메뉴
Use when evaluating documentation quality — check completeness, accuracy, freshness, and adherence to project documentation standards.
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 generating or auditing documentation in Docusaurus format — covers config, directory structure, frontmatter conventions, and build commands.
Use when generating or auditing documentation in MkDocs format — covers config, directory structure, frontmatter conventions, and build commands.
Use when generating or auditing documentation in plain Markdown format — covers config, directory structure, frontmatter conventions, and build commands.
Use when generating or auditing documentation in Sphinx format — covers config, directory structure, frontmatter conventions, and build commands.
Use when generating or auditing documentation in VitePress format — covers config, directory structure, frontmatter conventions, and build commands.
Use when writing, auditing, or generating documentation for projects in unsupported languages — covers docstring conventions, API doc extraction, and generic heuristic patterns.
| name | standards |
| description | Use when evaluating documentation quality — check completeness, accuracy, freshness, and adherence to project documentation standards. |
| Tag | Meaning | When to use |
|---|---|---|
CRITICAL | Documentation is dangerously wrong — will mislead users into bugs or security issues | API signature changed but docs show old signature; security-relevant parameter undocumented |
HIGH | Documentation is missing or significantly stale — users will struggle | Public function has no docs; doc references deleted parameter |
MEDIUM | Documentation exists but is incomplete or outdated in non-critical ways | Missing examples; parameter description vague; minor version drift |
LOW | Documentation quality issue — cosmetic or style | Typos; inconsistent heading levels; missing period at end of sentence |
INFO | Observation, not a problem | Unusually thorough docs; suggestion for improvement |
Every finding reported by an agent MUST use this structure:
### [SEVERITY] Short title
- **File**: `path/to/file`
- **Line**: 42 (if applicable)
- **Related doc**: `docs/path/to/doc.md` (if applicable)
- **Detail**: One-paragraph explanation of the issue.
- **Suggestion**: Concrete action to fix it.
Every agent output MUST begin with:
## <Agent Name> Report
**Scanned**: <number> files
**Findings**: <number> (Critical: N, High: N, Medium: N, Low: N, Info: N)
**Timestamp**: <ISO 8601>
Coverage is reported as a percentage:
coverage% = (documented_public_symbols / total_public_symbols) × 100
A "documented" symbol has at minimum:
Staleness is measured by comparing:
code_last_modified: last git commit touching the source filedoc_last_modified: last git commit touching the corresponding doc fileA doc is stale when code_last_modified - doc_last_modified > stalenessThresholdDays (from config).
Quality is rated 0–100 based on:
| Factor | Weight | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Completeness | 30% | All public APIs documented |
| Accuracy | 30% | Docs match current code |
| Freshness | 20% | No stale docs beyond threshold |
| Readability | 10% | Clear language, good structure |
| Examples | 10% | Working code examples present |