Skip to main content

write-design-docs

Write, revise, or review software design documents using Malte Ubl's "Design Docs at Google" guidance. Use when Codex needs to draft a design doc, technical design, RFC, engineering review doc, architecture proposal, mini design doc, or design-doc review focused on context, goals, non-goals, trade-offs, alternatives, cross-cutting concerns, review lifecycle, and deciding whether a design doc is warranted.

소스 정보

저장소
pproenca/dot-skills
최근 소스 활동
2026년 7월 5일 07:23
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
215
포크
19

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

파일 탐색기
4 개 파일

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
write-design-docs
description
Write, revise, or review software design documents using Malte Ubl's "Design Docs at Google" guidance. Use when Codex needs to draft a design doc, technical design, RFC, engineering review doc, architecture proposal, mini design doc, or design-doc review focused on context, goals, non-goals, trade-offs, alternatives, cross-cutting concerns, review lifecycle, and deciding whether a design doc is warranted.
# Write Design Docs ## Core Workflow Use the design doc as a problem-solving and consensus-building tool, not as an implementation manual. 1. Decide whether a design doc is warranted. - Write one when the software design is ambiguous, complex, contentious, cross-functional, likely to benefit from senior review, or valuable as organizational memory. - Prefer a short note, issue, or direct implementation when the solution is obvious and there are no meaningful trade-offs. - Prefer a mini design doc for small but non-obvious changes. 2. Gather the minimum context needed to make the design concrete. - Identify the problem, existing landscape, constraints, stakeholders, and decision deadline. - Ask focused questions only when missing information would materially change goals, non-goals, or trade-offs. - State assumptions explicitly when proceeding with incomplete information. 3. Draft around decisions and trade-offs. - Start with objective context and scope. - Define goals and non-goals as explicit boundaries. - Present the selected design from overview to detail. - Explain why the selected design best satisfies the goals under the known constraints. - Compare realistic alternatives, including why they were not selected. - Cover cross-cutting concerns such as security, privacy, reliability, observability, migrations, and operations when relevant. 4. Keep the document readable. - Optimize for busy reviewers who need to understand the decision, not every implementation detail. - Link to detailed requirements, prototypes, schemas, code, or prior docs instead of copying them wholesale. - Include diagrams or compact API/data sketches only when they clarify the design trade-offs. - Avoid large code blocks unless explaining a novel algorithm. 5. Shape the lifecycle. - Mark the document status: draft, in review, accepted, implementing, superseded, or archived. - Suggest the smallest useful review group first, then wider review when the design is stable. - Update the doc while the system has not shipped if implementation reveals wrong assumptions or changed requirements. - Link amendments or follow-up docs when the original doc diverges from reality. ## Reference Read [references/design-doc-guidance.md](references/design-doc-guidance.md) before drafting or reviewing a substantive design doc. Use it for the article-derived template, decision checklist, section guidance, and review rubric.
GitHub에서 보기