Individual skill
s4h-writing-technical
Writes and audits technical documentation, API docs, user guides, and specifications for completeness, sequence, precision, and audience calibration. Use when documentation is confusing, assumes too much knowledge, or leaves gaps a user can't bridge. Triggers: 'technical writing', 'API documentation', 'write documentation', 'user guide', 'technical docs', 'the documentation is confusing', 'write a spec', 'docs are missing steps'.
skills/s4h-writing-technical/SKILL.md
Source commit a30df8b67698ccb03ef5e35d68c2eddc5321ad3f
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Instructions only
- Last checked
- Nov 11, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 241
- Repository last updated
- Jul 15, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- claude-code Repository topic
- claude-code-plugin Repository topic
- cognitive-frameworks Repository topic
- creativity Repository topic
- decision-making Repository topic
- ethics Repository topic
- mental-models Repository topic
- problem-solving Repository topic
- reasoning Repository topic
- systems-thinking Repository topic
- docs Derived category
- writing Derived category
- docs-api Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 7,979 bytes
Read excerpt
# Writing: Technical
Technical writing fails when it is written for the person who already knows how the system works. The person who already knows doesn't need the document. The document is for the person who doesn't know — and that person's experience of the document is the only test that matters. The test is simple: can a reader with the assumed knowledge execute the task using only this document? If they cannot, something is missing.
This is a higher bar than it sounds. Technical writers who know the system well have difficulty seeing the gaps — because for them, nothing is missing. The prerequisite knowledge is so obvious it doesn't seem worth stating. The step that requires understanding the system's mental model doesn't look like a step — it looks like common sense. These invisible assumptions are where most documentation fails.
The five failure modes in technical writing:
**Audience miscalibration:** Assumes knowledge the reader doesn't have, or over-explains what the reader already knows. Both are wrong. The first makes the document unusable; the second makes it condescending.
**Incompleteness:** Steps that require bridging knowledge the document doesn't provide. Often invisible to the writer because the knowledge is automatic.
**Sequence errors:** Prerequisites stated after they are needed, steps in the wrong order, troubleshooting information buried after the task it applies to.
