signoz-docs-pr-review · git:20260323.8d2293d · 2026-03-23 · sha256 1553fc3ac205b81c
signoz-docs-pr-review git:20260323.8d2293dA
Immutable. This exact content never changes and is served at /api/v1/blob/1553fc3ac205b81c.
--- name: signoz-docs-pr-review description: Review SigNoz documentation pull requests using CONTRIBUTING.md and this skill's docs-review rubric. Use when asked to review docs PRs, post inline findings, verify OpenTelemetry technical accuracy with sources, decide add-to-onboarding labeling, and write a concise checklist-based summary. --- # SigNoz Docs PR Review Review documentation pull requests in `signoz.io` with a strict, actionable rubric, prioritizing a JTBD-first lens. ## Scope Use this skill for docs review on changes such as: - `data/docs/**` - `public/img/docs/**` - `constants/docsSideNav.ts` - `constants/componentItems.ts` and `constants/componentItems/*.ts` when new docs should also appear in docs listicles, overview cards, or similar discovery surfaces - `next.config.js` when docs URL paths change If a PR includes frontend code too, use this skill only for the docs part. ## Source of Truth - Treat `CONTRIBUTING.md` at repo root as the single source of truth for docs standards. - Apply rules; do not restate the entire guide in comments. - Ignore date-related guideline checks during review. ## Review Process 1. Identify docs files changed in the PR. 2. Identify related discoverability files that should change with the docs when relevant (`constants/docsSideNav.ts` for sidebar visibility, `constants/componentItems.ts` as the public entrypoint and `constants/componentItems/*.ts` as the source modules for listicle/overview visibility). 3. Read relevant sections in `CONTRIBUTING.md` (JTBD, patterns/components, happy path, hyperlinks, doc-type rules, docs checklist). 4. Identify intended user personas for each changed doc (for example: OTel beginner, platform engineer, app developer, SRE) from doc context. 5. Run a **JTBD-first pass** (mandatory) before technical verification. 6. Verify technical accuracy when claims involve OpenTelemetry behavior/configuration. 7. Post inline findings for concrete issues. 8. Post exactly one concise summary comment referencing Docs PR Checklist coverage. ## JTBD Priority Rubric (Mandatory) Review each changed doc against these checks in order. If any check fails, raise a finding. 1. Intended personas - List primary and secondary personas the doc appears to target. - Confirm scope, assumptions, and language match those personas. 2. Primary job clarity - The reader can quickly tell what problem this page solves. - The page does not mix unrelated jobs into one mandatory flow. 3. Happy/common path focus - Common path is easy to follow end-to-end. - Tangential information is minimized or moved to optional/collapsible sections. 4. Time-to-first-success - A clear default path exists and reaches first success without optional detours. - Mandatory steps are minimal and in the right order. 5. Step clarity and concision - Steps are concrete, unambiguous, and concise. - Users can execute each step without guessing missing actions. 6. Minimal required steps - The doc requires only what is necessary to complete the primary job. - Non-essential actions are explicitly optional. 7. Recommended defaults vs advanced options - Best/recommended configuration is presented as default. - Advanced options are moved to the bottom, troubleshooting, collapsible sections, or next steps. 8. Beginner unblockers - Any required attribute/config/concept has a direct "how to set this" step or link to a doc that explains how to set it. - No critical prerequisite is implied without remediation guidance. 9. Symptom-to-action mapping - Troubleshooting starts from user-visible symptoms and points to exact next actions. - Failure modes are concrete (not generic "check your setup"). 10. Success signal - Validation tells users exactly where to check in SigNoz and what success looks like. 11. Follow-through - Next steps help users complete the broader job (for example dashboards, alerts, deeper guides). 12. Helpful links (internal/external) - Link to internal/external docs wherever they directly help completion of the current step. - Avoid irrelevant link dumping. 13. Link health - Added/edited links resolve (no dead links). Prefer canonical production paths. 14. Discoverability surface updates - If a PR adds a new integration, data source, installation path, dashboard template, or similar doc that users should find from an existing docs listicle/overview card surface, verify the matching entry was added or updated in the relevant `constants/componentItems/*.ts` module and remains exported through `constants/componentItems.ts`. - When the surfaced component uses icons, verify the relevant component `ICON_MAP` was updated too. - Do not require this when no existing listicle/overview surface is relevant. If a JTBD check cannot be validated from the PR context, explicitly call out the assumption and residual risk. ## Technical Accuracy and Sources When validating technical claims, use this source priority: 1. `https://opentelemetry.io/docs/*` 2. `https://github.com/open-telemetry/*` (official repos, READMEs, examples) 3. Other reputable sources only if official sources do not cover the claim For each correction that depends on verification: - Add a short citation in the comment as: `Source: <URL>` - Keep citations precise and relevant to the claim - Do not paste long excerpts Prioritize verification for: - Config keys and component names - Receiver/exporter/processor names - Environment variables and CLI flags - APIs, semantic conventions, version compatibility, deprecations If sources conflict, prefer the most recent official OpenTelemetry docs/repo over third-party content. ## Web Lookup Guidance - Use targeted queries first (for example, `site:opentelemetry.io <topic>`). - Fetch only the minimal pages needed to verify the exact claim. - Summarize findings; avoid large copy-paste. ## Labeling Rule If PR adds a **new** docs file (not only edits existing docs) that explains sending data to SigNoz Cloud (for example new instrumentation, new collector receiver flow, or new log collection method), add label: - `add-to-onboarding` Command: ```bash gh issue edit <PR_NUMBER> --add-label "add-to-onboarding" ``` ## Commenting Rules - Comment only on issues. - Do not praise or restate compliant items. - Keep comments specific, with file references and concrete fixes. - Prefer concise wording focused on user impact. ## Output Structure ### Inline comments For each issue include: - short issue title - impact (why it matters) - exact fix suggestion - `Source: <URL>` when technical verification is involved ### One summary comment Post one summary comment that includes: 1. Key findings grouped by severity (`P1`, `P2`, `P3`) 2. Intended personas and fit summary (who this doc serves and where fit is weak) 3. JTBD coverage summary (which mandatory JTBD checks failed or were at risk) 4. Checklist-oriented coverage summary (what failed/needs work) 5. Any open questions/assumptions 6. Whether onboarding label was applied (when relevant) ## Suggested Commands ```bash # PR context gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> gh pr diff <PR_NUMBER> # changed docs and policy anchors rg --files data/docs rg -n "JTBD|happy path|Patterns and components|Hyperlinks|Docs PR Checklist" CONTRIBUTING.md # scan for likely docs quality issues rg -n "## Next steps|## Troubleshooting|KeyPointCallout|ToggleHeading|https?://|<[^>]+>" data/docs # quick link health checks for changed links curl -sI <URL> ``` ## Guardrails - Do not require a dedicated "Target Persona" section unless context truly needs it. - Keep advanced options out of the mandatory path unless essential for first success. - If a PR adds or changes docs MDX components or component-driven content patterns, verify both agent markdown handling (`utils/docs/agentMarkdownStubs.ts`) and rendered Copy Markdown behavior (`utils/docs/buildCopyMarkdownFromRendered.ts`) where relevant. - Keep review feedback decision-oriented and immediately actionable. - Do not mark a review complete if mandatory JTBD checks were skipped.