Skip to main content

write-design-docs

Write, revise, or review software design documents using Malte Ubl's "Design Docs at Google" guidance. Use when Codex needs to draft a design doc, technical design, RFC, engineering review doc, architecture proposal, mini design doc, or design-doc review focused on context, goals, non-goals, trade-offs, alternatives, cross-cutting concerns, review lifecycle, and deciding whether a design doc is warranted.

Quellinformationen

Repository
pproenca/dot-skills
Letzte Quellaktivität
5. Juli 2026 um 07:23
Erkannte Sprache von SKILL.md
Englisch
Sterne
215
Forks
19

Installationsoptionen

Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.

Quelldateien prüfen

Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.

Datei-Explorer
4 Dateien

SKILL.md wird angezeigt

SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
name
write-design-docs
description
Write, revise, or review software design documents using Malte Ubl's "Design Docs at Google" guidance. Use when Codex needs to draft a design doc, technical design, RFC, engineering review doc, architecture proposal, mini design doc, or design-doc review focused on context, goals, non-goals, trade-offs, alternatives, cross-cutting concerns, review lifecycle, and deciding whether a design doc is warranted.
# Write Design Docs ## Core Workflow Use the design doc as a problem-solving and consensus-building tool, not as an implementation manual. 1. Decide whether a design doc is warranted. - Write one when the software design is ambiguous, complex, contentious, cross-functional, likely to benefit from senior review, or valuable as organizational memory. - Prefer a short note, issue, or direct implementation when the solution is obvious and there are no meaningful trade-offs. - Prefer a mini design doc for small but non-obvious changes. 2. Gather the minimum context needed to make the design concrete. - Identify the problem, existing landscape, constraints, stakeholders, and decision deadline. - Ask focused questions only when missing information would materially change goals, non-goals, or trade-offs. - State assumptions explicitly when proceeding with incomplete information. 3. Draft around decisions and trade-offs. - Start with objective context and scope. - Define goals and non-goals as explicit boundaries. - Present the selected design from overview to detail. - Explain why the selected design best satisfies the goals under the known constraints. - Compare realistic alternatives, including why they were not selected. - Cover cross-cutting concerns such as security, privacy, reliability, observability, migrations, and operations when relevant. 4. Keep the document readable. - Optimize for busy reviewers who need to understand the decision, not every implementation detail. - Link to detailed requirements, prototypes, schemas, code, or prior docs instead of copying them wholesale. - Include diagrams or compact API/data sketches only when they clarify the design trade-offs. - Avoid large code blocks unless explaining a novel algorithm. 5. Shape the lifecycle. - Mark the document status: draft, in review, accepted, implementing, superseded, or archived. - Suggest the smallest useful review group first, then wider review when the design is stable. - Update the doc while the system has not shipped if implementation reveals wrong assumptions or changed requirements. - Link amendments or follow-up docs when the original doc diverges from reality. ## Reference Read [references/design-doc-guidance.md](references/design-doc-guidance.md) before drafting or reviewing a substantive design doc. Use it for the article-derived template, decision checklist, section guidance, and review rubric.
Auf GitHub ansehen