documentation

Verified·Scanned 2/18/2026

Technical documentation patterns, structure, maintenance, and avoiding common documentation failures.

from clawhub.ai·ve2dea6e·3.9 KB·0 installs
Scanned from 1.0.0 at e2dea6e · Transparency log ↗
$ vett add clawhub.ai/ivangdavila/documentation

Structure Hierarchy

  • README: what it is, how to install, quick example — 5 minutes to first success
  • Getting Started: guided tutorial for beginners — one complete workflow
  • Guides: task-oriented ("How to X") — goal-focused, not feature-focused
  • Reference: exhaustive API/CLI docs — complete but not for learning
  • Troubleshooting: common errors with solutions — search-optimized

README Essentials

  1. One-sentence description — what problem it solves
  2. Installation — copy-paste command that works
  3. Quick start — minimal example that actually runs
  4. Link to full docs — don't cram everything in README

Missing any of these = users bounce before trying.

Code Examples

  • Every example must be tested — untested examples rot within months
  • Show complete runnable code, not fragments — users copy-paste
  • Include expected output — confirms they did it right
  • Bad: client.query(...) / Good: full script with imports, setup, and output
  • Version-pin examples: npm install package@2.1.0 not npm install package

API Documentation

  • Every endpoint needs: method, path, parameters, request body, response, error codes
  • Show real request/response bodies — not just schemas
  • Include authentication in every example — most common missing piece
  • Document rate limits and pagination upfront — not buried in footnotes
  • Error responses need as much detail as success responses

What Gets Outdated

  • Screenshots — UI changes, screenshots don't
  • Version numbers — hardcoded versions become wrong
  • Links — external sites move, break constantly
  • "Current" anything — write timelessly or add review dates
  • Feature flags and experimental warnings — often forgotten after GA

Maintenance Patterns

  • Docs live next to code — same repo, same PR. Separate repos drift
  • CI checks for broken links — markdown-link-check or equivalent
  • Runnable examples as tests — if example breaks, build fails
  • Review date in docs: "Last verified: 2024-01" — signals freshness
  • Delete aggressively — outdated docs worse than no docs

Common Failures

  • Documenting implementation, not usage — users don't care how it works internally
  • Assuming context — define acronyms, link prerequisites
  • Wall of text — use headings, bullets, code blocks liberally
  • "See X for more info" without link — friction kills follow-through
  • Changelog as documentation — changes ≠ how to use current version

Writing Style

  • Imperative mood: "Run the command" not "You can run the command"
  • Second person: "you" not "the user"
  • Present tense: "This returns X" not "This will return X"
  • Short sentences — one idea per sentence
  • Active voice: "The function returns X" not "X is returned by the function"

Searchability

  • Use words users search for — not internal jargon
  • Error messages verbatim in troubleshooting — users paste exact errors
  • Multiple ways to describe same thing — alias common variations
  • H2/H3 headings are SEO — match user queries
  • Avoid clever titles — "Getting Started" beats "Your Journey Begins"

Versioned Documentation

  • Major versions need separate docs — v1 users shouldn't see v2 docs
  • Migration guides between versions — step-by-step, not just changelog
  • Default to latest stable, link to older versions
  • Mark deprecated features clearly — don't just remove
  • URL structure: /docs/v2/ not query params

README Anti-patterns

  • Badge spam — 15 badges before content
  • Massive feature lists — save for marketing page
  • No installation instructions — assuming everyone knows
  • Screenshots without context — what am I looking at?
  • License-only README — legal compliance ≠ documentation