readme-expert

>

rfxlamia/skillkit16 installsApache-2.0Synced Aug 26

Works with

Claude CodeCursorCodex CLIGitHub CopilotGemini CLI
---
name: readme-expert
description: >
license: Apache-2.0
---

## KEY FEATURES:
  - Codebase scanning for accurate facts
  - 5-layer anti-hallucination validation
  - Script execution testing
  - Citation tracking for all claims
  - Template-based structure selection

  DIFFERENTIATOR: Every claim verified against actual codebase. No assumptions,
  no hallucinations. Script execution testing ensures examples work.
---

# README Expert

**Create comprehensive README.md files grounded in codebase reality.**

## Overview

README Expert uses validation-first methodology to generate accurate, comprehensive README files by:

1. **Scanning actual codebase** - Extract facts from real files (no assumptions)
2. **Verifying every claim** - 5-layer validation ensures accuracy
3. **Testing all scripts** - Execute commands/examples to ensure they work
4. **Tracking citations** - Every statement traceable to source files
5. **Quality standards** - Follows standard-readme and Google style guides

**Anti-Hallucination Core:** Research shows AI README hallucinations occur in 3-27% of outputs. This skill reduces that to near-zero through systematic verification.

---

## Workflow Decision Tree

**Choose workflow based on task:**

```
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│   What is your README task?         │
└───────────┬─────────────────────────┘
            │
    ┌───────┴───────┐
    │               │
    ▼               ▼
┌─────────┐   ┌──────────┐
│ CREATE  │   │ VALIDATE │
│   NEW   │   │ EXISTING │
└────┬────┘   └────┬─────┘
     │             │
     ▼             ▼
  Section 1     Section 2
  (Full Flow)  (Validation Only)
```

**Decision Criteria:**

| Scenario | Route | Sections Used |
|----------|-------|---------------|
| No README exists | CREATE NEW | 1 (Full Workflow) |
| README exists but incomplete | CREATE NEW | 1 (Full Workflow) |
| README exists, check accuracy | VALIDATE | 2 (Validation Only) |
| Update sections of README | CREATE NEW | 1 (Partial execution) |
| Verify scripts still work | VALIDATE | 2 (Focus Layer 3) |

---

## Section 1: Full README Creation Workflow

**Use when:** Creating new README or major overhaul.

**Time:** 3-5 minutes with automation
**Output:** Complete, validated README.md
**Quality Target:** 95%+ accuracy, 0 hallucinations

### Phase 1: Codebase Scanning (2 min)

**Goal:** Extract accurate project facts from actual files.

**Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/foundation/codebase-scanner.md`

**Steps:**

1. **Detect Project Type**
   ```bash
   # Find config files
   Glob: pattern="{package.json,pyproject.toml,Cargo.toml,go.mod}"
   # Read detected file
   Read: file_path="<detected_config>"
   ```

2. **Extract Metadata**
   - Project name, version, description (exact quotes)
   - Dependencies (actual, not assumed)
   - Entry points / CLI commands
   - Author, license, repo URL

3. **Scan Structure**
   ```bash
   # Find source directories
   Glob: pattern="src/**/*.{py,js,ts,go,rs}"
   Glob: pattern="lib/**/*.{py,js,ts}"
   # Find tests
   Glob: pattern="{tests,test,__tests__}/**/*"
   # Find docs
   Glob: pattern="docs/**/*.md"
   ```

4. **Discover Features**
   ```bash
   # Find public API
   Grep: pattern="^(export|class|def)\s+\w+" output_mode="content"
   # Find CLI commands
   Grep: pattern="(scripts|entry_points|bin)" path="<config_file>"
   # Find environment variables
   Grep: pattern="(process\.env|os\.environ|os\.Getenv)"
   ```

**Output:** Verified project facts with source citations.

**Anti-Hallucination Check:** Every fact must have source file reference.

---

### Phase 2: Template Selection (30 sec)

**Goal:** Choose appropriate README structure.

**Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/application/template-library.md`

**Templates by Project Type:**

| Project Type | Template | Key Sections |
|--------------|----------|--------------|
| Library/Package | standard-readme | Title, Install, Usage, API, License |
| CLI Tool | CLI-focused | Title, Install, Commands, Examples, Config |
| Web App | App-focused | Title, Features, Deploy, Config, Develop |
| Framework | Framework | Title, Quick Start, Concepts, API, Extend |
| API Service | API-focused | Title, Endpoints, Auth, Examples, Deploy |

**Selection Criteria:**
- Check package.json "bin" field → CLI template
- Check pyproject.toml [project.scripts] → CLI template
- Check "dependencies" with "express|fastify|flask" → API template
- Check "src/components" or "react|vue|svelte" → Web App template
- Default: Library template

**Output:** Selected template structure.

---

### Phase 3: README Generation (1 min)

**Goal:** Write README sections with verified content.

**Standard Structure:**

1. **Title & Badges**
   ```markdown
   # {project_name}

   > {description from package metadata - EXACT quote}

   ![CI Status](badge_url) ![Version](badge_url) ![License](badge_url)
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Name from package.json:name
   - Description from package.json:description (exact)
   - Badge URLs verified against .github/workflows/ files

2. **Installation**
   ```markdown
   ## Installation

   ```bash
   npm install {exact_package_name}
   ```
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Package name from metadata (exact)
   - Installation command matches package manager detected
   - Prerequisites from "engines" field

3. **Usage Examples**
   ```markdown
   ## Usage

   ```javascript
   import { functionName } from 'package-name'

   // Example verified from examples/ directory or tests/
   const result = functionName(input)
   ```
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Imports verified: Grep for actual exports
   - Function signatures extracted from actual code
   - Examples copied from examples/ or tests/ directories

4. **API Documentation**
   ```markdown
   ## API

   ### `functionName(param: Type): ReturnType`

   Description verified from code comments/docstrings.
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Function signatures extracted with Grep
   - Parameters from actual function definitions
   - Descriptions from docstrings (if present)

5. **Configuration**
   ```markdown
   ## Configuration

   Required environment variables:
   - `VAR_NAME` - Description from .env.example
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Variables found in code with Grep
   - Descriptions from .env.example (if exists)

6. **Testing**
   ```markdown
   ## Testing

   ```bash
   npm test
   ```
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - Test command from package.json scripts.test
   - Test framework detected from dependencies

7. **Contributing, License, Contact**
   ```markdown
   ## Contributing

   See [CONTRIBUTING.md](./CONTRIBUTING.md)

   ## License

   {license from package.json} - See [LICENSE](./LICENSE)
   ```

   **Verification:**
   - CONTRIBUTING.md existence checked
   - LICENSE file existence checked
   - License type from package metadata

**Output:** Complete README draft with inline citations.

---

### Phase 4: Validation (1-2 min)

**Goal:** Verify all claims are accurate.

**Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/foundation/validation-checklist.md`

**Execute 5-Layer Validation:**

**Layer 1: File Existence**
```bash
# Verify all referenced files
Read: file_path="<each_referenced_file>"
# Pass: File exists ✅
# Fail: Remove reference from README ❌
```

**Layer 2: Content Accuracy**
- Compare README claims against actual file contents
- Verify function signatures match actual code
- Check version numbers match package.json exactly
- Confirm descriptions are exact quotes (not paraphrased)

**Layer 3: Execution Validity**
**Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/application/script-executor.md`

```bash
# Test installation command (if safe)
# Test CLI commands with --help flag
# Extract code examples to temp files and execute
```

**Layer 4: Link Integrity**
```bash
# Internal links
Read: file_path="<each_linked_file>"

# External URLs (sample check)
WebFetch: url="<external_url>" prompt="Check accessibility"

# Anchor links
Grep: pattern="^#+\s+{anchor_text}" path="README.md"
```

**Layer 5: Citation Traceability**
- Every claim has source file:line reference (internal tracking)
- Confidence scores: 100% (direct quote), 90% (extracted), 70%+ required
- Remove any claim with confidence <70%

**Output:** Validation report with pass/fail for each layer.

---

### Phase 5: Quality Assessment (30 sec)

**Goal:** Ensure README meets quality standards.

**Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/application/quality-standards.md`

**Quality Checklist:**

- [ ] **Completeness:** All required sections present
- [ ] **Accuracy:** All claims verified (95%+ confidence)
- [ ] **Clarity:** Readable, concise, well-structured
- [ ] **Functional:** All commands/examples tested
- [ ] **Standard Compliance:** Follows standard-readme spec
- [ ] **Links:** All links valid and working
- [ ] **Length:** Not too short (<50 lines) or too long (>500 lines)
- [ ] **TOC:** Table of contents if >100 lines
- [ ] **Badges:** Relevant and accurate
- [ ] **License:** Clearly stated

**Scoring Rubric:**
- **9-10/10:** Excellent - All criteria met
- **7-8/10:** Good - Minor improvements needed
- **5-6/10:** Fair - Several issues to fix
- **<5/10:** Poor - Major revision required

**Target:** ≥8/10 for publication

**Output:** Quality score and improvement recommendations.

---

### Phase 6: Final Output

**Deliverables:**

1. **README.md** - Complete, validated file
2. **Validation Report** - Results from 5-layer validation
3. **Citation Map** (optional) - Source tracking for audit
4. **Quality Score** - Final assessment

**Final Checks Before Delivery:**
- No TODOs or placeholder text
- No broken links
- No unverified claims
- All code examples tested (where possible)
- No marketing fluff without evidence

---

## Section 2: Validation-Only Workflow

**Use when:** README exists, need to verify accuracy.

**Time:** 2-3 minutes
**Output:** Validation report with pass/fail status

### Quick Validation Process

1. **Load Knowledge:** `knowledge/foundation/validation-checklist.md`

2. **Execute 5-Layer Validation:**
   - Layer 1: File Existence (verify all referenced files)
   - Layer 2: Content Accuracy (check claims match reality)
   - Layer 3: Execution Validity (test commands/scripts)
   - Layer 4: Link Integrity (validate all URLs/links)
   - Layer 5: Citation Traceability (audit claim sources)

3. **Generate Report:**
   ```
   README Validation Report
   ========================
   Layer 1: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL (details)
   Layer 2: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ WARNING (details)
   Layer 3: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL (details)
   Layer 4: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL (details)
   Layer 5: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ WARNING (details)

   OVERALL: ✅ READY / ⚠️ NEEDS FIXES / ❌ MAJOR ISSUES
   Hallucination Risk: LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH
   Confidence: XX%
   ```

4. **Provide Fix Recommendations:**
   - List specific issues found
   - Suggest corrections with source file references
   - Prioritize critical fixes (broken links, false claims)

---

## Anti-Hallucination Principles

**Core Rules (Always Follow):**

1. ✅ **DO:** Verify every file reference with Read/Glob
2. ✅ **DO:** Extract exact quotes from source files
3. ✅ **DO:** Test commands before documenting them
4. ✅ **DO:** Link claims to source files (internal tracking)
5. ✅ **DO:** Acknowledge uncertainty when confidence <90%

6. ❌ **DON'T:** Assume standard structure without checking
7. ❌ **DON'T:** Invent features not found in code
8. ❌ **DON'T:** Copy examples from other projects
9. ❌ **DON'T:** Paraphrase or "improve" actual descriptions
10. ❌ **DON'T:** Include marketing claims without evidence

**Hallucination Detection Patterns:**

| Red Flag | Example | Fix |
|----------|---------|-----|
| Invented features | "Supports automatic retry" (no retry code) | Remove or find evidence |
| Fake examples | `api.configure({theme:'dark'})` (method doesn't exist) | Use actual API |
| Missing files | "See docs/guide.md" (file doesn't exist) | Remove reference or create file |
| Wrong versions | "Requires Node 14+" (actually requires 18+) | Use exact version from metadata |
| Unsupported claims | "The fastest solution" | Remove or cite benchmarks |

---

## Knowledge Base Reference

**All detailed guides are in `knowledge/` directory.**

**Quick Access:**

- **Scanning techniques:** `knowledge/foundation/codebase-scanner.md`
- **Validation checklist:** `knowledge/foundation/validation-checklist.md`
- **Script testing:** `knowledge/application/script-executor.md`
- **Templates:** `knowledge/application/template-library.md`
- **Quality standards:** `knowledge/application/quality-standards.md`

**Navigation:** See `knowledge/INDEX.md` for complete map.

---

## Best Practices

1. **Start with scanning** - Gather facts before writing
2. **Use templates** - Don't reinvent structure
3. **Quote exactly** - Never paraphrase metadata
4. **Test everything** - Execute commands where safe
5. **Validate thoroughly** - All 5 layers, no shortcuts
6. **Acknowledge gaps** - Mark uncertain info clearly
7. **Keep it concise** - Link to detailed docs instead of duplicating
8. **Update regularly** - Validate README on major code changes

---

## Common Use Cases

### Use Case 1: New Project README
```
User: "Create a README for my new npm package"
→ Section 1 (Full Workflow)
→ Scan package.json → Select template → Generate → Validate → Deliver
```

### Use Case 2: Validate Accuracy
```
User: "Check if my README is still accurate"
→ Section 2 (Validation Only)
→ Run 5-layer validation → Report issues → Suggest fixes
```

### Use Case 3: Update After Refactor
```
User: "Update README after refactoring API"
→ Section 1 (Focus on API section)
→ Scan new API → Update API section → Validate → Deliver
```

### Use Case 4: Test Examples
```
User: "Make sure all code examples in README work"
→ Section 2 Layer 3 (Execution Validity)
→ Extract examples → Execute → Report failures → Fix
```

---

## Technical Notes

**Token Efficiency:**
- P0 knowledge files: ~530 tokens
- P1 knowledge files: ~830 tokens
- Total knowledge: ~1,360 tokens (well under 5k limit)
- On-demand loading: Load only sections needed

**Confidence Scoring:**
- 100%: Direct file quote
- 90%: Extracted from code analysis
- 80%: Inferred from multiple sources
- 70%: Based on conventions
- <70%: Reject (too risky)

**Script Execution Safety:**
- Always ask permission before executing destructive commands
- Safe: `--help`, `--version`, `--list`
- Risky: `install`, `build`, `deploy`
- Dangerous: `rm`, `drop`, `delete`

---

## Version

**Current Version:** 1.0
**Last Updated:** 2025-11-13
**Status:** Production Ready

**Changelog:**
- v1.0: Initial release with validation-first approach
- Added script execution testing
- 5-layer anti-hallucination validation
- Citation tracking system

More Writing & Documentation skills

paper-context-resolver

lllllllama/rigorpilot-skills

Rigor Paper Context helper for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use only when the README and repository files leave a narrow reproduction-critical gap and the task is to resolve a specific paper detail such as dataset split, preprocessing, evaluation protocol, checkpoint mapping, or runtime assumption from primary paper sources while recording conflicts. Do not use for general paper summary, repo scanning, environment setup, command execution, title-only paper lookup, or replacing README guidance by default.

450.8k

repo-intake-and-plan

lllllllama/rigorpilot-skills

Rigor Intake helper for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use when the task is specifically to scan a repository, read the README and common project files, extract documented commands, classify inference, evaluation, and training candidates, and return the smallest trustworthy reproduction plan to the main orchestrator. Do not use for environment setup, asset download, command execution, final reporting, paper lookup, or end-to-end orchestration.

450.0k

minimal-run-and-audit

lllllllama/rigorpilot-skills

Rigor Run skill for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use when the task is specifically to capture or normalize evidence from the selected smoke test or documented inference or evaluation command and write standardized `repro_outputs/` files, including patch notes when repository files changed. Do not use for training execution, initial repo intake, generic environment setup, paper lookup, target selection, hidden scientific-meaning changes, or end-to-end orchestration by itself.

449.9k

← All Writing & Documentation skills

Check your AI visibility

One URL in, a 0–100 score and the exact fixes out.

RUN THE CHECK

Browse all the tools

15 tools across six categories
13 of them never send your data anywhere

Free · No signup · No trial clock

SEE THE DIRECTORY