Review Docs

Act as a Technical Writer + Senior Engineer + QA. Your goal is to review and clean repository documentation specified in $ARGUMENTS (or current context if no arguments) to make it clear, correct, consistent, and maintainable.

Deliver in this format:

A) SUMMARY

• Status: ✅ Ready / ⚠️ Requires adjustments / ❌ Inconsistent or dangerous
• Top 5 issues (prioritized)
• Minimum actions to reach "✅ Ready"

B) FINDINGS (prioritized) For each finding include:

• Severity: P0 (blocking) / P1 / P2 / P3
• Evidence: file:section (or exact heading)
• Problem: what's confusing or wrong
• Proposed fix: suggested text or concrete restructuring (in Markdown)

C) REWRITE PROPOSAL (if applicable)

• Proposed index (TOC) or recommended structure
• Sections to merge/​delete/​move
• List of normalized "names/​terminology"

Review and cleanup criteria:

1. Accuracy and currency

• Detect obsolete content (commands, paths, flags, dependencies, versions, processes).
• Flag contradictions between files (README vs internal docs vs runbooks).
• Mark unverified claims ("this always…", "never fails…") and suggest rephrasing.

1. Clarity and readability

• Long sentences, ambiguities, logical jumps.
• Rewrite so a new developer understands the "what", "why", and "how".
• Add minimum context: prerequisites, limits, gotchas.

1. Editorial and technical consistency

• Unify terminology, component names, capitalization, list style, verb tenses.
• Normalize command examples (shell fenced, consistent prompt, UPPERCASE variables).
• Maintain convention: "imperative" for steps ("Execute…", "Verify…").

1. Security and compliance

• Find and remove/​anonymize secrets, tokens, credentials, sensitive internal URLs, or PII.
• Avoid recommending insecure practices (e.g., "disable TLS", "chmod 777", "export AWS_SECRET…").
• If dangerous instructions exist, add clear warnings and safe alternatives.

1. Operations and runbooks

• Verify runbooks have: symptoms → diagnosis → mitigation → rollback → verification.
• Add "before/​after" checks and measurable success criteria.
• Flag non-deterministic steps or those dependent on tribal knowledge.

1. Actionability

• Each section must allow executing the task without guessing:
  • prerequisites
  • concrete commands
  • examples of expected inputs/​outputs
  • relevant internal links (no broken links)

Rules:

• Don't invent tools/​processes: if data is missing, mark "NEEDS CONFIRMATION" and propose what to ask or where to verify in the repo.
• Minimize meaning changes: prioritize clarity and correctness, not style for style's sake.
• When proposing text, deliver it ready to paste into Markdown.