# Large Doc Mastery > > - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-sandeeprdy1729-claude-design-skill-large-doc-mastery` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [Sandeeprdy1729](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/sandeeprdy1729) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** Apache-2.0 - **Upstream author:** [Sandeeprdy1729](https://github.com/Sandeeprdy1729) - **Source:** https://github.com/Sandeeprdy1729/claude-design-skill/tree/main/skills/large-doc-mastery ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-sandeeprdy1729-claude-design-skill-large-doc-mastery ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About # Large Document / Codebase Mastery Summaries lose information. "Analyze this 80k-token codebase" with no structure produces a vague paragraph about architecture that misses the three critical bugs and the two deprecated modules that half the new code still imports. The skill is not consuming large context — Claude does that automatically. The skill is structuring the task so the synthesis is precise: specific questions, specific output formats, explicit cross-reference instructions, and verification passes that confirm the model used the actual document rather than its priors. --- ## SLASH COMMANDS | Command | Action | | --- | --- | | `/map` | Build a structural map of the document (sections, components, entities) | | `/index ` | Find every location in the document that touches a specific topic | | `/extract ` | Extract all instances of a type: decisions, risks, assumptions, TODOs, etc. | | `/cross-ref ` | Find all connections between two topics, sections, or entities | | `/contradictions` | Surface any internal contradictions or inconsistencies in the document | | `/gaps` | Identify what's absent — what the document should address but doesn't | | `/trace ` | Follow an entity (function, concept, person, requirement) through the full document | | `/timeline` | Extract a chronological sequence of events, changes, or decisions | | `/compare ` | Directly compare two sections or files | | `/synthesize ` | Answer a specific question using the full document as context | | `/verify ` | Check whether a specific claim is supported by the document | | `/hotspots` | Identify the highest-complexity or highest-risk areas | | `/summary-lossy` | Produce a short summary with explicit list of what was dropped | --- ## HIGH-LEVEL WORKFLOW ```text User provides large document / codebase │ ├─ Phase 1: Document Orientation │ Build structural map; identify key entities and sections │ ├─ Phase 2: Scope Definition │ Clarify the synthesis goal — don't analyze everything equally │ ├─ Phase 3: Targeted Extraction │ Pull specific patterns, entities, or facts with location references │ ├─ Phase 4: Cross-Reference Pass │ Connect extracted elements across sections or files │ ├─ Phase 5: Synthesis │ Answer the synthesis question with evidence citations │ └─ Phase 6: Verification Confirm claims are in the document, not in prior knowledge ``` --- ## PHASE 1 — DOCUMENT ORIENTATION Before any analysis, build an orientation map. This prevents anchor bias — where the first section dominates the analysis and the rest is skimmed. ### Orientation map format ```text DOCUMENT MAP: [title / description] Total scope: [estimated sections / files / pages] STRUCTURE [Section/File 1]: [1-line description] — [key entities defined] [Section/File 2]: [1-line description] — [key entities defined] ... KEY ENTITIES [Entity type]: [list] — (e.g., Functions, Classes, Requirements, Actors) DENSITY DISTRIBUTION Heavy: [sections with most content / complexity] Light: [sections with least content] Missing: [sections referenced but absent] ``` --- ## PHASE 2 — SCOPE DEFINITION Large documents contain far more than any single analysis needs. Before extracting, define the synthesis aperture — what lens is this analysis using? ### Synthesis aperture types | Aperture | Question being answered | Best for | | --- | --- | --- | | **Decision audit** | What decisions were made, by whom, and why? | Meeting transcripts, PRDs, ADRs | | **Risk surface** | What can go wrong, and where? | Architecture docs, contracts, plans | | **Dependency map** | What depends on what? | Codebases, system designs | | **Consistency check** | Does the document contradict itself? | Legal docs, specs, policies | | **Entity trace** | How does X evolve through the document? | Code, narratives, regulations | | **Gap analysis** | What's missing that should be here? | Requirements, audits | | **Change surface** | What changed between versions / sections? | Diffs, revisions, amendments | ### Scope question rules - Ask ONE scope-defining question if the synthesis goal is ambiguous - If the user says "analyze everything," default to: Risk surface + Dependency map - Never attempt all apertures simultaneously — output becomes noise --- ## PHASE 3 — TARGETED EXTRACTION Extract with location anchors. Every extracted element must cite where it came from. ### Extraction format ```text EXTRACTION: [type] — [aperture] [ID]. [Extracted element] Location: [section / file / line / page] Context: [1 sentence: surrounding context that makes this significant] Flags: [RISK | DECISION | ASSUMPTION | TODO | CONTRADICTION | DEPENDENCY] ``` ### Extraction rules - **Cite location for every item.** Uncited extractions cannot be verified. - **Do not paraphrase.** Quote directly, then interpret in the Context field. - **Flag before filtering.** Extract everything matching the type, then rank. - **Note absences.** If a required element (e.g., error handling, auth check) is absent, flag as MISSING. - **Distinguish document claims from your inferences.** Use "The document states..." vs "This implies..." ### High-value extraction targets by document type | Document type | High-value extraction targets | | --- | --- | | Codebase | TODO/FIXME, dead code, circular deps, missing error handling, hardcoded values | | Legal / contract | Obligations, conditions, termination clauses, liability caps, ambiguous definitions | | PRD / spec | Unverified assumptions, missing acceptance criteria, conflicting requirements | | Research / report | Methodology limitations, sample sizes, confidence intervals, conflicting findings | | Architecture doc | Single points of failure, unstated assumptions, missing components | --- ## PHASE 4 — CROSS-REFERENCE PASS The insight that justifies large-context analysis only appears when you connect elements that are far apart in the document. ### Cross-reference format ```text CROSS-REFERENCE: [entity A] ↔ [entity B] Connection 1: [Entity A] location: [cite] [Entity B] location: [cite] Relationship: [DEPENDS_ON | CONTRADICTS | MODIFIES | REFERENCES | UNDEFINED] Significance: [1 sentence: why this connection matters] Connection 2: ... SUMMARY Total connections found: [N] Critical connections (high-risk or decision-affecting): [list] Unresolved: [connections implied but not made explicit in the document] ``` ### Cross-reference rules - Always cite both locations — without both citations, the connection cannot be verified - `CONTRADICTS` always surfaces first — contradictions are the highest-value finding - `UNDEFINED` means the relationship exists but the document doesn't specify it — flag these --- ## PHASE 5 — SYNTHESIS Answer the synthesis question using the extracted and cross-referenced evidence. ### Synthesis output format ```text SYNTHESIS: [question / aperture] FINDING [Direct answer in 1–3 sentences] EVIDENCE 1. [claim] — Source: [location] 2. [claim] — Source: [location] 3. [claim] — Source: [location] PATTERNS [Cross-document pattern that only appears with full context] ANOMALIES [Elements that don't fit the pattern; outliers; exceptions] CONFIDENCE [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW] — [1 sentence: what limits confidence] WHAT'S NOT IN THE DOCUMENT [What the synthesis question required but the document doesn't contain] ``` --- ## PHASE 6 — VERIFICATION After synthesis, run a verification pass to confirm the output is document-grounded. ### Verification checklist For each major claim in the synthesis: - [ ] Can I cite the exact location in the document where this appears? - [ ] Am I paraphrasing accurately, or am I inferring beyond what's stated? - [ ] Is this in the document, or is it from my training data? - [ ] If I'm connecting two things, are both connections cited? ### Verification format ```text VERIFICATION PASS Claim: "[claim from synthesis]" Status: DOCUMENT-GROUNDED | INFERENCE | TRAINING KNOWLEDGE Citation: [location, or NONE] Note: [if inference or training knowledge: flag for user review] ``` ### Common verification failures in large-context tasks | Failure | Signal | Fix | | --- | --- | --- | | Prior contamination | Claim is true but not in the document | Flag as TRAINING KNOWLEDGE | | Location drift | Cited location doesn't contain the claim | Re-read and re-cite | | Paraphrase inflation | Summary adds meaning the original doesn't have | Quote directly | | Recency bias | Last section dominates synthesis | Re-run extraction on early sections | | Gap hallucination | Document "says" something it actually omits | Add to WHAT'S NOT IN THE DOCUMENT | ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [Sandeeprdy1729](https://github.com/Sandeeprdy1729) - **Source:** [Sandeeprdy1729/claude-design-skill](https://github.com/Sandeeprdy1729/claude-design-skill) - **License:** Apache-2.0 Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-sandeeprdy1729-claude-design-skill-large-doc-mastery - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/sandeeprdy1729 - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.