# Docs As You Go > Write and maintain a project's docs folder (product, architecture, decision records, feature spec/plan/tasks, development notes) and an AGENTS.md step by step while the project is being built prompt by prompt, so decisions and requirements live in the repo instead of only in the conversation. Also works in small reviewed steps and makes conventional commits on request. Use only when someone explicitly asks for it, e.g. "start docs-as-you-go", "document this as we build", "resume docs-as-you-go"; never start it on your own. - Skill: `githubstig/docs-as-you-go` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add githubstig/docs-as-you-go` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/githubstig/docs-as-you-go/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - Author: GitHubStig (https://skillmd.com/u/githubstig) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/githubstig/docs-as-you-go --- # Docs as you go The user builds by prompting, one idea at a time. They usually know what they want, both the requirements and the technical approach, and they make decisions in conversation. This skill makes sure every one of those decisions ends up in the repo, in a fixed docs structure, **in the same step it was made**. Two reasons this matters: - **Conversations get lost.** Context runs out, gets summarised or the session ends. Anything that exists only in the chat is gone. The docs are the memory. - **The next session starts cold.** A new session, a different agent or another developer should be able to continue from the repo alone. The skill is agent-neutral. It needs only reading and writing files, running the project's own commands, and git. Nothing here depends on a particular model, agent, harness or language. ## Contents - [Starting](#starting) - [Resuming](#resuming) - [The docs](#the-docs) - [When to write what](#when-to-write-what) - [Nothing lives only in the chat](#nothing-lives-only-in-the-chat) - [Noticing decisions](#noticing-decisions) - [How the docs are written](#how-the-docs-are-written) - [Working in steps](#working-in-steps) - [Commits](#commits) - [Stopping](#stopping) ## Starting Start only when the user asks. Then: 1. **Look before writing.** Read the README, any existing `docs/` and `AGENTS.md`, and the build or package files to learn the language and the commands. Check whether it's a git repo. 2. **Existing docs win.** If the repo already has docs in another shape, say so and ask whether to adopt this structure or fit into theirs. Never restructure without a yes. 3. **Write files in your first reply.** Always create `AGENTS.md` and `docs/README.md` from what the user has said so far, however little that is. Questions don't come first: write the files, put what you still need to know in Open threads, and ask at the end of the reply. 4. **Create only what there's content for.** Beyond those two, files appear when their trigger is hit (see [When to write what](#when-to-write-what)). An empty repo with one sentence of intent gets a two-line `AGENTS.md`, not ten empty files. Indexes follow the same rule: a table, row, list entry or link appears only once the file it points to exists. That includes the links under "What this is" in `AGENTS.md`. Never write a placeholder link or a "pending" note. 5. **Other instruction files point here.** If the agent in use reads a differently named instruction file, make that file refer to `AGENTS.md` instead of copying its content, so there's one set of rules. 6. **State the working agreement** in your first reply, in a few lines, even when the user asked for something else too: docs are updated every step, work goes one step at a time, each step stops for review, commits only on request. Then continue with whatever the user asked for. Templates for every file are in [reference/templates.md](reference/templates.md). ## Resuming At the start of every new session, and whenever earlier conversation may have been summarised or lost, before doing anything else: 1. Read `AGENTS.md`, then `docs/README.md`. 2. Read `spec.md` and `tasks.md` for every feature not marked Done. 3. Read the Open threads in `AGENTS.md`. 4. Say back, without being asked, even when some of it doesn't seem to matter for the next step: - each Accepted ADR's decision and why, one line each (the language, storage and so on); - each entry in "Things that will bite you", by name; - what's parked; - the tasks left in any unfinished feature. Then wait for the go-ahead. Trust the docs over what you think you remember from the conversation. If they disagree with what the user is now asking, point out the difference and ask. ## The docs ``` AGENTS.md rules and gotchas for anyone (or any agent) working here docs/ README.md index: reading order, ADR table, feature table product.md the problem, who it's for, goals and non-goals architecture/overview.md the parts and how data moves between them adr/NNNN-short-title.md one file per significant decision features/NNN-name/ spec.md what and why: problem, stories, requirements, acceptance plan.md how: approach, modules or files, order tasks.md small checkable steps development.md running, checks, local data, dependencies, workarounds proposals/ drafts for other projects (feature requests upstream) ``` Numbers are zero-padded and never reused: ADRs `0001`, features `001`. ## When to write what | Trigger in the conversation | Write | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | The user explains what the project is, who it's for or what it won't do | `docs/product.md`, and "What this is" in `AGENTS.md` | | A choice between real alternatives is made (see below) | A new ADR, and a row in the `docs/README.md` table | | A feature is agreed, before its code | `features/NNN-name/spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`, table row | | Two or more parts start to talk to each other, or data gets a shape | `docs/architecture/overview.md` | | Commands to run, check, test or build settle | "Commands" in `AGENTS.md`; details in `docs/development.md` | | A rule is set ("always…", "never…") | "Rules" in `AGENTS.md`; an ADR if it needed weighing up | | Something surprising breaks and gets worked around | "Things that will bite you" in `AGENTS.md` | | The user parks something ("later", "park it", "not now") | "Open threads" in `AGENTS.md`, with enough to resume it | | An idea needs another project to change | A draft in `docs/proposals/`; the user posts it | | A task in a feature is finished and verified | Tick it in that feature's `tasks.md` | | A feature's spec is written | Its row in the `docs/README.md` table says In progress | | A feature's last task is ticked | Its status in the `docs/README.md` table becomes Done | | A bug is fixed | A test that fails without the fix; a gotcha if it could recur | | The user reverses an earlier decision | A superseding ADR, and every doc that mentions the old choice | Update the index tables in `docs/README.md` in the same step as the file they list. ## Nothing lives only in the chat This is the rule the skill exists for. - **Every step ends with a docs pass.** Before reporting a step as done, update every doc the step affected, and check that every link in those docs resolves. Docs-only steps included. Code and its docs are one change. - **Decisions are written when they're made,** not at the end of the feature. - **Before anything long** (a big refactor, a long run, a research dive), write down where things stand: tick tasks, add open questions to `tasks.md` or Open threads. - **When the conversation is getting long,** or the agent shows any sign that earlier context is being summarised, do a docs pass straight away, even mid-step, and say so. - **The test:** if this conversation disappeared right now, could a fresh session continue from the repo alone, without asking the user to repeat themselves? If not, something is still only in the chat. Write it down. Chat-only details that matter and have no home yet (a half-agreed idea, a question the user hasn't answered) go in Open threads, marked as such. ## Noticing decisions Watch for decisions the user doesn't announce as decisions. Signs: - They pick one of the options you offered. - They reject an approach ("no, don't use X", "keep it simple"). - They set a constraint ("no cloud", "exact versions only", "never npm"). - Something was tried and dropped for a reason. - A library, service, storage or file format is chosen. - They change their mind about an earlier decision. Write an ADR when someone could reasonably have chosen differently. Record the options that were on the table and why the chosen one won, in the user's reasoning where they gave it. Mention it in the step report ("recorded as ADR 0007"). A small preference that needed no weighing up goes into Rules in `AGENTS.md` instead. When unsure whether it's worth an ADR, ask in one line. Every ADR has a status: - **Proposed:** a setup or approach you recommend where the user has to pick something, such as the test runner. Say so in the step report. A decision the user hasn't made yet is not an ADR at all: it waits in Open threads until they choose, so the ADR records their reasons rather than yours. - **Accepted:** the user agreed. Most ADRs are written straight as Accepted, because the decision was made in the conversation. - **Rejected:** a Proposed ADR the user turned down. Delete it instead, unless the reasons are worth remembering. - **Superseded by NNNN:** a later ADR replaced it. Once an ADR is Accepted, never edit its decision. When the user changes their mind, write a new ADR that supersedes it: its Context names the old ADR and what changed. In the old ADR, change only the status line. In the `docs/README.md` table, add "(superseded by NNNN)" to the old row and add the new one. Fixing a typo or a broken link is fine; changing what was decided is not. Then clean up everything else. Search every doc outside `docs/adr/` for the old choice: its name, file names, commands and formats. That includes the spec, plan and tasks of features finished long ago. Rewrite each mention to describe the new choice, in the present tense. ## How the docs are written - **The templates list every heading; files only hold the ones with content.** Create a doc with just the sections there's something real to say about. When new content arrives, add its section in the template's order. No "TBD", no empty headings, no placeholder text. - **Docs read as if written before the build.** Present tense, describing what the project does and why. No "we first tried…", "update:", dated change notes or "how it went" sections. History lives in git and ADRs. (ADR Context sections are the exception: they explain the situation at the time.) A spec's Problem says what's missing, in the present tense ("there's no way to…"), not how the code used to behave. - **Everything outside the ADRs describes the project as it is now.** That includes finished features' spec, plan and tasks. When something changes, they change with it. - **Plain words, short sentences.** Explain why, not just what. Name files and commands exactly. - **`AGENTS.md` stays short.** It holds rules, commands, a repo map, gotchas and open threads, and links into `docs/` for the long explanations. Its Status line says what the project is as a whole ("in development", "feature complete, not released"), never how far the build has got and never a date. Progress lives in the feature table. - **A new feature's spec, plan and tasks are their own step.** When a feature is agreed, write them from what the user said, then stop for review before writing any code. Only when the user says to build straight away ("no need to show me the spec", "just build it") write the docs and the code in one step, still in that order: spec, plan and tasks first, then the code. - **Tasks are ticked when verified:** after an automated check passes, or after a manual check the user agreed to. Never just because the code is written. - **Keep the user's words for decisions.** If they gave a reason, use it. ## Working in steps - **One step at a time.** A step is one request from the user: finish all of it, then stop. "Carry on" on a feature whose plan is approved means the whole feature, not just the next task; stop early only for a real question. When a request is big, say the steps before starting (for a feature, its plan's Order is that list), and suggest splitting it so each part makes sense as one commit. - **Tests.** If the project has no automated tests yet, don't pick a setup silently, and never decide on your own that it doesn't need tests. Write the setup you recommend (the language's built-in test runner where there is one) as an ADR marked Proposed, and flag it in that step's report. It becomes Accepted when the user goes ahead. Every bug fix starts with a test: run it, see it fail, then fix. - **Verify with the project's own checks.** Formatting, linting, tests and build, whatever the project uses. For anything visible, look at it (run it, take a screenshot if you can). Check that links in changed docs resolve. - **Stop and report** at the end of each step, in three short parts: - **Changed:** code and docs touched. - **Checked:** what was verified, and what wasn't and why. - **Next:** the next step, and any question for the user. Then offer a review and a commit, and wait. Don't start the next step until the user says so. "Carry on", "continue", "next" and "looks good" are a go-ahead for the next step, never a request to commit. - **Offer options with a recommendation** when there's a real choice. Don't pick silently, and don't list options without saying which you'd take. - **Ask when something is genuinely unclear** rather than guessing. - **Spikes before building.** When an approach is uncertain, try it in a throwaway location first. Spike code is never committed; what it showed goes in the plan or an ADR. - **Temporary files** go outside the repo or are deleted before the step ends. - **Match the surrounding code:** its naming, comment density and idioms. ## Commits Only commit when the user explicitly asks for a commit ("commit", "commit it", "make a commit"). When they do: 1. **Look at what's changed first.** Stage everything except an agent's own folders (its local settings or skills), which stay out unless the user says otherwise. If anything else looks like it shouldn't be committed (secrets, large binaries, data or build output), leave it out and ask. Say in your report what was left out and why. 2. **Write a Conventional Commits message.** A one-line subject: `type: summary` or `type(scope): summary`, imperative, lowercase start, no full stop, about 72 characters at most. Types: `feat`, `fix`, `docs`, `refactor`, `test`, `chore`, `build`, `ci`, `perf`, `style`. 3. **Several separate changes get bullets.** After a blank line, one short bullet per change. A single change needs only the subject. 4. **No attribution.** Never end with `Co-authored-by`, "Generated with", or any line crediting an AI, agent or tool, even if the agent in use adds one by default. 5. **Docs go in the same commit** as the code they describe. 6. **Never push, amend, rebase or force-push** unless the user asks. ``` fix: keep the filter panel open after saving ``` ``` feat: add CSV export for reports - export button on the report screen - dates and numbers written in the user's locale - docs: feature 004 spec and plan, ADR 0006 for the CSV library ``` ## Stopping When the user says they're done for now, or the session is ending: 1. Do a final docs pass: tasks ticked, feature statuses right, Open threads current, including anything half-discussed. 2. Report what's uncommitted, if anything, and offer a commit.