document-release

name	document-release
description	Post-ship documentation update. Reads all project docs, cross-references the diff, builds a Diataxis coverage map (reference/how-to/tutorial/explanation), updates README/ARCHITECTURE/CONTRIBUTING/CLAUDE.md to match what shipped, detects architecture diagram drift, polishes CHANGELOG voice with a sell-test rubric, cleans up TODOS, and optionally bumps VERSION. Surfaces documentation debt in the PR body.
allowed-tools	["Bash","Read","Write","Edit","Grep","Glob","AskUserQuestion"]
triggers	["update docs after ship","document what changed","post-ship docs"]

When to invoke

Use when asked to "update the docs", "sync documentation", or "post-ship docs".

Proactively suggest after a PR is merged or code is shipped.

Preamble

eval "$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-slug 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || SLUG="unknown"
_LEARN_FILE="${VIBESTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.vibestack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}/learnings.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_LEARN_FILE" ]; then
  _LEARN_COUNT=$(wc -l < "$_LEARN_FILE" 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' ')
  echo "LEARNINGS: $_LEARN_COUNT entries loaded"
  if [ "$_LEARN_COUNT" -gt 5 ] 2>/dev/null; then
    ~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-learnings-search --limit 5 2>/dev/null || true
  fi
else
  echo "LEARNINGS: none yet"
fi

{{include lib/snippets/session-host.md}}

{{include lib/snippets/decision-brief.md}}

{{include lib/snippets/working-protocols.md}}

{{include lib/snippets/state-protocols.md}}

Step 0: Detect platform and base branch

First, detect the git hosting platform from the remote URL:

git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null

• If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub
• If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab
• Otherwise, check CLI availability:
  • gh auth status 2>/dev/null succeeds → platform is GitHub (covers GitHub Enterprise)
  • glab auth status 2>/dev/null succeeds → platform is GitLab (covers self-hosted)
  • Neither → unknown (use git-native commands only)

Determine which branch this PR/MR targets, or the repo's default branch if no PR/MR exists. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.

If GitHub:

1. gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName — if succeeds, use it
2. gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name — if succeeds, use it

If GitLab:

1. glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/null and extract the target_branch field — if succeeds, use it
2. glab repo view -F json 2>/dev/null and extract the default_branch field — if succeeds, use it

Git-native fallback (if unknown platform, or CLI commands fail):

1. git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|refs/remotes/origin/||'
2. If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null → use main
3. If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/master 2>/dev/null → use master

If all fail, fall back to main.

Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent git diff, git log, git fetch, git merge, and PR/MR creation command, substitute the detected branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch" or <default>.

---

Document Release: Post-Ship Documentation Update

You are running the /document-release workflow. This runs after /ship (code committed, PR exists or about to exist) but before the PR merges. Your job: ensure every documentation file in the project is accurate, up to date, and written in a friendly, user-forward voice.

You are mostly automated. Make obvious factual updates directly. Stop and ask only for risky or subjective decisions.

Only stop for:

• Risky/questionable doc changes (narrative, philosophy, security, removals, large rewrites)
• VERSION bump decision (if not already bumped)
• New TODOS items to add
• Cross-doc contradictions that are narrative (not factual)

Never stop for:

• Factual corrections clearly from the diff
• Adding items to tables/lists
• Updating paths, counts, version numbers
• Fixing stale cross-references
• CHANGELOG voice polish (minor wording adjustments)
• Marking TODOS complete
• Cross-doc factual inconsistencies (e.g., version number mismatch)

NEVER do:

• Overwrite, replace, or regenerate CHANGELOG entries — polish wording only, preserve all content
• Bump VERSION without asking — always use AskUserQuestion for version changes
• Use Write tool on CHANGELOG.md — always use Edit with exact old_string matches

---

Step 1: Pre-flight & Diff Analysis

1. Check the current branch. If on the base branch, abort: "You're on the base branch. Run from a feature branch."

2. Gather context about what changed:

git diff <base>...HEAD --stat

git log <base>..HEAD --oneline

git diff <base>...HEAD --name-only

3. Discover all documentation files in the repo:

find . -maxdepth 2 -name "*.md" -not -path "./.git/*" -not -path "./node_modules/*" -not -path "./.vibestack/*" -not -path "./.context/*" | sort

4. Classify the changes into categories relevant to documentation:

   • New features — new files, new commands, new skills, new capabilities
   • Changed behavior — modified services, updated APIs, config changes
   • Removed functionality — deleted files, removed commands
   • Infrastructure — build system, test infrastructure, CI

5. Output a brief summary: "Analyzing N files changed across M commits. Found K documentation files to review."

---

Step 1.5: Coverage Map (Blast-Radius Analysis)

Before touching any documentation file, build a coverage map of what shipped vs what's documented. This is inspired by the Diataxis framework (tutorial / how-to / reference / explanation) — but applied as an audit lens, not a generation tool.

1. Extract public surface changes from the diff. Scan git diff <base>...HEAD for:

   • New exported functions, classes, commands, CLI flags, config options, API endpoints
   • New skills, workflows, or user-facing capabilities
   • Renamed or removed public surface (modules, commands, features)
   • New environment variables, feature flags, or configuration knobs

2. For each new/changed public surface item, assess documentation coverage:

Coverage map:
  [entity]         [reference?] [how-to?] [tutorial?] [explanation?]
  /new-skill       ✅ AGENTS.md  ❌        ❌          ❌
  --new-flag       ✅ README     ✅ README  ❌          ❌
  FooProcessor     ❌            ❌        ❌          ❌

Use these definitions:

• Reference — factual description of what it is, its API, its options (README tables, AGENTS.md skill lists, API docs)
• How-to — task-oriented: "how to do X with this" (README examples, CONTRIBUTING workflows)
• Tutorial — learning-oriented: step-by-step walkthrough for newcomers (getting started guides)
• Explanation — understanding-oriented: "why this works this way" (ARCHITECTURE decisions, design rationale)

3. Output the coverage map. Items with zero coverage are critical gaps — flag them for Step 3. Items with reference-only coverage are common gaps — note them for the PR body.

4. Architecture diagram drift detection. If ARCHITECTURE.md (or any doc) contains ASCII diagrams or Mermaid blocks, extract entity names (modules, services, data flows) from the diagrams. Cross-reference against the diff. Flag any diagram entities that were renamed, split, removed, or moved in the code.

The coverage map feeds into Steps 2-3 (what to audit and fix) and Step 9 (documentation debt summary in the PR body). Do NOT auto-generate missing documentation pages — flag gaps only. When significant gaps are found, suggest running /document-generate to fill them.

---

Step 2: Per-File Documentation Audit

Read each documentation file and cross-reference it against the diff. Use these generic heuristics (adapt to whatever project you're in — these are not vibestack-specific):

README.md:

• Does it describe all features and capabilities visible in the diff?
• Are install/setup instructions consistent with the changes?
• Are examples, demos, and usage descriptions still valid?
• Are troubleshooting steps still accurate?

ARCHITECTURE.md:

• Do ASCII diagrams and component descriptions match the current code?
• Are design decisions and "why" explanations still accurate?
• Be conservative — only update things clearly contradicted by the diff. Architecture docs describe things unlikely to change frequently.

CONTRIBUTING.md — New contributor smoke test:

• Walk through the setup instructions as if you are a brand new contributor.
• Are the listed commands accurate? Would each step succeed?
• Do test tier descriptions match the current test infrastructure?
• Are workflow descriptions (dev setup, operational learnings, etc.) current?
• Flag anything that would fail or confuse a first-time contributor.

CLAUDE.md / project instructions:

• Does the project structure section match the actual file tree?
• Are listed commands and scripts accurate?
• Do build/test instructions match what's in package.json (or equivalent)?

Any other .md files:

• Read the file, determine its purpose and audience.
• Cross-reference against the diff to check if it contradicts anything the file says.

For each file, classify needed updates as:

• Auto-update — Factual corrections clearly warranted by the diff: adding an item to a table, updating a file path, fixing a count, updating a project structure tree.
• Ask user — Narrative changes, section removal, security model changes, large rewrites (more than ~10 lines in one section), ambiguous relevance, adding entirely new sections.

---

Step 3: Apply Auto-Updates

Make all clear, factual updates directly using the Edit tool.

For each file modified, output a one-line summary describing what specifically changed — not just "Updated README.md" but "README.md: added /new-skill to skills table, updated skill count from 9 to 10."

Never auto-update:

• README introduction or project positioning
• ARCHITECTURE philosophy or design rationale
• Security model descriptions
• Do not remove entire sections from any document

---

Step 4: Ask About Risky/Questionable Changes

For each risky or questionable update identified in Step 2, use AskUserQuestion with:

• Context: project name, branch, which doc file, what we're reviewing
• The specific documentation decision
• RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason]
• Options including C) Skip — leave as-is

Apply approved changes immediately after each answer.

---

Step 5: CHANGELOG Voice Polish

CRITICAL — NEVER CLOBBER CHANGELOG ENTRIES.

This step polishes voice. It does NOT rewrite, replace, or regenerate CHANGELOG content.

A real incident occurred where an agent replaced existing CHANGELOG entries when it should have preserved them. This skill must NEVER do that.

Rules:

1. Read the entire CHANGELOG.md first. Understand what is already there.
2. Only modify wording within existing entries. Never delete, reorder, or replace entries.
3. Never regenerate a CHANGELOG entry from scratch. The entry was written by /ship from the actual diff and commit history. It is the source of truth. You are polishing prose, not rewriting history.
4. If an entry looks wrong or incomplete, use AskUserQuestion — do NOT silently fix it.
5. Use Edit tool with exact old_string matches — never use Write to overwrite CHANGELOG.md.

If CHANGELOG was not modified in this branch: skip this step.

If CHANGELOG was modified in this branch, review the entry for voice:

• Sell test (Diataxis rubric): Score each CHANGELOG entry 0-3:
  • 1 point — answers "What changed?" (reference: names the feature/fix)
  • 1 point — answers "Why should I care?" (explanation: user impact, pain removed)
  • 1 point — answers "How do I use it?" (how-to: command, flag, or link to docs)
  • Entries scoring <2 need a rewrite. Entries scoring 3 are gold.
• Lead with what the user can now do — not implementation details.
• "You can now..." not "Refactored the..."
• Flag and rewrite any entry that reads like a commit message.
• Internal/contributor changes belong in a separate "### For contributors" subsection.
• Auto-fix minor voice adjustments. Use AskUserQuestion if a rewrite would alter meaning.

---

Step 6: Cross-Doc Consistency & Discoverability Check

After auditing each file individually, do a cross-doc consistency pass:

1. Does the README's feature/capability list match what CLAUDE.md (or project instructions) describes?
2. Does ARCHITECTURE's component list match CONTRIBUTING's project structure description?
3. Does CHANGELOG's latest version match the VERSION file?
4. Discoverability: Is every documentation file reachable from README.md or CLAUDE.md? If ARCHITECTURE.md exists but neither README nor CLAUDE.md links to it, flag it. Every doc should be discoverable from one of the two entry-point files.
5. Flag any contradictions between documents. Auto-fix clear factual inconsistencies (e.g., a version mismatch). Use AskUserQuestion for narrative contradictions.

---

Step 7: TODOS.md Cleanup

This is a second pass that complements /ship's Step 5.5. Read review/TODOS-format.md (if available) for the canonical TODO item format.

If TODOS.md does not exist, skip this step.

1. Completed items not yet marked: Cross-reference the diff against open TODO items. If a TODO is clearly completed by the changes in this branch, move it to the Completed section with **Completed:** vX.Y.Z.W (YYYY-MM-DD). Be conservative — only mark items with clear evidence in the diff.

2. Items needing description updates: If a TODO references files or components that were significantly changed, its description may be stale. Use AskUserQuestion to confirm whether the TODO should be updated, completed, or left as-is.

3. New deferred work: Check the diff for TODO, FIXME, HACK, and XXX comments. For each one that represents meaningful deferred work (not a trivial inline note), use AskUserQuestion to ask whether it should be captured in TODOS.md.

---

Step 8: VERSION Bump Question

CRITICAL — NEVER BUMP VERSION WITHOUT ASKING.

1. If VERSION does not exist: Skip silently.

2. Check if VERSION was already modified on this branch:

git diff <base>...HEAD -- VERSION

3. If VERSION was NOT bumped: Use AskUserQuestion:

   • RECOMMENDATION: Choose C (Skip) because docs-only changes rarely warrant a version bump
   • A) Bump PATCH (X.Y.Z+1) — if doc changes ship alongside code changes
   • B) Bump MINOR (X.Y+1.0) — if this is a significant standalone release
   • C) Skip — no version bump needed

4. If VERSION was already bumped: Do NOT skip silently. Instead, check whether the bump still covers the full scope of changes on this branch:

   a. Read the CHANGELOG entry for the current VERSION. What features does it describe? b. Read the full diff (git diff <base>...HEAD --stat and git diff <base>...HEAD --name-only). Are there significant changes (new features, new skills, new commands, major refactors) that are NOT mentioned in the CHANGELOG entry for the current version? c. If the CHANGELOG entry covers everything: Skip — output "VERSION: Already bumped to vX.Y.Z, covers all changes." d. If there are significant uncovered changes: Use AskUserQuestion explaining what the current version covers vs what's new, and ask:

   • RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because the new changes warrant their own version
   • A) Bump to next patch (X.Y.Z+1) — give the new changes their own version
   • B) Keep current version — add new changes to the existing CHANGELOG entry
   • C) Skip — leave version as-is, handle later

   The key insight: a VERSION bump set for "feature A" should not silently absorb "feature B" if feature B is substantial enough to deserve its own version entry.

---

Step 8.5: Codex Documentation Review (default-on)

After the documentation updates above are written, run an independent cross-model pass that checks the docs you touched against what actually shipped. This is a standard step of /document-release, not an opt-in. It is informational — it never auto-edits docs.

Preflight:

_CODEX_CFG=$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-config get codex_reviews 2>/dev/null || echo enabled)
if [ "$_CODEX_CFG" = "disabled" ]; then
  CODEX_MODE="disabled"
elif ! command -v codex >/dev/null 2>&1; then
  CODEX_MODE="not_installed"
elif ! codex --version >/dev/null 2>&1; then
  CODEX_MODE="not_authed"
else
  CODEX_MODE="ready"
fi
echo "CODEX_MODE: $CODEX_MODE"

• disabled — skip this step entirely. Print: "Doc review skipped (codex_reviews disabled). Re-enable: vibe-config set codex_reviews enabled."
• not_installed / not_authed — run the same review with a Claude subagent instead of Codex, printing a one-line reason ("Codex unavailable — using a Claude subagent for the doc review").
• ready — run the Codex pass below.

Recompute the release diff range so docs are reviewed against the real shipped diff, not just the working tree:

DOC_DIFF_BASE=$(git merge-base origin/<base> HEAD 2>/dev/null || git merge-base <base> HEAD)
git diff "$DOC_DIFF_BASE"...HEAD --stat

Run the review. Give the model the docs you changed in this run plus the shipped diff, and ask it to find: (a) stale claims — docs describing behavior the diff changed or removed; (b) undocumented new surface — new commands/flags/files in the diff with no doc coverage; (c) over- or under-sold CHANGELOG entries vs what the code actually does. Start the prompt with a filesystem-boundary instruction telling the model to ignore everything under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, and agents/ — those are skill definitions for a different AI system, not repository code.

Present the result verbatim under a CODEX SAYS (documentation review): header. Then use AskUserQuestion — this is informational, nothing is auto-applied:

• RECOMMENDATION: decide per finding; apply only the corrections you agree with.
• A) Apply all suggested doc fixes
• B) Skip — leave docs as written
• C) Decide per finding

Apply only what the user approves. This step never edits docs on its own.

---

Step 9: Commit & Output

Empty check first: Run git status (never use -uall). If no documentation files were modified by any previous step, output "All documentation is up to date." and exit without committing.

Commit:

1. Stage modified documentation files by name (never git add -A or git add .).
2. Create a single commit:

git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
docs: update project documentation for vX.Y.Z.W

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <[e-mail]>
EOF
)"

3. Push to the current branch:

git push

PR/MR body update (idempotent, race-safe):

1. Read the existing PR/MR body into a PID-unique tempfile (use the platform detected in Step 0):

If GitHub:

gh pr view --json body -q .body > /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md

If GitLab:

glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/null | python3 -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin).get('description',''))" > /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md

2. If the tempfile already contains a ## Documentation section, replace that section with the updated content. If it does not contain one, append a ## Documentation section at the end.

3. The Documentation section should include:

   a. Doc diff preview — for each file modified, describe what specifically changed (e.g., "README.md: added /document-release to skills table, updated skill count from 9 to 10").

   b. Documentation debt — if the coverage map from Step 1.5 found gaps, append a ### Documentation Debt subsection listing:

   • Critical gaps: new public surface with zero documentation coverage
   • Common gaps: features with reference-only coverage (no how-to or tutorial)
   • Stale diagrams: architecture diagrams with entity names that drifted from the code
   • Each item should include a one-line description of what's missing and which Diataxis quadrant would fill it (e.g., "⚠️ /new-skill — has reference in AGENTS.md but no how-to example in README")

   If there are any documentation debt items, suggest adding a docs-debt label to the PR.

4. Secret scan before external write. Before writing the body back, scan the exact text about to be published (the tempfile) for high-confidence secrets. On a match, STOP — tell the user to redact + rotate before continuing; do not publish. {{include lib/snippets/secret-scan-patterns.md}}

5. Write the updated body back:

If GitHub:

gh pr edit --body-file /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md

If GitLab: Read the contents of /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md using the Read tool, then pass it to glab mr update using a heredoc to avoid shell metacharacter issues:

glab mr update -d "$(cat <<'MRBODY'
<paste the file contents here>
MRBODY
)"

6. Clean up the tempfile:

rm -f /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md

7. If gh pr view / glab mr view fails (no PR/MR exists): skip with message "No PR/MR found — skipping body update."
8. If gh pr edit / glab mr update fails: warn "Could not update PR/MR body — documentation changes are in the commit." and continue.

PR/MR title sync (idempotent, always-on):

PR titles must always start with v<VERSION> — same rule as /ship. If Step 8 bumped VERSION after /ship had already created the PR, the title is now stale. This sub-step fixes it.

1. Read the current VERSION:

V=$(cat VERSION 2>/dev/null | tr -d '[:space:]')

If VERSION does not exist or is empty, skip this sub-step entirely.

2. Read the current PR/MR title:

If GitHub:

CURRENT_TITLE=$(gh pr view --json title -q .title 2>/dev/null || true)

If GitLab:

CURRENT_TITLE=$(glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/null | jq -r .title 2>/dev/null || true)

If CURRENT_TITLE is empty (no open PR/MR), skip with message "No PR/MR found — skipping title sync."

3. Compute the corrected title. Three cases:

# Case 1: title already starts with "v<V>" or "v<V> " or "v<V>:" — no-op
# Case 2: title starts with a "vX.Y.Z[.W][ :]" prefix that doesn't match — replace
# Case 3: title has no version prefix — prepend "v<V> "
if printf '%s' "$CURRENT_TITLE" | grep -qE "^v${V}([[:space:]]|:|$)"; then
  NEW_TITLE="$CURRENT_TITLE"
elif printf '%s' "$CURRENT_TITLE" | grep -qE '^v[0-9]+(\.[0-9]+){2,3}([[:space:]]|:|$)'; then
  NEW_TITLE=$(printf '%s' "$CURRENT_TITLE" | sed -E "s/^v[0-9]+(\.[0-9]+){2,3}/v${V}/")
else
  NEW_TITLE="v${V} ${CURRENT_TITLE}"
fi

4. If NEW_TITLE differs from CURRENT_TITLE, update it:

If GitHub:

gh pr edit --title "$NEW_TITLE"

If GitLab:

glab mr update -t "$NEW_TITLE"

5. If the edit command fails: warn "Could not update PR/MR title — documentation changes are still in the commit." and continue. Do not block on title sync failure.

Structured doc health summary (final output):

Output a scannable summary showing every documentation file's status:

Documentation health:
  README.md       [status] ([details])
  ARCHITECTURE.md [status] ([details])
  CONTRIBUTING.md [status] ([details])
  CHANGELOG.md    [status] ([details])
  TODOS.md        [status] ([details])
  VERSION         [status] ([details])

Where status is one of:

• Updated — with description of what changed
• Current — no changes needed
• Voice polished — wording adjusted
• Not bumped — user chose to skip
• Already bumped — version was set by /ship
• Skipped — file does not exist

If the coverage map from Step 1.5 identified any gaps, append:

Documentation coverage:
  [entity]         [reference] [how-to] [tutorial] [explanation]
  /new-skill       ✅          ❌       ❌         ❌
  --new-flag       ✅          ✅       ❌         ❌

Diagram drift:
  ARCHITECTURE.md: "FooProcessor" renamed to "BarProcessor" in code — diagram may be stale

If all coverage is complete and no diagrams drifted, output: "Coverage: all shipped features have adequate documentation."

---

Important Rules

• Read before editing. Always read the full content of a file before modifying it.
• Never clobber CHANGELOG. Polish wording only. Never delete, replace, or regenerate entries.
• Never bump VERSION silently. Always ask. Even if already bumped, check whether it covers the full scope of changes.
• Be explicit about what changed. Every edit gets a one-line summary.
• Generic heuristics, not project-specific. The audit checks work on any repo.
• Discoverability matters. Every doc file should be reachable from README or CLAUDE.md.
• Coverage map informs, never generates. The Diataxis coverage map flags gaps for the PR body and future work. It does NOT auto-generate missing documentation pages or sections. When gaps are found, suggest /document-generate as the follow-up skill.
• Diagram drift is advisory. Flag stale architecture diagrams in the PR body but do not auto-edit ASCII art or Mermaid blocks — they require human judgment to update correctly.
• Voice: friendly, user-forward, not obscure. Write like you're explaining to a smart person who hasn't seen the code.