api-documentador-revisor

You can review API documentation by running an automated check that validates the presence and correctness of Getting Started, Use Cases, Technical Reference, endpoint examples, schemas, and error formats. The process cross-checks consistency across partitioned documents and produces a Markdown revision report with a final verdict.

Technical API documentation for non-technical audiences should include a Getting Started guide, Use Cases, Glossary, and Support layers. A review checks that language is appropriate for the target audience and that examples use realistic values like valid JSON, UUIDs, dates, and emails.

To audit existing API docs before publication, apply a validation check to the documentation directory to verify coverage across technical and non-technical layers. This generates a structured Markdown revision report with category-by-category verdicts like APROVADO, AJUSTAR, or REESCREVER, detailing problems and suggested corrections.

Yes, you can validate endpoint examples and error formats by applying a quality analysis that checks for real-value examples, including valid JSON and actionable error explanations. This ensures examples are realistic and error formats are consistent across the entire API documentation set.

The best way to ensure proper navigation is to run a consistency check that verifies index.md coverage and cross-checks endpoints, error catalogs, environments, and glossary terms across partitioned documents. This confirms that all navigation and index files are present and correctly linked.

A revision report marks sections as REESCREVER when the API documentation fails critical quality, completeness, or consistency checks. This verdict indicates that the reviewed documentation layer requires significant rewriting to meet the standards for technical and non-technical audiences before publication.