Defame1297
60be7b3232
Only 12 of 39 skills carried metadata.version, and adoption tracked which plugin a skill lived in rather than any stated rule: core, gitea and lint were consistent adopters, bin and kyberforge were consistent non-adopters, git was split with one outlier. There was no documented convention, and skill-author's own bump logic was already written as if presence were conditional. metadata.version is now required on every skill. The 19 skills here that never carried one (bin, kyberforge, gitea-files) are seeded at 1.0.0, not 0.1.0 -- that value stays reserved for a skill's actual creation point under skill-author's existing convention. The skill-frontmatter pre-commit hook now fails a SKILL.md missing the field, the same class of failure as a missing name/description. Full rationale in the new ADR. The git-plugin skills that also need this field follow in the next commit, bundled with issue #113's rtk normalization since both touch the same files. Refs: #127 ADR: 0022 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EeH8SCbcrCAQrtymkNuhKP
write-docs
Produce technical documentation derived from code and spec, one section at a time, with a confirmation gate on every section.
What it does
Casts the agent as a technical writer with one non-negotiable constraint: every claim must be traceable to a source file line, a spec section, or an explicit user statement. Nothing is invented, and behaviour that genuinely cannot be documented from the available sources is marked out-of-scope rather than explained away.
The process is eight steps — identify scope, read and extract, gap check, draft section by section, confirmation gate, delta summary, reader testing, finalise — and several of them are deliberately gated on the human:
- Files are read only after the user approves them by name. The skill may propose candidates; it waits.
- The gap check presents what the code does say and asks the user to fill only what it does not: caller intent, error-handling rationale, non-obvious side effects.
- No section is finalised until the full revised text has been shown. The skill never gates on output the user has not seen, and never reprints the whole document — all edits are surgical.
- Reader testing predicts 5–10 questions a target reader would ask, then spawns a sub-agent that receives only the finished doc and the questions — no source files. If the doc cannot answer them, neither can the sub-agent, and the run loops back to drafting.
Summary and overview sections are written last, once the detail sections are stable.
Usage
/write-docs
Name the files or modules to document, the target audience (developer / user / contributor / internal), and the documentation type (reference, guide, README section, inline comment, changelog entry). For a PRD, ADR or decision doc, use grill-me or grill-with-docs instead — those have dedicated handling.
Files
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
SKILL.md |
The whole skill — role, use/do-not-use boundaries, required inputs, constraints, the eight-step process, output format, failure handling, and a nine-item self-check |