Install
$ agentstack add skill-timurgaleev-vibestack-document-release ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
When to invoke
Use when asked to "update the docs", "sync documentation", or "post-ship docs".
Proactively suggest after a PR is merged or code is shipped.
Preamble
eval "$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-slug 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || SLUG="unknown"
_LEARN_FILE="${VIBESTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.vibestack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}/learnings.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_LEARN_FILE" ]; then
_LEARN_COUNT=$(wc -l /dev/null | tr -d ' ')
echo "LEARNINGS: $_LEARN_COUNT entries loaded"
if [ "$_LEARN_COUNT" -gt 5 ] 2>/dev/null; then
~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-learnings-search --limit 5 2>/dev/null || true
fi
else
echo "LEARNINGS: none yet"
fi
{{include lib/snippets/session-host.md}}
{{include lib/snippets/decision-brief.md}}
{{include lib/snippets/working-protocols.md}}
{{include lib/snippets/state-protocols.md}}
Step 0: Detect platform and base branch
First, detect the git hosting platform from the remote URL:
git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null
- If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub
- If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab
- Otherwise, check CLI availability:
gh auth status 2>/dev/nullsucceeds → platform is GitHub (covers GitHub Enterprise)glab auth status 2>/dev/nullsucceeds → platform is GitLab (covers self-hosted)- Neither → unknown (use git-native commands only)
Determine which branch this PR/MR targets, or the repo's default branch if no PR/MR exists. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.
If GitHub:
gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName— if succeeds, use itgh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name— if succeeds, use it
If GitLab:
glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/nulland extract thetarget_branchfield — if succeeds, use itglab repo view -F json 2>/dev/nulland extract thedefault_branchfield — if succeeds, use it
Git-native fallback (if unknown platform, or CLI commands fail):
git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|refs/remotes/origin/||'- If that fails:
git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null→ usemain - If that fails:
git rev-parse --verify origin/master 2>/dev/null→ usemaster
If all fail, fall back to main.
Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent git diff, git log, git fetch, git merge, and PR/MR creation command, substitute the detected branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch" or ``.
Document Release: Post-Ship Documentation Update
You are running the /document-release workflow. This runs after /ship (code committed, PR exists or about to exist) but before the PR merges. Your job: ensure every documentation file in the project is accurate, up to date, and written in a friendly, user-forward voice.
You are mostly automated. Make obvious factual updates directly. Stop and ask only for risky or subjective decisions.
Only stop for:
- Risky/questionable doc changes (narrative, philosophy, security, removals, large rewrites)
- VERSION bump decision (if not already bumped)
- New TODOS items to add
- Cross-doc contradictions that are narrative (not factual)
Never stop for:
- Factual corrections clearly from the diff
- Adding items to tables/lists
- Updating paths, counts, version numbers
- Fixing stale cross-references
- CHANGELOG voice polish (minor wording adjustments)
- Marking TODOS complete
- Cross-doc factual inconsistencies (e.g., version number mismatch)
NEVER do:
- Overwrite, replace, or regenerate CHANGELOG entries — polish wording only, preserve all content
- Bump VERSION without asking — always use AskUserQuestion for version changes
- Use
Writetool on CHANGELOG.md — always useEditwith exactold_stringmatches
Step 1: Pre-flight & Diff Analysis
- Check the current branch. If on the base branch, abort: "You're on the base branch. Run from a feature branch."
- Gather context about what changed:
git diff ...HEAD --stat
git log ..HEAD --oneline
git diff ...HEAD --name-only
- Discover all documentation files in the repo:
find . -maxdepth 2 -name "*.md" -not -path "./.git/*" -not -path "./node_modules/*" -not -path "./.vibestack/*" -not -path "./.context/*" | sort
- Classify the changes into categories relevant to documentation:
- New features — new files, new commands, new skills, new capabilities
- Changed behavior — modified services, updated APIs, config changes
- Removed functionality — deleted files, removed commands
- Infrastructure — build system, test infrastructure, CI
- Output a brief summary: "Analyzing N files changed across M commits. Found K documentation files to review."
Step 1.5: Coverage Map (Blast-Radius Analysis)
Before touching any documentation file, build a coverage map of what shipped vs what's documented. This is inspired by the Diataxis framework (tutorial / how-to / reference / explanation) — but applied as an audit lens, not a generation tool.
- Extract public surface changes from the diff. Scan
git diff ...HEADfor:
- New exported functions, classes, commands, CLI flags, config options, API endpoints
- New skills, workflows, or user-facing capabilities
- Renamed or removed public surface (modules, commands, features)
- New environment variables, feature flags, or configuration knobs
- For each new/changed public surface item, assess documentation coverage:
Coverage map:
[entity] [reference?] [how-to?] [tutorial?] [explanation?]
/new-skill ✅ AGENTS.md ❌ ❌ ❌
--new-flag ✅ README ✅ README ❌ ❌
FooProcessor ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌
Use these definitions:
- Reference — factual description of what it is, its API, its options (README tables, AGENTS.md skill lists, API docs)
- How-to — task-oriented: "how to do X with this" (README examples, CONTRIBUTING workflows)
- Tutorial — learning-oriented: step-by-step walkthrough for newcomers (getting started guides)
- Explanation — understanding-oriented: "why this works this way" (ARCHITECTURE decisions, design rationale)
- Output the coverage map. Items with zero coverage are critical gaps — flag them for
Step 3. Items with reference-only coverage are common gaps — note them for the PR body.
- Architecture diagram drift detection. If ARCHITECTURE.md (or any doc) contains ASCII
diagrams or Mermaid blocks, extract entity names (modules, services, data flows) from the diagrams. Cross-reference against the diff. Flag any diagram entities that were renamed, split, removed, or moved in the code.
The coverage map feeds into Steps 2-3 (what to audit and fix) and Step 9 (documentation debt summary in the PR body). Do NOT auto-generate missing documentation pages — flag gaps only. When significant gaps are found, suggest running /document-generate to fill them.
Step 2: Per-File Documentation Audit
Read each documentation file and cross-reference it against the diff. Use these generic heuristics (adapt to whatever project you're in — these are not vibestack-specific):
README.md:
- Does it describe all features and capabilities visible in the diff?
- Are install/setup instructions consistent with the changes?
- Are examples, demos, and usage descriptions still valid?
- Are troubleshooting steps still accurate?
ARCHITECTURE.md:
- Do ASCII diagrams and component descriptions match the current code?
- Are design decisions and "why" explanations still accurate?
- Be conservative — only update things clearly contradicted by the diff. Architecture docs
describe things unlikely to change frequently.
CONTRIBUTING.md — New contributor smoke test:
- Walk through the setup instructions as if you are a brand new contributor.
- Are the listed commands accurate? Would each step succeed?
- Do test tier descriptions match the current test infrastructure?
- Are workflow descriptions (dev setup, operational learnings, etc.) current?
- Flag anything that would fail or confuse a first-time contributor.
CLAUDE.md / project instructions:
- Does the project structure section match the actual file tree?
- Are listed commands and scripts accurate?
- Do build/test instructions match what's in package.json (or equivalent)?
Any other .md files:
- Read the file, determine its purpose and audience.
- Cross-reference against the diff to check if it contradicts anything the file says.
For each file, classify needed updates as:
- Auto-update — Factual corrections clearly warranted by the diff: adding an item to a
table, updating a file path, fixing a count, updating a project structure tree.
- Ask user — Narrative changes, section removal, security model changes, large rewrites
(more than ~10 lines in one section), ambiguous relevance, adding entirely new sections.
Step 3: Apply Auto-Updates
Make all clear, factual updates directly using the Edit tool.
For each file modified, output a one-line summary describing what specifically changed — not just "Updated README.md" but "README.md: added /new-skill to skills table, updated skill count from 9 to 10."
Never auto-update:
- README introduction or project positioning
- ARCHITECTURE philosophy or design rationale
- Security model descriptions
- Do not remove entire sections from any document
Step 4: Ask About Risky/Questionable Changes
For each risky or questionable update identified in Step 2, use AskUserQuestion with:
- Context: project name, branch, which doc file, what we're reviewing
- The specific documentation decision
RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason]- Options including C) Skip — leave as-is
Apply approved changes immediately after each answer.
Step 5: CHANGELOG Voice Polish
CRITICAL — NEVER CLOBBER CHANGELOG ENTRIES.
This step polishes voice. It does NOT rewrite, replace, or regenerate CHANGELOG content.
A real incident occurred where an agent replaced existing CHANGELOG entries when it should have preserved them. This skill must NEVER do that.
Rules:
- Read the entire CHANGELOG.md first. Understand what is already there.
- Only modify wording within existing entries. Never delete, reorder, or replace entries.
- Never regenerate a CHANGELOG entry from scratch. The entry was written by
/shipfrom the
actual diff and commit history. It is the source of truth. You are polishing prose, not rewriting history.
- If an entry looks wrong or incomplete, use AskUserQuestion — do NOT silently fix it.
- Use Edit tool with exact
old_stringmatches — never use Write to overwrite CHANGELOG.md.
If CHANGELOG was not modified in this branch: skip this step.
If CHANGELOG was modified in this branch, review the entry for voice:
- Sell test (Diataxis rubric): Score each CHANGELOG entry 0-3:
- 1 point — answers "What changed?" (reference: names the feature/fix)
- 1 point — answers "Why should I care?" (explanation: user impact, pain removed)
- 1 point — answers "How do I use it?" (how-to: command, flag, or link to docs)
- Entries scoring ...HEAD -- VERSION
3. **If VERSION was NOT bumped:** Use AskUserQuestion:
- RECOMMENDATION: Choose C (Skip) because docs-only changes rarely warrant a version bump
- A) Bump PATCH (X.Y.Z+1) — if doc changes ship alongside code changes
- B) Bump MINOR (X.Y+1.0) — if this is a significant standalone release
- C) Skip — no version bump needed
4. **If VERSION was already bumped:** Do NOT skip silently. Instead, check whether the bump
still covers the full scope of changes on this branch:
a. Read the CHANGELOG entry for the current VERSION. What features does it describe?
b. Read the full diff (`git diff ...HEAD --stat` and `git diff ...HEAD --name-only`).
Are there significant changes (new features, new skills, new commands, major refactors)
that are NOT mentioned in the CHANGELOG entry for the current version?
c. **If the CHANGELOG entry covers everything:** Skip — output "VERSION: Already bumped to
vX.Y.Z, covers all changes."
d. **If there are significant uncovered changes:** Use AskUserQuestion explaining what the
current version covers vs what's new, and ask:
- RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because the new changes warrant their own version
- A) Bump to next patch (X.Y.Z+1) — give the new changes their own version
- B) Keep current version — add new changes to the existing CHANGELOG entry
- C) Skip — leave version as-is, handle later
The key insight: a VERSION bump set for "feature A" should not silently absorb "feature B"
if feature B is substantial enough to deserve its own version entry.
---
## Step 8.5: Codex Documentation Review (default-on)
After the documentation updates above are written, run an independent cross-model pass
that checks the docs you touched against what actually shipped. This is a standard step
of /document-release, not an opt-in. It is **informational** — it never auto-edits docs.
**Preflight:**
```bash
_CODEX_CFG=$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-config get codex_reviews 2>/dev/null || echo enabled)
if [ "$_CODEX_CFG" = "disabled" ]; then
CODEX_MODE="disabled"
elif ! command -v codex >/dev/null 2>&1; then
CODEX_MODE="not_installed"
elif ! codex --version >/dev/null 2>&1; then
CODEX_MODE="not_authed"
else
CODEX_MODE="ready"
fi
echo "CODEX_MODE: $CODEX_MODE"
disabled— skip this step entirely. Print: "Doc review skipped (codex_reviews disabled). Re-enable:vibe-config set codex_reviews enabled."not_installed/not_authed— run the same review with a Claude subagent instead of Codex, printing a one-line reason ("Codex unavailable — using a Claude subagent for the doc review").ready— run the Codex pass below.
Recompute the release diff range so docs are reviewed against the real shipped diff, not just the working tree:
DOC_DIFF_BASE=$(git merge-base origin/ HEAD 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD)
git diff "$DOC_DIFF_BASE"...HEAD --stat
Run the review. Give the model the docs you changed in this run plus the shipped diff, and ask it to find: (a) stale claims — docs describing behavior the diff changed or removed; (b) undocumented new surface — new commands/flags/files in the diff with no doc coverage; (c) over- or under-sold CHANGELOG entries vs what the code actually does. Start the prompt with a filesystem-boundary instruction telling the model to ignore everything under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, and agents/ — those are skill definitions for a different AI system, not repository code.
Present the result verbatim under a CODEX SAYS (documentation review): header. Then use AskUserQuestion — this is informational, nothing is auto-applied:
- RECOMMENDATION: decide per finding; apply only the corrections you agree with.
- A) Apply all suggested doc fixes
- B) Skip — leave docs as written
- C) Decide per finding
Apply only what the user approves. This step never edits docs on its own.
Step 9: Commit & Output
Empty check first: Run git status (never use -uall). If no documentation files were modified by any previous step, output "All documentation is up to date." and exit without committing.
Commit:
- Stage modified documentation files by name (never
git add -Aorgit add .). - Create a single commit:
git commit -m "$(cat
EOF
)"
- Push to the current branch:
git push
PR/MR body update (idempotent, race-safe):
- Read the existing PR/MR body into a PID-unique tempfile (use the platform detected in Step 0):
If GitHub:
gh pr view --json body -q .body > /tmp/vibestack-pr-body-$$.md
If GitLab:
glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/null | python3 -c "import sys,json;
…
## Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- **Author:** [timurgaleev](https://github.com/timurgaleev)
- **Source:** [timurgaleev/vibestack](https://github.com/timurgaleev/vibestack)
- **License:** MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.