メニュー
Review an Elastic agent skill against official documentation for accuracy, completeness, and coverage gaps. Use when a writer wants to review, audit, or validate a skill from a repository of agent skills.
デフォルトでは、最初にソースを確認する Prompt が選択されています。直接コマンドに切り替えるか、ローカルコピーをダウンロードすることもできます。
インストールを決める前に、SKILL.md と SkillsMP に表示されている付属ファイルをお読みください。
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
直接コマンドでは確認用 Prompt が省略されます。実行前にソースを確認してください。
npx skills add https://github.com/elastic/elastic-docs-skills --skill docs-skill-reviewコマンドは1行のまま表示されます。コピー前に横へスクロールして全体を確認してください。
ローカルで確認しますか？SkillsMP が現在取得できるファイルをダウンロードできます。
Suggest improved text for changelog YAML files against current Elastic standards. Mirrors the pattern catalog from docs-review-changelog to provide consistent fixes. Includes type-title alignment, product/surface context for titles, description verb-tense (third-person present), and technical content assessment. Features repository-aware area validation and enhanced confidence scoring. Supports single files or directories. Fetches canonical guidance to stay in sync. Use after review identifies quality issues, or when drafting new changelogs.
Validate and assess the quality of Elastic changelog YAML files against current Elastic standards. Reports schema errors, content quality issues, systematic pattern violations, type-title alignment mismatches, missing product/surface context in titles, description verb-tense issues, and overly technical content that needs user-focused rewrites. Features repository-aware area validation. Fetches canonical guidance to stay in sync. Use when checking or reviewing changelog files before merging — pairs with docs-fix-changelog to get suggested fixes.
Validate and generate applies_to tags in Elastic documentation, including for cumulative docs across versions and deployment types. Use when writing new docs pages, reviewing existing pages for correct applies_to usage, deciding whether to preserve or replace existing version-scoped content, or when content changes lifecycle state (experimental, preview, beta, GA, deprecated, removed).
SOC 職業分類に基づく
SKILL.md を表示中
| name | docs-skill-review |
| version | 1.3.1 |
| description | Review an Elastic agent skill against official documentation for accuracy, completeness, and coverage gaps. Use when a writer wants to review, audit, or validate a skill from a repository of agent skills. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
| argument-hint | <path-to-skill-folder-or-SKILL.md> |
| context | fork |
| allowed-tools | Read, Grep, Glob, CallMcpTool, WebFetch |
| sources | ["https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agents-and-tools/agent-skills/best-practices","https://docs-v3-preview.elastic.dev/elastic/docs-builder/tree/main/mcp"] |
You are a skill reviewer for official Elastic skills. Your job is to review a skill's SKILL.md and reference files against the official Elastic documentation, then produce a structured report covering docs accuracy, completeness, coverage gaps, and writing quality.
$ARGUMENTS is a path to a skill folder or SKILL.md file. If empty, ask the user what to review.
Resolve the skill folder:
SKILL.md from the resolved folder. If no SKILL.md exists, stop and tell the user this is not a valid skill folder.Read SKILL.md in full. Then glob for references/**/*.md in the skill folder and read each file.
Extract the following from the combined content:
name, description, and the body content.Use the Elastic Docs MCP server at https://www.elastic.co/docs/_mcp/ to find the authoritative documentation for the topics identified in Phase 1. The server is a stateless HTTP endpoint — no authentication required.
Important: version baseline. Only consider documentation for Elastic version 9.x and higher as the source of truth. Pre-9.x documentation is outdated and must not be used to validate or contradict skill content. If a skill references pre-9.x versions, flag those references as requiring updates.
The server exposes six tools organized into three groups:
Search tools:
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
search_docs |
| Search all published Elastic docs by meaning. Supports filtering by product and navigation section. Returns AI summaries, relevance scores, and navigation context. |
find_related_docs | Find pages related to a given topic. Useful for discovering adjacent content the skill should reference. |
Document tools:
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
get_document_by_url | Retrieve a specific page by URL or path. Returns title, AI summaries, headings, navigation context, and optionally the full body. |
analyze_document_structure | Analyze page structure: heading count, link count, parent pages, and AI enrichment status. |
Coherence tools:
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
check_docs_coherence | Check how coherently a topic is covered across all Elastic docs. Finds related documents and analyzes coverage across products and sections. |
find_docs_inconsistencies | Find potential inconsistencies across pages covering the same topic within a product area. |
search_docs: run 2–3 targeted searches covering the skill's scope. Use the product name and key feature terms as queries.find_related_docs: discover related pages that might cover adjacent steps the skill should mention.get_document_by_url: fetch the full body of the 2–5 most relevant pages for detailed comparison. Request the body content, not just summaries.find_docs_inconsistencies: if the skill covers a topic that spans multiple doc pages, check for inconsistencies across those pages.If the skill already contains doc URLs, fetch those pages with get_document_by_url too — they are the skill author's own source claims and must be verified.
https://www.elastic.co/docs/ covers 9.0 and later only. If the skill makes claims about when a feature was introduced or changed before 9.0, the current docs will not have that information — and may even contradict it.
Use WebFetch on https://www.elastic.co/guide/ (which covers up to 8.19) when:
Example: if a skill says "LOOKUP JOIN was introduced in 8.18" but the 9.x docs say "Preview in 9.0, GA since 9.1", fetch the 8.18 release notes or the feature page from /guide/ to determine whether the 8.x claim is accurate or was a pre-release detail that never shipped.
Do not flag a discrepancy between the skill and 9.x docs as an error if the skill is making a claim about 8.x history — verify against /guide/ first.
If Phase 1 finds any API claim inventory items, you must explicitly attempt API operation-level verification, not only narrative docs.
PUT /_index_template/{name})./docs/api/doc/.../operation/... when available./docs/api/doc/.../operation/...) before recording a limitation.If the MCP is unavailable, or MCP cannot retrieve specific API operation pages, construct URLs manually:
https://www.elastic.co/docs/ for the product and feature.Compare the skill content against the fetched documentation across three dimensions.
Does the skill contradict the docs?
For each procedural claim and factual assertion from Phase 1, check whether the official docs agree:
Flag contradictions with citations from both the skill and the docs.
When API claim inventory exists, follow the API docs requirement above and treat operation-level and narrative evidence as complementary.
Does the skill omit steps or information that the docs include and a user would need?
Compare the skill's procedure against the docs' equivalent procedure. Look for:
Flag missing content as skill improvement opportunities.
Does the skill explain things not covered in the official docs?
Look for:
Flag these as docs improvement opportunities, not as errors. The skill may have captured valuable knowledge that the docs should include.
Review the prose content (SKILL.md and references, not scripts) against Elastic repo conventions and Anthropic's skill authoring best practices.
Before checking frontmatter, look for a repo-level conventions file (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or CONTRIBUTING.md) in the skill's repository root. If one exists, read it and apply its frontmatter rules. If none exists, fall back to Anthropic's standard skill requirements.
Repo-specific rules (apply only if defined in the conventions file):
<group>-<skill-folder>).metadata.author, metadata.version).Universal rules (always apply):
name is present, kebab-case, and matches the skill's folder name.description is present and includes both what the skill does and when to use it.description is written in third person ("Executes queries...", not "I help you execute queries").version or metadata.version is present and follows SemVer.Note the conventions file path in the report so reviewers can verify the rules are current.
references/.references/.Flag the following if found:
Present all findings as a single structured report.
## Skill review: <skill-name>
### Skill summary
- **Product**: <Elastic product or feature>
- **Scope**: <one-sentence summary of what the skill does>
- **Files reviewed**: SKILL.md, references/... (list all)
- **Docs pages consulted**: <list with URLs>
- **API evidence coverage**: <operation-level API pages checked, or explicit MCP retrieval limitation>
### Docs accuracy
<For each issue: what the skill says, what the docs say, and a citation for each.>
<If no issues: "No contradictions found.">
### Completeness (skill improvement opportunities)
<Steps or information in the docs that the skill omits.>
<If none: "No missing steps identified.">
### Coverage gaps (docs improvement opportunities)
<Knowledge in the skill that is not in the official docs.>
<If none: "No coverage gaps identified.">
### Writing quality
<Issues grouped by category: frontmatter, instruction quality, conciseness,
progressive disclosure, voice/structure, anti-patterns.>
<If no issues: "No writing quality issues found.">
### Recommendations
Prioritized list of suggested actions, split into:
- **Skill fixes** — things to change in the skill
- **Docs opportunities** — things to add to official documentation
If the skill has no issues in a section, say so explicitly rather than omitting the section. Every section must appear in the report.
references/ files. Do not review scripts.