recipe-update-doc
GitHub用于更新现有设计文档(Design Doc/PRD/ADR)的编排技能。通过识别目标、澄清变更、调用专家代理更新内容,并强制执行代码验证与文档审查流程,确保文档一致性与准确性,最终等待审批完成。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add shinpr/claude-code-workflows --skill recipe-update-doc -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "recipe-update-doc",
"description": "Update existing design documents (Design Doc \/ PRD \/ ADR) with review",
"disable-model-invocation": true
}
Execute Skill: llm-friendly-context before writing Agent prompts, handoffs, or generated artifacts. Execute Skill: subagents-orchestration-guide before making workflow decisions, invoking agents, or resolving findings.
Context: Dedicated to updating existing design documents.
Orchestrator Definition
Core Identity: "I am an orchestrator." (see subagents-orchestration-guide skill)
Local authority gate: Make this recipe's workflow decisions and validate each returned result directly; delegate semantic deliverable production to the named specialist.
Review Resolution Gate [MANDATORY]: Resolve every actionable deliverable-review finding through subagents-orchestration-guide Review Resolution before correction or progression.
Before the first finding disposition, read references/review-resolution.md from the loaded subagents-orchestration-guide skill.
First Action: Register Steps 1-6 using TaskCreate before any execution.
Execution Protocol:
- Invoke named specialists for deliverable production — pass deliverable paths between them and validate their results (see subagents-orchestration-guide "Orchestrator Execution Boundary")
- Execute update flow:
- Identify target → Clarify changes → Update document → Review → Consistency check
- Stop at the
[Stop: Final approval]marker → Wait for user approval before completing
- Scope: Complete when updated document receives approval
At each Agent invocation below, build the prompt as a mechanical extraction: copy the named source values into the exact fields, apply only the declared serialization, then invoke immediately.
CRITICAL: Execute document-reviewer — it is the quality gate for document accuracy.
Workflow Overview
Target document → change clarification
↓
technical-designer / technical-designer-frontend / prd-creator (update mode)
↓ (Design Doc only)
code-verifier → document-reviewer
↓ (Design Doc only)
design-sync → [Stop: Final approval]
Scope Boundaries
Included in this skill:
- Existing document identification and selection
- Change content clarification
- Document update with appropriate agent (update mode)
- Document review with document-reviewer
- Consistency verification with design-sync (Design Doc only)
Out of scope (redirect to appropriate skills):
- New requirement analysis
- Work planning or implementation
Responsibility Boundary: This skill completes with updated document approval.
Target document: $ARGUMENTS
Execution Flow
Step 1: Target Document Identification
Discover the existing documents under docs/design/, docs/prd/, and docs/adr/.
Decision flow:
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
| $ARGUMENTS specifies a path | Use specified document |
| $ARGUMENTS describes a topic | Search documents matching the topic |
| Multiple candidates found | Present options with AskUserQuestion |
| No documents found | Report and end (document creation is out of scope) |
Step 2: Document Type and Layer Determination
Determine type from document path, then determine the layer to select the correct update agent:
| Path Pattern | Type | Update Agent | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
docs/design/*.md |
Design Doc | technical-designer or technical-designer-frontend | See layer detection below |
docs/prd/*.md |
PRD | prd-creator | - |
docs/adr/*.md |
ADR | technical-designer or technical-designer-frontend | See layer detection below |
Layer detection (for Design Doc and ADR): Read the document and determine its layer from content signals:
- Frontend (→ technical-designer-frontend): Document title/scope mentions React, components, UI, frontend; or file contains component hierarchy, state management, UI interactions
- Backend (→ technical-designer): All other cases (API, data layer, business logic, infrastructure)
ADR Update Guidance:
- Minor changes (clarification, typo fix, small scope adjustment): Update the existing ADR file
- Major changes (decision reversal, significant scope change): Create a new ADR that supersedes the original
Step 3: Change Content Clarification
Determine which sections need updating, the reason for the change, and the expected outcome after the update. Derive them from the request and the target document. Use AskUserQuestion only for an item the request and document leave undetermined, and only when a different answer would change which sections are updated or what the update must achieve.
Pass the resulting items, covered sections, and any stated total size budget to update or revision agents. Before the next approval gate, map every diff hunk to an approved item or required consistency update; request a scope decision for unmapped or over-budget changes.
Step 4: Document Update
Invoke the update agent determined in Step 2:
subagent_type: [Update Agent from Step 2]
description: "Update [Type from Step 2]"
prompt: |
Operation Mode: update
Existing Document: [path from Step 1]
## Changes Required
[Step 3 statements for the sections to update, reason, and expected outcome, copied verbatim]
Update the document to reflect the specified changes.
Add change history entry.
Step 5: Document Review
For Design Doc updates only: Before document-reviewer, invoke code-verifier:
subagent_type: code-verifier
description: "Verify updated Design Doc"
prompt: |
doc_type: design-doc
document_path: [path from Step 1]
Verify the updated Design Doc against current codebase.
Verification focus: Pay special attention to literal identifier referential
integrity in the updated sections (paths, endpoints, type names, config keys).
Store output as: $CODE_VERIFICATION_OUTPUT
Invoke document-reviewer with the applicable exact shape:
- Design Doc:
doc_type: DesignDoc,target: [path from Step 1],review_context: update, andverification_evidence: $CODE_VERIFICATION_OUTPUT. - PRD:
doc_type: PRDandtarget: [path from Step 1]. - ADR:
doc_type: ADRBatch,targets: [path from Step 1], andreview_context: update.
For each type, review consistency of the changed sections and their dependent statements, governing requirements, and change history.
Store output as: $STEP_5_OUTPUT
On review result:
- Approved → Proceed to Step 6
- Needs revision → Apply the Review Resolution Gate. Return to Step 4 when
applyfindings exist, using the following prompt:subagent_type: [Update Agent from Step 2] description: "Revise [Type from Step 2]" prompt: | Operation Mode: update Existing Document: [path from Step 1] ## Adjudicated Review Findings [complete reviewer finding objects verbatim, with only their orchestrator dispositions added] Treat these findings as the complete revision scope and preserve adjacent content. - On re-review pass
prior_feedbackas[{id, disposition, reason?, evidence}] - All actionable findings are
declineand everyuser_decision_requireditem is resolved → Proceed to Step 6
Step 6: Consistency Verification and Final Approval [Stop: Final approval]
For Design Doc only, invoke design-sync first:
subagent_type: design-sync
description: "Verify consistency"
prompt: "source_design: [path from Step 1]"
When conflicts are detected, apply the Review Resolution Gate using design-sync as a fresh verifier. Return apply conflicts to Step 4 for the owning document, rerun design-sync after correction, retain evidenced declines as complete, and request user input for user_decision_required or the Gate's escalation conditions.
For every document type, present the updated document, the review outcome, any resolved declines, and the sync result when one ran. This is the only approval gate in the flow: wait for the user's decision before completing.
Error Handling
| Error | Action |
|---|---|
| Target document not found | Report and end (document creation is out of scope) |
| Sub-agent update fails | Log failure, present error to user, retry once |
Completion Criteria
- Identified target document
- Change content determined from the request, the document, or a question whose answer changed the update
- Updated document with appropriate agent (update mode)
- Executed code-verifier before document-reviewer (Design Doc only)
- Executed document-reviewer and addressed feedback
- Executed design-sync for consistency verification (Design Doc only)
- Obtained user approval for updated document
Output Example
Document update completed.
- Updated document: docs/design/[document-name].md
- Approval status: User approved
When findings were declined during review, append their IDs, governing reasons, and evidence to this completion response.
Version History
-
416af89
Current 2026-08-12 16:37
重构:移除了跨代理和技能的工作生成约束,优化了责任边界和文档路由逻辑。
-
0d96a63
2026-08-05 22:03
修复工作流契约缺口;收敛基于证据的设计决策;在审查决议门控中增加被驳回ID及其治理理由的证据报告要求。
-
51b7dbc
2026-08-05 01:44
重构简化了规划流程并收敛审查机制;修复以确保基于结果的编排;新增基于证据的审查决议功能。
-
d439b50
2026-07-31 02:51
修复工作流提示词契约;重构以最小化 Opus 5 工作流提示词;将批准的范围绑定到已完成的差异中
- 66e3b29 2026-07-05 11:58


