| name | docs-review |
| description | Audit or improve general repository documentation against implemented behavior. Use for deliberate README or documentation-quality work not owned by a more specific documentation skill. |
Documentation Review
Own general repository-document quality in an explicit audit-only or authorized edit mode.
Workflow
- Confirm audience, document set, desired outcome, and whether the task authorizes edits.
- Route current-change drift to
docs-drift-review, docs/context/ structure to repo-context-document, semantic contracts to spec-update, journeys to critical-journey-document, and persuasive claims to marketing-claims-review.
- Verify content against implementation, commands, configuration, examples, tests, metadata, and canonical documents.
- Classify evidence-backed findings as
keep, update, merge, split, move, archive, or remove.
- In audit-only mode, return prioritized findings without edits.
- In edit mode, change only the confirmed document set and preserve repository structure and voice unless that structure is the requested defect.
- Use
english-text-review on changed prose and apply its material findings without changing verified facts, required terminology, or intentional voice.
- Require explicit authority before archiving, removing, or materially expanding the document set.
Do not invent features, commands, architecture, benchmarks, screenshots, promises, or roadmap items; impose a generic template; or broaden a focused request.
Finish with an evidence-backed audit or verified scoped edits, plus unresolved facts needing an owner.
