원클릭으로
ensure-docs
Verify documentation coverage and generate missing docs interactively
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
메뉴
Verify documentation coverage and generate missing docs interactively
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Use when you need a bite-sized, TDD-driven implementation plan but do NOT have a brainstorm-beagle spec to plan against. quick-plan reconstructs intent from the current conversation, fans out domain-expert exploration subagents across the codebase, and synthesizes the same plan format write-plan produces — without requiring `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`. Triggers on: "quick plan", "plan this out", "plan what we just discussed", "turn this into an implementation plan", "plan this without a spec", "I don't have a spec, just plan it", "write-plan but no spec". Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants an implementation or TDD plan and there is no spec to plan against — even if they just say "plan it" after discussing a feature. Writes to `.beagle/plans/<slug>/plan.md`. If a finalized spec already exists at `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md`, prefer write-plan. Does NOT brainstorm specs, write code, or execute the plan — produces the plan document (and an optional handoff prompt) only.
Use when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: "brainstorm this", "I have an idea for...", "help me think through this project", "what should I build", "spec this out". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews — produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
Use as the follow-up to brainstorm-beagle when a spec has an Open Questions section (or quietly carries latent gaps) that need closing before planning or implementation can begin. Triggers on: "resolve the open questions", "close the gaps in this spec", "research the open items", "finalize my spec", "make this spec implementation-ready", "answer the TBDs". Also triggers whenever the user points at a brainstorm-beagle spec and asks for research, proposals, or answers to unresolved items. Orchestrates parallel research subagents when available (falls back to inline sequential research otherwise), proposes answers one at a time for user approval, then rewrites the spec in place so it arrives at planning with no known gaps. Does NOT write code, design implementation, or create plans — it only produces a complete spec.
Use when you have a finalized brainstorm-beagle spec at `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/spec.md` and need a bite-sized, TDD-driven implementation plan before any code is written. Triggers on: "write a plan", "plan this spec", "turn the spec into a plan", "now plan the implementation", "write-plan". Reads the spec, designs the file structure, decomposes work into 2-5 minute TDD steps with exact paths and commands, self-reviews against the spec, gets user approval, then writes to `.beagle/concepts/<slug>/plan.md` and offers to generate an execution handoff prompt via the subagent-prompt skill. Does NOT brainstorm specs, write code, or execute the plan — produces the plan document (and an optional handoff prompt) only.
Core technical documentation writing principles for voice, tone, structure, and LLM-friendly patterns. Use when writing or reviewing any documentation.
Generate first-draft technical documentation from code analysis
| name | ensure-docs |
| description | Verify documentation coverage and generate missing docs interactively |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Verify documentation coverage across a codebase, report gaps, and generate missing docs. If the agent supports subagents, dispatch one verifier per detected language in parallel; otherwise run the same per-language verification sequentially — the output is identical either way.
Coverage has two complementary lenses, and a healthy project needs both:
Complete steps in order. Do not advance until each step’s Pass is satisfied.
Language detection — Follow Phase 1 (language detection) in references/workflow.md.
Load standards — Read the sections for your detected languages (language standards, verifier prompts, consolidation format) in the same reference file.
Verification — Verify each qualifying language using the verifier prompts and JSON output shape in the reference (Phase 2). If the agent supports subagents, run one verifier per language in parallel; otherwise run them sequentially.
language, files_scanned, and findings (array, possibly empty).Diataxis balance check — Run the Diataxis type balance check against the project's existing docs (e.g. a docs/ tree, README, or wiki).
Consolidated report — Merge results per Phase 3 (summary table, severity grouping, detailed findings if requested). Include the Diataxis balance alongside symbol coverage.
Generation — Only if --report-only is not set: offer choices per Phase 4; apply doc edits only after an explicit user choice to generate. For a missing Diataxis type, route generation through draft-docs for the relevant type rather than generating inline.
Post-edit verification — After any generation, run or offer the linter commands in Phase 5 of the reference for languages you changed, when those tools exist in the repo.
N/A with a one-line reason (e.g. tool not configured); remaining issues are listed or cleared.Survey the project's prose documentation (a docs/ tree, README, wiki, or doc site) and classify what exists into the four Diataxis types. Use the compass to classify — action or cognition? acquisition or application? — per docs-style/references/diataxis-compass.md.
Report the balance as a table:
| Type | Present? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Tutorial (learning) | yes / no / thin | e.g. "No getting-started / first-project guide" |
| How-To (tasks) | yes / no / thin | e.g. "Several task guides under docs/how-to/" |
| Reference (lookup) | yes / no / thin | e.g. "API reference generated, but no CLI reference" |
| Explanation (understanding) | yes / no / thin | e.g. "No architecture / design-rationale docs" |
Flag, in priority order:
Do not propose generating empty skeletons for missing types. Following the Diataxis "work by improvement" principle, recommend the single highest-value document to add or fix next, and offer to draft it via draft-docs.
--report-only to skip generation.