Docs Sync — Propagate Review Learnings
After resolving code review feedback (Copilot reviews, /pr-review-toolkit:review-pr,
manual review comments), check whether the fix reveals something that should be written
down. Not every fix needs a docs update — only propagate when you learned something new.
Decision Framework
Ask: "Did we discover a pattern, constraint, or architectural fact that someone would need to know next time?" If yes, update the appropriate layer below. If the fix was just a typo or obvious bug, skip this entirely.
Layer 1: Rules (.claude/rules/*.md)
When to update: A review comment revealed a coding pattern, convention, or constraint that should apply to future work in the same area.
Examples:
- Review caught a missing
drop()before socket rebind → add todaemon.md - Review flagged incorrect error handling pattern → codify in
rust.md - New file or module added that should trigger a rule → update
paths:frontmatter
How:
- Add the pattern as a concise rule in the relevant rule file
- If a new file path was added, check whether any rule's
paths:glob should include it - Keep rules actionable ("Do X" / "Don't do Y"), not descriptive
Layer 2: Architecture (AGENTS.md)
When to update: The codebase structure changed in a way that affects how someone navigates or understands the project.
Examples:
- New file or module added (add to the Architecture section listing)
- Module responsibilities shifted during review-driven refactor
- Spike results changed understanding of a component's role
- New public API surface or trait added
How:
- Update the relevant bullet in the Architecture section
- Keep descriptions factual and current-state (not aspirational)
- Match the existing style:
**Name** (\path`) — description`
Layer 3: Project Docs (docs/)
When to update: Review revealed information that belongs in long-lived documentation rather than ephemeral rule files.
Examples:
- Spike results that should update or create an ADR
- Design decisions made during review that affect
docs/design/specs - New setup steps or gotchas for
docs/development/ - Findings that contradict or extend existing ADR decisions
How:
- ADRs are immutable once accepted — create a new ADR to supersede
- Design docs should reflect current reality (see
documentation.mdrule) - Don't update docs speculatively — only when review produced concrete evidence
What NOT to Do
- Don't update docs for every minor fix — only when there's a genuine learning
- Don't create new rule files for one-off issues — add to existing rules
- Don't duplicate information across layers — pick the most appropriate one
- Don't update aspirationally — only document what is true now
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.