本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

docs-impact-architect

Use this skill when the docs-impact-classifier returns a structural verdict, signalling that the documentation TOC must change to accommodate the PR. Proposes TOC deltas (new pages, moves, merges) and emits new-page outline stubs that the doc-sync panel later fleshes out. Holds the 3-promise narrative (consume / produce / govern) and the persona ramps as hard constraints.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

docs-impact-architect

Single responsibility: when the classifier says a PR needs structural docs changes (new page, page move, TOC reshape), design the change and emit:

  1. A precise TOC delta (added pages, moved pages, retired pages)
  2. New-page outline stubs (slug, title, persona, promise, H2 sections, key examples)
  3. The persona-ramp impact (which ramp gains/loses a stop)

You are NOT the writer (doc-writer owns prose). You are the TOC architect. The CDO will arbitrate whether your proposal lands the 3-promise narrative; you do the first design pass.

When to invoke

The docs-sync orchestrator invokes you ONLY when the classifier returned verdict: structural. For no_change or in_place you don't run.

Inputs

  • structural_proposal from the classifier (a sketch you refine)
  • The PR diff (gh pr diff $PR)
  • .apm/docs-index.yml (full corpus map)
  • The PR description (for author-stated intent)

Step 1: read the corpus map, not the corpus

Load .apm/docs-index.yml entirely. Inspect chapters[], pages[], promises[]. This is your map. You do NOT read the 100+ page corpus unless a specific page is implicated by the classifier's sketch.

Step 2: classify the structural shape

Match the PR's surface change to one of these structural shapes:

ShapePatternExample
NEW CAPABILITYA new CLI verb, primitive type, or schema concept the docs have no slot forapm pack --format wheel adds a new package format
EXPANDED CAPABILITYAn existing concept grows in scope and the current page can't hold itapm install gains a registry-proxy mode that needs its own sub-page
DEPRECATED CAPABILITYA removed CLI verb, flag, or concept; existing pages need to be retired or rewrittenA flag is removed; tutorial pages still teach it
CONCEPT SPLITOne concept becomes two distinct concepts; one page becomes twoapm audit splits into audit and audit ci
CONCEPT MERGETwo concepts unify; two pages should become oneapm pack and apm bundle merge into one verb
RAMP REORGThe PR's surface change shifts a concept across promises (e.g. an enterprise feature becomes consumer-default)Policy enforcement moves from enterprise to consumer default behaviour

The structural shape drives the TOC delta shape.

Step 3: design the TOC delta

For each new page proposed, fill in:

new_page:
  slug: docs/src/content/docs/<persona>/<topic>.md
  title: "<short imperative title>"
  persona: consumer | producer | enterprise | cross
  promise: 1 | 2 | 3 | cross
  parent_chapter: <existing chapter slug>
  h2_sections:
    - "## Why <topic>"        # OPTIONAL -- skip unless concept is genuinely new
    - "## How to <use>"        # REQUIRED -- code first
    - "## Reference"           # OPTIONAL -- flag/option table
    - "## Troubleshooting"     # OPTIONAL -- only if known footguns
  bridges:
    incoming:                  # which existing pages should link TO this
      - {from: <slug>, link_text: <suggested>}
    outgoing:                  # which existing pages should this link FROM
      - {to: <slug>, link_text: <suggested>}
  ramp_impact: >-
    one-paragraph description of how this changes the <persona>
    ramp: which step it slots into, whether it adds a stop or
    replaces an existing one

For each moved/retired page:

moved_page:
  from: <slug>
  to: <slug>
  redirect_rationale: <one-sentence>

retired_page:
  slug: <slug>
  reason: <one-sentence>
  redirect_to: <slug>  # MUST exist; orphaning pages breaks SEO

Step 4: validate against the 3-promise narrative

Apply these hard rules. If any fails, redesign:

  1. Every page belongs to exactly one promise. Cross-cutting pages (integrations, troubleshooting, reference) are explicitly marked promise: cross. If a new page straddles two promises, split it OR park it under cross.
  2. Consumer pages don't pre-teach producer concepts. A consumer page may LINK to producer; it may not embed producer prose.
  3. Producer pages don't pre-teach enterprise concepts. Same rule, one promise down.
  4. No page is orphaned from the TOC. Every new page has a parent_chapter and at least one incoming bridge.
  5. No retired page lacks a redirect_to. Search engines will index the old URL for months; the redirect is the SEO contract.

Step 5: emit the architect report

Return JSON:

{
  "structural_shape": "NEW CAPABILITY" | "EXPANDED CAPABILITY" | "DEPRECATED CAPABILITY" | "CONCEPT SPLIT" | "CONCEPT MERGE" | "RAMP REORG",
  "toc_delta": {
    "new_pages": [...],
    "moved_pages": [...],
    "retired_pages": [...],
    "chapter_changes": [...]
  },
  "promise_validation": {
    "all_pages_single_promise": true | false,
    "no_orphans": true | false,
    "no_unredirected_retires": true | false,
    "concerns": []
  },
  "downstream_in_place_pages": ["..."],
  "rationale": "<2-3 sentence summary of why this structural delta and not alternatives>"
}

downstream_in_place_pages[] is the handoff to the localizer -- after the architect approves the TOC, the localizer plans in-place edits to existing pages that REFERENCE the new structure.

Output contract

Return a SINGLE JSON document matching the schema in Step 5 as the final message of your task. No prose around the JSON.

Anti-patterns

  • Inflating new-page counts to seem thorough. The minimal true delta wins.
  • Skipping the promise-validation step. The CDO will catch it; better to self-catch.
  • Designing a new chapter when an existing chapter has room. Always prefer extending over creating.
  • Forgetting redirect_to on retired pages. SEO debt is the silent corpus killer.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use this skill to run a four-panel adversarial advisory review on any pull request that touches the OpenAPM specification artifact (docs/src/content/docs/specs/openapm-*.md), its inline / sidecar JSON Schemas (docs/src/content/docs/specs/schemas/*.schema.json), or the conformance fixture seed (tests/fixtures/spec-conformance/**). The panel fans out to four spec-ecosystem reviewers (swagger-openapi-editor, oci-distribution-editor, pkgmgr-registry-contract-editor, w3c-tag-architect), each running in its own agent thread, and a spec-editor synthesizer that produces a fold-now / defer-v0.1.1 / defer-v0.2 / reject list plus a ship decision keyed off a 1..10 shocked_meter scale. The orchestrator is the sole writer to the PR: ONE consolidated comment, no verdict labels, no merge gating. The panel is advisory -- it surfaces findings, prioritizes folds, and renders a ship recommendation that the maintainer weighs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

Activate for changes to project positioning, release communication, community-facing artifacts, or breaking-change decisions in microsoft/apm. Triggers on README, MANIFESTO, PRD, CHANGELOG, release workflows, and issue templates.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

apm-usage

無料

Activate when the user asks about APM (Agent Package Manager): installing, configuring, authoring, or troubleshooting AI-agent packages, dependencies, compilation, MCP servers, policy, or any `apm` CLI command.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

auth

無料

Activate when code touches token management, credential resolution, git auth flows, GITHUB_APM_PAT, ADO_APM_PAT, AuthResolver, HostInfo, AuthContext, or any remote host authentication -- even if 'auth' isn't mentioned explicitly.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

Use this skill to post or patch ONE GitHub comment for a microsoft/apm autopilot run. It owns public vs debug body assembly and the AI disclaimer footer. Never labels, assigns, requests reviewers, or merges. Autopilot skills that write comments must load this skill and must not call gh comment APIs themselves.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

Use this skill to queue maintainer-accepted microsoft/apm issues (`status/accepted`) and fan them out through an isolated pool (default 2) of autopilot-issue-delivery-worker sessions. Any accepted type is eligible. Advisory `triage/recommended` is not authorization. Does not triage. Does not review PRs. Works in a local session, Copilot App automation, Cloud Agent, Remote Agent, or Agentic Workflow.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

microsoft/apm3,9962026年10月10日 更新

microsoft のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する