# Metamask Metamask Docs Metamask Docs > Style review - Skill: `tomevault-io/metamask-metamask-docs-metamask-docs` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/metamask-metamask-docs-metamask-docs` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/metamask-metamask-docs-metamask-docs/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/metamask-metamask-docs-metamask-docs --- # Style review ## When to use - You want to check existing content for style, terminology, formatting, or content-type issues. - You are preparing to submit a PR and want a structured editorial pass. ## Inputs The user provides a file path or directory to review. If not provided, ask what to review. ## Step 1: Identify the product and content type Read the file path to determine: 1. **Product area** - which product folder the file lives in (for example, `metamask-connect/`, `services/`, `snaps/`). Load the corresponding product rule from `.cursor/rules/product-*.mdc`. 2. **Content type** - which subfolder determines the expected structure (for example, `concepts/`, `how-to/`, `reference/`). Use `.cursor/rules/content-types.mdc` for the mapping. ## Step 2: Run Vale (if available) Try running Vale on the target file: ```bash vale ``` If Vale is not installed, skip this step and note it in the report. Continue with the manual review. ## Step 3: Review against editorial rules Read the file fully. The following points are quick reminders; use the linked `.mdc` files as the source of truth for full criteria, examples, and edge cases. ### Voice and tone (editorial-voice.mdc) - Active voice and present tense used throughout. - Second person ("you"), not "the developer" or "users." - Contractions used naturally. - No marketing language, superlatives, or promotional tone. - No em dashes or en dashes; use commas, parentheses, or semicolons. - First sentence of each section gets to the point. - No slang, figures of speech, or culturally specific idioms. ### Terminology (terminology.mdc) - Product names match the required forms (dapp, MetaMask, smart account, web3, etc.). - Standards spelled out on first use with identifier in parentheses (for example, "Chain Agnostic Improvement Proposal 25 (CAIP-25)"), short form on subsequent references. - Product-specific terminology matches the corresponding `product-*.mdc` rule file. ### Markdown formatting (markdown-formatting.mdc) - Lines wrapped at roughly 100 columns. - Each sentence on its own line. - Code blocks have a language tag. - Links use relative paths within the product, absolute paths across products. - Descriptive link text; no "click here" or bare URLs. - Admonitions use Docusaurus syntax and are not nested. - Tables are aligned in source Markdown. - No duplicate H1 if frontmatter contains a `title` field. ### Content type compliance (content-types.mdc) - Page structure matches the expected content type for its folder. - Concept pages: no step-by-step instructions, ends with "Next steps." - How-to pages: goal stated first, prerequisites listed, numbered steps. - Reference pages: parameter format matches surrounding pages in the same product section. - Quickstart pages: complete, copy-paste-and-run code. - Troubleshooting pages: symptom/error first, then fix. ### Frontmatter - `description` field present (one sentence for SEO). - `sidebar_label` only when needed (default nav label would be too long or wordy); otherwise omit. - No duplicate H1 if `title` is set in frontmatter. ### Contributor workflow (contributor-workflow.mdc) - If the file is new, verify it has been added to the correct sidebar file. - If the file was moved or renamed, verify a redirect exists in `vercel.json`. - Cross-product links use absolute URL paths. ## Step 4: Generate the report Present findings as a structured report grouped by category. For each issue: 1. **Line number** - approximate location in the file. 2. **Category** - Voice/Tone, Terminology, Formatting, Content Type, Frontmatter, or Workflow. 3. **Issue** - what is wrong. 4. **Suggestion** - how to fix it. ### Report format ``` ## Style review: ### Product: | Content type: ### Summary - X issues found (Y from Vale, Z from manual review) - Severity: A critical, B suggestions ### Voice and tone - Line 12: Passive voice - "The block number can be specified..." → "Specify the block number..." ### Terminology - Line 8: "smart contract account" → Use "smart account" per terminology.mdc. ### Formatting - Line 45: Code block missing language tag. - Line 22: Em dash found - replace with comma or period. ### Content type - Page is in `concepts/` but contains numbered step-by-step instructions. Move steps to a how-to page and link to it. ### Frontmatter - Missing `description` field. ``` If reviewing a directory, produce one report per file, then a summary at the end showing totals across all files. If no issues are found, say so explicitly. --- > Source: [MetaMask/metamask-docs](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-docs) — distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io).