japanese-tech-writing

name	japanese-tech-writing
description	Use when Japanese technical prose is drafted or revised in this repo: a PR title/body in 日本語, a Japanese review comment or reply, a Japanese issue, or Japanese content under plans/, reports/, or a README/doc. Applies house norms for formatting, paragraph/argument structure, rigor, reader load, restraint, and banning LLM-ish phrasing. Do not use for commit messages, code, identifiers, code comments, or English prose.
metadata	{"short-description":"Japanese technical writing conventions","requires":["references/japanese-tech-writing.md"]}

Purpose

Use this skill to keep Japanese technical prose in this repository aligned with a single house style for formatting, argument rigor, and restraint. The norms are adapted (not copied) from an external Japanese technical-writing gist; the operational checklist and its provenance note live in references/japanese-tech-writing.md.

When to use

Use when at least one trigger applies:

• Drafting or revising a PR title/body written in 日本語.
• Writing or replying to a Japanese code-review comment.
• Writing a Japanese GitHub issue.
• Writing or revising Japanese content under plans/, reports/, or a Japanese README/doc.

Scope boundaries

• Applies to Japanese technical prose only: PR titles/bodies, review comments and replies, issues, plans/, reports/, and Japanese README/docs.
• Commit messages stay English (existing repository convention) — out of scope.
• Code, identifiers, and code comments are out of scope (owned by other skills).
• English-language documents are out of scope.
• PR bodies use ordinary Markdown paragraphs, not one-sentence-per-line; the 一文一行 formatting rule applies only to source Markdown docs (plans/, reports/, README/docs). Every other rule (argument rigor, redundancy removal, no LLM-ish phrasing, heading conventions) still applies to PR bodies.

How to use

0. Open references/japanese-tech-writing.md. Where interpretation conflicts, the source gist takes precedence per its provenance note.
1. Identify the artifact type (PR body, review comment, issue, or doc) and apply the matching formatting rule: one-sentence-per-line for docs, ordinary paragraphs for PR bodies.
2. Draft or revise against the reference checklist. On a revision pass, prioritize argument rigor and paragraph structure first, then LLM-ish phrasing and redundancy, then formatting/heading polish.
3. Re-read once for reader honesty: no hidden artificiality, no unverified claim stated as settled fact.

Output expectation

• The Japanese prose follows the reference checklist; for non-trivial edits, note which checklist sections you actively revised for.
• Any rule you deliberately did not apply is named with a one-line reason.
• For PR bodies, confirm ordinary paragraph formatting (not one-sentence-per-line) while every non-formatting rule still holds.