docs-review

Documentation quality checks identify readability, coverage, and accuracy issues by analyzing artifacts to surface broken links, inconsistent frontmatter, and readability gaps. You can run a review across README, repository, and site docs to generate actionable quality reports.

Yes, you can validate code examples for syntax correctness, required imports, and practical usefulness. The review enforces framework-specific syntax checks for MDX, Docusaurus, and VitePress, while also verifying frontmatter completeness across your site docs.

Identifying coverage gaps involves verifying that topics defined in design docs are actually documented in the final output. The review process cross-references source design materials with repository documentation to surface missing topics and validate example functionality.

Measuring documentation readability applies Flesch score, sentence length, and passive voice metrics to evaluate text clarity. The review enforces readability thresholds across various documentation artifacts to ensure content is clear, correct, and actionable.

Yes, link and navigation checks validate both internal and external links alongside anchor references to prevent dead ends. The review process scans across Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 documentation artifacts to ensure all cross-references remain valid.

Automated documentation quality assessments focus on structural, syntactic, and readability metrics like link validity, frontmatter consistency, and code example syntax. They may not fully evaluate nuanced contextual accuracy or subjective pedagogical clarity without explicit design doc cross-referencing.