9.3 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| updating-documentation-for-changes | Use before committing staged changes when you need to verify all related documentation is current - systematically checks README, CLAUDE.md, CHANGELOG, API docs, package metadata, and cross-references rather than spot-checking only obvious files |
Updating Documentation for Changes
Overview
Before committing staged changes, systematically verify ALL documentation that might reference those changes.
The problem: We naturally check the "obvious" doc (README.md) but miss CLAUDE.md, CHANGELOG, API documentation, package metadata, and cross-references in related docs.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- You have staged changes ready to commit
- You're about to create a PR
- You've modified functionality, added features, or changed behavior
- Any code change that users or other agents interact with
Required trigger: Before every commit with functional changes.
Core Principle
This skill checks documentation consistency for STAGED changes only.
Do NOT stage additional files during this process. Only verify if documentation for your staged changes is current.
The Systematic Documentation Sweep
Follow this checklist in order. No skipping "obvious" items.
1. Identify What's Staged
git diff --staged --name-only
git diff --staged
Note: What was added? Modified? What does it affect?
If nothing is staged: Stop. Tell user to stage their changes first, then return to this skill.
2. Core Documentation Files (Check if they exist)
Check EVERY one that exists in the repo (no rationalization):
- README.md (root and subdirectories)
- CLAUDE.md (project conventions, architecture, patterns)
- DESIGN_DOC.md or ARCHITECTURE.md (system design)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (contribution guidelines)
- API.md or docs/api/ (API documentation)
- CHANGELOG.md or HISTORY.md (version history)
This list is not comprehensive. If the project has other documentation, check those too. Examples: TESTING.md, DEPLOYMENT.md, SECURITY.md, project-specific guides.
If a core doc doesn't exist: Note its absence but don't create it as part of this commit.
IMPORTANT: When you find a documentation file, read it in its entirety. Do not skim or spot-check - read the complete file to understand its full context and identify all potential references to your changes.
3. Project-Specific Documentation
Check documentation specific to this project type:
For libraries/packages:
- Package metadata (package.json, pyproject.toml, setup.py, Cargo.toml - check if exports/APIs changed)
- docs/ directory (API docs, guides, examples)
For web services:
- OpenAPI/Swagger specs (if API changed)
- docker-compose.yaml comments (if deployment changed)
- Config examples (if config structure changed)
For other projects:
- Identify key documentation by searching for *.md files
- Check files in
docs/,documentation/, or similar directories
Consistency check: If you find multiple related files (like package.json and README.md version numbers), verify they're consistent.
4. Related Documentation Search
Search for files that might reference your changes:
# Search for direct feature name
grep -r "exact-feature-name" --include="*.md" --include="*.json"
# Search for related terms (if changing auth, search: auth, login, session)
grep -r "related-concept" --include="*.md" --include="*.json"
# Search for command names if you modified commands
grep -r "command-name" --include="*.md" --include="*.json"
Check cross-references:
- Do other documentation files reference this feature?
- Does the architecture documentation describe this pattern?
- Do examples or tutorials use this functionality?
- Are there related features that should be updated together?
Search depth limit: Check one level of cross-references. If doc A references feature B, check doc B. Don't recursively check doc B's references.
5. Determine Update Significance
Update higher-level docs (README, package metadata, CHANGELOG) if your change:
- Adds new user-facing commands, flags, features, or APIs
- Changes existing behavior in a way users will notice
- Removes functionality mentioned in high-level descriptions
- Expands core capabilities described in the summary
- Modifies configuration structure or deployment steps
Do NOT update higher-level docs if your change:
- Adds implementation details or internal techniques
- Improves existing behavior without changing interface
- Refactors internal code without external impact
- Adds examples or clarifications to existing docs
- Fixes bugs without changing documented behavior
When in doubt: Check if a user relying on current high-level docs would be surprised by your change. Surprised = update needed.
6. Update What's Outdated
For each outdated doc:
- Read the entire file (not just the section that mentions it)
- Update to match new behavior
- Check examples still work
- Verify cross-references are accurate
Stage updates after sweep: Note what needs updating during the sweep, then stage those documentation changes after you've completed the full checklist.
7. Handle Unrelated Outdated Documentation
If you discover unrelated outdated docs during your sweep:
- Note it for later (mention to user after sweep)
- Don't fix it in this commit (keeps changes focused)
- Don't skip the rest of the sweep (finding one issue doesn't mean you're done)
Common Rationalizations - STOP
If you're thinking any of these, you're about to skip necessary docs:
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "It's just a small change" | Small changes break outdated examples. Check anyway. |
| "Nothing actually changed" | Even if smaller than expected, complete the sweep to verify consistency. |
| "If related docs existed, I'd know" | You don't know until you search. Search systematically. |
| "That file is technical config" | Plugin manifests ARE user-facing. Check them. |
| "User is waiting" | 3 minutes now saves 30 minutes debugging confusion later. |
| "I already checked the main README" | README ≠ all documentation. Follow the full checklist. |
| "Other skills wouldn't reference this" | They might. Search, don't assume. |
| "The change is in the code itself" | Code ≠ documentation. Users read docs, not your diff. |
| "I found unrelated outdated docs, I should fix those" | Note for later. Stay focused on staged changes. |
| "Found one issue, good enough" | One issue doesn't mean you're done. Complete the sweep. |
| "I'll just skim the file for relevant parts" | Skimming misses context. Read the entire file to catch all references. |
All of these mean: Continue with the systematic sweep.
Red Flags - You're Skipping Something
- Checked only README.md
- Didn't search for cross-references
- Skipped plugin manifest as "just config"
- Assumed other skills are independent
- Used time pressure to justify incomplete check
- Thought "minor change doesn't need full sweep"
- Started staging additional documentation before completing the sweep
- Stopped after finding first inconsistency
Any red flag = Start over with full checklist.
Real-World Impact
Without systematic sweep:
- Users miss new features (not in README)
- API consumers hit undocumented breaking changes (package metadata stale)
- Examples break (outdated patterns in docs)
- Cross-references dangle (related docs out of sync)
- Inconsistent information across README, CHANGELOG, and package files
- Support burden increases (users confused by outdated docs)
With systematic sweep:
- All entry points updated (README, API docs, CHANGELOG)
- Discovery works (accurate package metadata, search results)
- Examples current and runnable
- Cross-references intact
- Consistent information across all documentation
- Reduced support questions and confusion
Summary Checklist
Before committing, have you:
- Identified what's staged (
git diff --staged) - Checked all core documentation files that exist (README, CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md, DESIGN_DOC, CONTRIBUTING, API docs, CHANGELOG)
- Checked project-specific documentation (package metadata, API specs, config examples, etc.)
- Verified consistency between related files (e.g., package.json version vs README version)
- Searched for cross-references (grep with feature name and related terms)
- Determined update significance (does behavior change warrant high-level doc updates?)
- Updated outdated docs (or noted what needs updating)
- Noted any unrelated outdated docs for later
- Completed the full sweep without rationalizing shortcuts
All checked? You're ready to commit or stage documentation updates.