dev-document-review

name	dev-document_review
description	Systematically review technical documentation for quality issues. Use when (1) user asks to check/review a document, (2) mentions consistency/accuracy/errors in docs, (3) needs feedback on technical writing quality.

Document Review Skill

Objectives

Review technical documentation across 7 dimensions: Consistency, Accuracy, Clarity, Conciseness, Errors, Organization, and Content Relevance. Identify unnecessary content and provide actionable feedback with prioritized fixes.

Core Principle: 简单就是美 (Simplicity is Beauty)

• Less is more: Remove everything that doesn't serve the core purpose
• One concept, one explanation: No redundant content
• Essential only: If readers can succeed without it, remove it

Review Dimensions

1. Consistency (一致性)

• Terminology: Same concepts use same terms throughout
• Formatting: Uniform heading levels, code blocks, lists
• Naming: Variable/function names match actual code
• Notation: Mathematical symbols used consistently (e.g., γ always for gamma)

2. Accuracy (准确性)

• Technical Facts: Formulas, algorithms, concepts are correct
• Code Correctness: Snippets match actual implementation
• References: Links, file paths exist and are valid
• Examples: Produce stated outputs

3. Clarity (理解性)

• Explanations: Complex concepts broken down clearly
• Examples: Abstract ideas paired with concrete examples
• Flow: Logical progression from simple to complex
• Jargon: Technical terms explained when first introduced

4. Conciseness (精简度)

• Redundancy: No unnecessary repetition
• Relevance: All content serves a purpose
• Efficiency: Key points easy to find

5. Errors (错误检测)

• Spelling/Grammar: No typos or grammatical errors
• Syntax: Markdown renders properly
• Broken Elements: Dead links, missing images, broken code blocks

6. Organization (组织结构)

• Hierarchy: Clear section organization
• Navigation: TOC present, headings logical
• Grouping: Related content together
• Flow: Prerequisites before advanced topics

7. Content Relevance (内容相关性) 🆕

• Core vs Peripheral: Distinguish essential content from nice-to-have
• Redundancy Detection: Identify duplicate explanations across sections
• Scope Alignment: Flag content beyond document's stated objectives
• Unused Concepts: Identify explained concepts never applied in practice
• Bloat Indicators: Multiple tables/examples explaining same concept

Content Pruning Guidelines

Philosophy: 简单就是美 (Simplicity is Beauty)

When identifying unnecessary content, ask: "Can readers succeed without this?" If yes, remove it.

1. Duplicate Explanations: Same concept explained in multiple sections

   • Keep the best explanation, reference it elsewhere
   • Example: Bellman equation explained in both Part 3 and Part 4
   • Principle: One concept = One explanation

2. Unused Theory: Concepts explained but never used in practice

   • Example: Transition probability P(s'|s,a) in deterministic environment
   • Action: Remove or move to "Advanced Topics" appendix
   • Principle: If not used, not needed

3. Excessive Tables: Multiple tables showing similar information

   • Keep the clearest one, remove redundant tables
   • Example: Three different comparison tables in introduction
   • Principle: One table is better than three

4. Over-detailed Symbols: Symbol tables with unused notation

   • Only include symbols actually used in the document
   • Example: General math symbols (Σ, ∞) when not used
   • Principle: Essential symbols only

5. Scope Creep: Advanced topics beyond document's learning objectives

   • Example: Deep Q-Networks in a basic Q-Learning tutorial
   • Action: Move to separate "Further Reading" document
   • Principle: Stay focused on core objectives

6. Verbose Examples: Too many examples for simple concepts

   • One clear example is usually enough
   • Multiple examples only for complex/critical concepts
   • Principle: Quality over quantity

7. Backup Files: Keep only the final, best version

   • Delete verbose backups, drafts, and alternative versions
   • Principle: 简单就是美 - One clean version is enough

Review Process

1. Initial Scan: Read title, TOC, skim headings to understand structure and objectives
2. Systematic Review: Go through each dimension checking against criteria
3. Content Relevance Check: Identify sections that don't serve core objectives
4. Generate Report: Use output format below with pruning recommendations

Output Format

# Document Review Report

**Document**: [filename]
**Reviewed**: [date]

## Summary

[1-2 sentence overall assessment]

## Strengths ✅

- [What works well - 3-5 points]

## Issues Found 🔍

### Critical Issues ⚠️

1. **[Dimension]**: [Issue with location]
   - **Impact**: [Why this matters]
   - **Fix**: [How to resolve]

### Major Issues ⚡

1. **[Dimension]**: [Issue]
   - **Fix**: [Recommendation]

### Minor Issues 📝

1. **[Dimension]**: [Issue]
   - **Fix**: [Quick fix]

## Priority Fixes (Top 3)

1. [Most important fix]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]

## Content Pruning Recommendations 🆕

### High Priority Removal (Redundant/Unused)

1. **[Section]**: [What to remove]
   - **Reason**: [Why it's unnecessary]
   - **Impact**: [How much shorter document becomes]

### Medium Priority Simplification

1. **[Section]**: [What to simplify]
   - **Current**: [Current state]
   - **Suggested**: [Simplified version]

### Optional Content (Move to Appendix)

1. **[Section]**: [Advanced/tangential content]
 : [Why it's optional]
 : [Where to move it]



[Specific findings for each dimension including Content Relevance]

Key Instructions

1. Be Specific: Point to exact locations (line numbers, section names)
2. Be Constructive: Suggest improvements, not just criticisms
3. Prioritize: Focus on high-impact fixes first
4. Verify Code: Check that code snippets match actual implementation files
5. Test Links: Verify all file paths and URLs are valid
6. Check Consistency: Ensure terminology matches between code and docs
7. Identify Bloat: Flag redundant, unused, or out-of-scope content
8. Suggest Pruning: Provide specific sections to remove or simplify
9. Embrace Simplicity: 简单就是美 - Always prefer the simpler, clearer version

Common Issues & Quick Fixes

Issue	Example	Fix
Inconsistent terminology	"epoch" vs "episode"	Choose one term, use consistently
Code mismatch	Doc shows epochs=500, code has episodes=50	Update doc to match code
Missing context	Using γ without explanation	Define: "γ (gamma, discount factor)"
Broken references	Link to non-existent file	Verify path, update to correct location
Poor structure	Advanced before basics	Reorganize: Overview → Basics → Advanced
Duplicate content	Same concept in Part 3 and Part 4	Keep best version, reference elsewhere
Unused theory	P(s'|s,a) in deterministic environment	Remove or move to appendix
Excessive tables	Three comparison tables in intro	Keep clearest one, remove others

Pruning Decision Framework

Use this framework to decide if content should be removed:

Is this content...
├─ Used in practice/code?
│  ├─ NO → Consider removing
│  └─ YES → Keep
├─ Explained elsewhere?
│  ├─ YES → Remove duplicate, add reference
│  └─ NO → Keep
├─ Within document scope?
│  ├─ NO → Move to appendix or separate doc
│  └─ YES → Keep
└─ Essential for understanding?
   ├─ NO → Consider removing
   └─ YES → Keep but simplify if verbose

Validation

Before finalizing review:

• All issues have specific locations
• Fixes are actionable and clear
• Priority ranking makes sense
• Strengths are acknowledged
• Report is concise and scannable
• Pruning recommendations are justified
• Estimated length reduction calculated
• Final version embraces 简单就是美 (simplicity is beauty)

Simplicity Checklist

After pruning, verify the document follows these principles:

• One Purpose: Document has a clear, single objective
• One Explanation: Each concept explained once, referenced elsewhere
• Essential Only: Every section serves the core purpose
• No Redundancy: No duplicate tables, examples, or explanations
• Clean Structure: Clear hierarchy, easy navigation
• Minimal Versions: Only one final version, no backups in repo

Remember: 简单就是美 - If readers can succeed without it, remove it.

For detailed review guidelines and examples: See references/review-guide.md (if needed)