubleshooting, Logging, Getting Started, Monitoring Data List, etc.) are exempt via the SKIP_ING_HEADINGS constant in the script. If a flagged heading is a legitimate section concept, add it there.I-alt-empty: the script flags every empty alt as a prompt to confirm the image is genuinely decorative, not as a hard error.
Part 2 — Judgment-call review (where your attention goes)
Part 1 is run-and-paste; this pass is where you actually read and reason. For each changed file, read it and look for:
Headings
- Title case: every heading uses proper title case. Major words capitalized; minor words (
a, and, the, of, in, on, to, etc.) lowercase except at the start. Flag any heading that reads as sentence case, all-lowercase, or inconsistent.
Bold and emphasis
- Bold for UI elements and key terms only. Running-text emphasis should be italic or restructured. Flag bold that isn't a UI label, a menu path, a tab/field name, or a first-use key term.
- Double quotation marks not used for emphasis. Flag
"word" patterns used emphatically (not as direct quotations or literal-phrase references).
Lists
- Numbered lists only for sequential steps. If items are not ordered steps, they should be unordered (dashes).
- Descriptive-list pattern:
- **Label**: description. A list where each item introduces a labeled concept should use this pattern.
- Period consistency: items are either all complete sentences (period) or all fragments (no period). Flag mixed styles within a list.
- Child content indentation: when a list item has an expanded description, callout, or image, it must be indented two spaces under that item.
Links
- Descriptive link text. Flag link text that is vague (
this page, here) even when it isn't click here exactly.
Images
- Alt text in title case, describes what the image communicates (not its appearance). "LLM Node Configuration Panel" is correct; "Screenshot of a form" is not.
- Comparison images (two or more images shown together for comparison) each need a caption. The linter cannot detect image adjacency; check by reading.
- Decorative
alt="" should be used only for images that carry no information. Confirm that any empty alt flagged by the linter is truly decorative.
- Image storage path under
/images/<tier-1>/<tier-2>/... follows the content-domain taxonomy in the guide.
- Filenames are descriptive and specific (
workflow-llm-node-parameters.png, not workflow-01.png or screenshot.png).
Tables
- Left-aligned with
:---; bold used in header row only when it aids clarity.
- Multi-line cells: prefer lists or components; fall back to
<br/><br/><br/><br/> when a manual break is unavoidable.
General
- Content inside Mintlify components reads cleanly (bold, links, etc. work as expected inside
<Info>, <Note>, etc.).
Output Format
Paste the script's raw output first, then append your judgment findings under each file. The script already groups by file and ends each file with either its violation lines or ✅ no deterministic issues found; do not invent per-rule "clean" lines it never printed.
[script output, verbatim. Per file: "### {path}", then "line [rule-id] message"
lines, or "✅ no deterministic issues found", ending with "Total violations: {n}"]
### Judgment findings
**{path}**
- Line {n}: {description of issue} ({rule area})
- ...
If a file has no deterministic violations and no judgment findings, the script's ✅ no deterministic issues found line stands on its own.
Important
- Do NOT modify any files. This is a read-only audit.
- Report findings to the user for review.
- When the script flags a rule that looks like a false positive on inspection (e.g., an
-ing verb that should have been in SKIP_ING_HEADINGS, or _ that is a legitimate filename/identifier), surface it as a finding but note the ambiguity so the user can decide.
