Skip to main content
#2
Ranked #2 of 56 in this category· 该品类排名 #2 / 共 56 个

Docs Release

by Mila Cho✓ verified author · 已验证·3mo ago

Sync the docs after the code changes, not three weeks later.

代码改完就同步文档,别拖到三周之后。

Developer DocsCodexClaude CodeLow risk · 低风险trusted · 官方/可信open source · 开源

Before you install安装前须知

No special access needs declared未声明特殊权限需求
Editor's verdict· 编辑结论

Best for the docs that age worst — README, ARCHITECTURE, getting-started — when code has moved on and prose hasn't. Reads the diff, finds the docs that reference the changed code path, and proposes the smallest update needed to keep them honest. Strongest after architectural refactors or API rename waves; weakest on net-new documentation. For full authoring loops with reader testing, anthropic-doc-coauthoring is the better fit.

对那种「代码改了但文字还停在去年」的文档最有效——README、架构图、上手指南这一类长寿命文档。它读 diff,找出哪些文档段落和改动有关,提出最小修改让它们重新对上。在架构重构或 API 改名潮之后效果最好;纯新文档场景不如它的兄弟 anthropic-doc-coauthoring 适合。

— Editorial team · 编辑团队

Install via Skills CLI

Use npx skills add to install this skill into the selected agent. Phase 0 commands are generated from source rules, not verified.

Codex
npx skills add https://github.com/mila-cho/docs-release -g -a codex -y

Drop `-g` to install project-locally

Best for适合什么场景

  • README updatesREADME 更新
  • Architecture docs架构文档同步
  • Changelog cleanupChangelog 清理

Not for不适合什么场景

  • Live deploy verification线上发布验证
  • Persona distillation人物蒸馏
  • Deep browser QA深度浏览器 QA

vs alternativesvs 其他选择

Full compare table完整对比表 →
QA Loop

Open the product, try the flow, fix what breaks, repeat.

4.9·15k stars
diff · 差异Best browser QA pick when you need evidence to leave a paper trail. Each run produces screenshots, console diffs, and a reproducible action log — much harder for stakeholders to wave off than "I tested it locally." Works well as a pre-merge gate and for filing bugs with repro steps attached. Not for unit tests, and not for authenticated production sessions where the screenshot itself becomes a data risk.
GStack QA

Open the app, test the flow, fix what breaks.

4.8·123k stars
diff · 差异Best when browser QA needs to close the loop — find the bug, propose the fix, verify the fix, leave evidence. Where qa-loop emphasizes evidence trails for stakeholder reporting, gstack-qa emphasizes shipping the fix in the same session. Strongest on frontend refactors and visual regressions. Same screenshot data-risk caveat as qa-loop: don't point it at authenticated production sessions where the screenshot itself becomes a leak.
Review Radar

Find the bugs, regressions, and missing tests first.

4.8·11k stars
diff · 差异Best when you want PR review insights without committing to a full review workflow. Surfaces the same regression-and-missing-tests signal as gstack-review, but in a quieter, suggestion-only mode — no fix application, no diff edits, no comment threads. Strongest for senior engineers who want a second opinion before they merge their own PR. Weakest when the goal is gating others' code; for that, gstack-review's heavier loop pays off.

Side-by-side compare维度对比

Key differences with same-lane alternatives
this skill · 当前Docs ReleaseQA LoopGStack QAReview Radar
Rating · 评分4.74.94.84.8
Stars · 星标9.3k15k123k11k
Risk · 风险Low risk · 低风险Medium risk · 中风险Medium risk · 中风险Low risk · 低风险
Best for · 最适合README updatesBrowser smoke testsOpen the app, test the flow, fix what breaks.Find the bugs, regressions, and missing tests first.
Not for · 不适合Live deploy verificationPure unit testingWorkflows that require stronger human review than this catalog entry documents.Workflows that require stronger human review than this catalog entry documents.

Audit notes审计备注

last reviewed 2026-06-10 · 复查
Source源码open on GitHub · 公开
Author作者verified org · 已验证
Network网络访问read-only · 只读
Filesystem文件写入sandboxed · 沙箱
Dependencies依赖audited · 已审计
Telemetry遥测none · 无
Skill Market
Find the best AI skills for the job·按品类找最好用的 AI 技能
v0.4 · 1306 skills indexed · last review 2026-06-10