Menú
Top-level research orchestrator: combines exists, route, and coverage to give a complete picture before writing.
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
Top-level review orchestrator: runs style-check, outline-check, outline-ux-analyzer, code-verify, coherence-check, and pitfalls-check on a file, directory, or PR.
Create a pull request on strapi/documentation following git-rules.md. Strict flat-text description, no headings, no test plan.
End-to-end documentation orchestrator: chains all four inki phases (research, write, review, submit) for a single subject. Gates between each phase by default; --non-interactive chains without pauses and runs a review-fix loop. The simplest way to document a subject from scratch.
Generate an outline for a new documentation page from a topic brief and the appropriate template.
Add a new entry to the known-pitfalls catalog that pitfalls-check audits against. Verifies the correct pattern against the Strapi source before adding, and confirms with the user. Use when you have found a documentation mistake worth catching automatically in future reviews.
Rewrite the title or description/body of one or more open PRs on strapi/documentation to match git-rules.md. Strict one-by-one confirmation, or auto-edit with --non-interactive.
| name | research |
| description | Top-level research orchestrator: combines exists, route, and coverage to give a complete picture before writing. |
| argument-hint | [--no-log] <topic, feature name, or strapi/strapi or strapi/cloud PR> |
| user-invocable | true |
Logging: unless --no-log is passed, write this skill's report to the run log per ../../references/logging.md (--log-dir <path> and --short-log are also accepted). When invoked as part of an orchestrator (e.g. /inki:document), write into that run's existing directory instead of creating a new one.
Given $ARGUMENTS, classify the input:
/inki:exists $ARGUMENTS/inki:coverage $ARGUMENTS/inki:route $ARGUMENTSIf the input is ambiguous, run more than one and label sections clearly.
Combine sub-reports under labeled sections:
=== Existing coverage ===
<output of /inki:exists, if invoked>
=== Feature gaps ===
<output of /inki:coverage, if invoked>
=== Code change routing ===
<output of /inki:route, if invoked>
Conclude with a single recommended next step (e.g., "Run /inki:write" or "Skip: already documented at ").