with one click
cognitive-doc-design
Design docs that reduce cognitive load. Trigger: writing guides, READMEs, RFCs, onboarding, architecture, or review-facing docs.
Menu
Design docs that reduce cognitive load. Trigger: writing guides, READMEs, RFCs, onboarding, architecture, or review-facing docs.
Shared SDD references for installed skills. Not invokable.
Archive a completed SDD change by syncing delta specs. Trigger: orchestrator launches archive after implementation and verification.
Write SDD delta specs with requirements and scenarios. Trigger: orchestrator launches spec work for a change.
Create an SDD change proposal with intent, scope, and approach. Trigger: orchestrator launches proposal work for a change.
Write warm, direct collaboration comments. Trigger: PR feedback, issue replies, reviews, Slack messages, or GitHub comments.
Create the SDD technical design and architecture approach. Trigger: orchestrator launches design for a change.
| name | cognitive-doc-design |
| description | Design docs that reduce cognitive load. Trigger: writing guides, READMEs, RFCs, onboarding, architecture, or review-facing docs. |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| metadata | {"author":"gentleman-programming","version":"1.0"} |
Load this skill when creating or editing documentation that people need to understand quickly, retain, or use during review.
Use it especially for:
| Pattern | Rule |
|---|---|
| Lead with the answer | Put the decision, action, or outcome first. Context comes after. |
| Progressive disclosure | Start with the happy path, then add details, edge cases, and references. |
| Chunking | Group related information into small sections. Keep flat lists short. |
| Signposting | Use headings, labels, callouts, and summaries so readers know where they are. |
| Recognition over recall | Prefer tables, checklists, examples, and templates over prose that must be remembered. |
| Review empathy | Design docs so reviewers can verify intent without reconstructing the whole story. |
Use this default structure unless the repo already provides a stronger template:
# <Outcome-oriented title>
<One paragraph: what changed, who it helps, and why it matters.>
## Quick path
1. <First action>
2. <Second action>
3. <Verification or expected result>
## Details
| Topic | Decision |
|-------|----------|
| <area> | <concise explanation> |
## Checklist
- [ ] <Reader can confirm this>
- [ ] <Reader can confirm that>
## Next step
<Link or action that continues the workflow.>
When documenting a PR, reduce reviewer burnout by making the review path explicit:
# Check markdown files changed in the current branch
git diff --name-only -- '*.md'
# Inspect PR changed-line count for cognitive load
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json additions,deletions,changedFiles