Atlas / Skills / paperclipai / Doc Maintenance

Doc MaintenanceCAUTION

skills/paperclipai/doc-maintenance

The open-source app everyone uses to manage agents at work

Verdict
CAUTION
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
—
Hosts
2 documented
License
MIT
Stars
81,307
01

Overview

The open-source app everyone uses to manage agents at work

Read from source at commit 59d017e6174aOBSERVED · 2026-09-23
02

Host compatibility

What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.

HostStatusNotes
cursormentioned
openclawmentioned
03

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: doc-maintenance
description: >
  Audit README, SPEC, and PRODUCT docs against recent git history for drift and
  make minimal PR-ready edits. Use when asked to review docs for accuracy, after
  major feature merges, or on a schedule.
---

# Doc Maintenance Skill

Detect documentation drift and fix it via PR — no rewrites, no churn.

## When to Use

- Periodic doc review (e.g. weekly or after releases)
- After major feature merges
- When asked "are our docs up to date?"
- When asked to audit README / SPEC / PRODUCT accuracy

## Target Documents

| Document | Path | What matters |
|----------|------|-------------|
| README | `README.md` | Features table, roadmap, quickstart, "what is" accuracy, "works with" table |
| SPEC | `doc/SPEC.md` | No false "not supported" claims, major model/schema accuracy |
| PRODUCT | `doc/PRODUCT.md` | Core concepts, feature list, principles accuracy |

Out of scope: DEVELOPING.md, DATABASE.md, CLI.md, doc/plans/, skill files,
release notes. These are dev-facing or ephemeral — lower risk of user-facing
confusion.

## Workflow

### Step 1 — Detect what changed

Find the last review cursor:

```bash
# Read the last-reviewed commit SHA
CURSOR_FILE=".doc-review-cursor"
if [ -f "$CURSOR_FILE" ]; then
  LAST_SHA=$(cat "$CURSOR_FILE" | head -1)
else
  # First run: look back 60 days
  LAST_SHA=$(git log --format="%H" --after="60 days ago" --reverse | head -1)
fi
```

Then gather commits since the cursor:

```bash
git log "$LAST_SHA"..HEAD --oneline --no-merges
```

### Step 2 — Classify changes

Scan commit messages and changed files. Categorize into:

- **Feature** — new capabilities (keywords: `feat`, `add`, `implement`, `support`)
- **Breaking** — removed/renamed things (keywords: `remove`, `breaking`, `drop`, `rename`)
- **Structural** — new directories, config changes, new adapters, new CLI commands

**Ignore:** refactors, test-only changes, CI config, dependency bumps, doc-only
changes, style/formatting commits. These don't affect doc accuracy.

For borderline cases, check the actual diff — a commit titled "refactor: X"
that adds a new public API is a feature.

### Step 3 — Build a change summary

Produce a concise list like:

```
Since last review (<sha>, <date>):
- FEATURE: Plugin system merged (runtime, SDK, CLI, slots, event bridge)
- FEATURE: Project archiving added
- BREAKING: Removed legacy webhook adapter
- STRUCTURAL: New .agents/skills/ directory convention
```

If there are no notable changes, skip to Step 7 (update cursor and exit).

### Step 4 — Audit each target doc

For each target document, read it fully and cross-reference against the change
summary. Check for:

1. **False negatives** — major shipped features not mentioned at all
2. **False positives** — features listed as "coming soon" / "roadmap" / "planned"
   / "not supported" / "TBD" that already shipped
3. **Quickstart accuracy** — install commands, prereqs, and startup instructions
   still correct (README only)
4. **Feature table accuracy** — does the features section reflect current
   capabilities? (README only)
5. **Works-with accuracy** — are supported adapters/integrations listed correctly?

Use `references/audit-checklist.md` as the structured checklist.
Use `references/section-map.md` to know where to look for each feature area.

### Step 5 — Create branch and apply minimal edits

```bash
# Create a branch for the doc updates
BRANCH="docs/maintenance-$(date +%Y%m%d)"
git checkout -b "$BRANCH"
```

Apply **only** the edits needed to fix drift. Rules:

- **Minimal patches only.** Fix inaccuracies, don't rewrite sections.
- **Preserve voice and style.** Match the existing tone of each document.
- **No cosmetic changes.** Don't fix typos, reformat tables, or reorganize
  sections unless they're part of a factual fix.
- **No new sections.** If a feature needs a whole new section, note it in the
  PR description as a follow-up — don't add it in a maintenance pass.
- **Roadmap items:** Move shipped features out of Roadmap. Add a brief mention
  in the appropriate existing section if there isn't one already. Don't add
  long descriptions.

### Step 6 — Open a PR

Commit the changes and open a PR:

```bash
git add README.md doc/SPEC.md doc/PRODUCT.md .doc-review-cursor
git commit -m "docs: update documentation for accuracy

- [list each fix briefly]

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <[email protected]>"

git push -u origin "$BRANCH"

gh pr create \
  --title "docs: periodic documentation accuracy update" \
  --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
Automated doc maintenance pass. Fixes documentation drift detected since
last review.

### Changes
- [list each fix]

### Change summary (since last review)
- [list notable code changes that triggered doc updates]

## Review notes
- Only factual accuracy fixes — no style/cosmetic changes
- Preserves existing voice and structure
- Larger doc additions (new sections, tutorials) noted as follow-ups

🤖 Generated by doc-maintenance skill
EOF
)"
```

### Step 7 — Update the cursor

After a successful audit (whether or not edits were needed), update the cursor:

```bash
git rev-parse HEAD > .doc-review-cursor
```

If edits were made, this is already committed in the PR branch. If no edits
were needed, commit the cursor update to the current branch.

## Change Classification Rules

| Signal | Category | Doc update needed? |
|--------|----------|-------------------|
| `feat:`, `add`, `implement`, `support` in message | Feature | Yes if user-facing |
| `remove`, `drop`, `breaking`, `!:` in message | Breaking | Yes |
| New top-level directory or config file | Structural | Maybe |
| `fix:`, `bugfix` | Fix | No (unless it changes behavior described in docs) |
| `refactor:`, `chore:`, `ci:`, `test:` | Maintenance | No |
| `docs:` | Doc change | No (already handled) |
| Dependency bumps only | Maintenance | No |

## Patch Style Guide

- Fix the fact, not the prose
- If removing a roadmap item, don't leave a gap — remove the bullet cleanly
- If adding a feature 
04

Trust audit

CAUTIONgrade B · trust 89/100 Install with care. The audit found things worth knowing before you trust its output.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryWARN
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (2)

MEDIUMInventory / provenance · inv.symlink · CWE-1104
.claude/skills/company-creator
.claude/skills/company-creator
Why it matters. link not followed
MEDIUMInventory / provenance · inv.symlink · CWE-1104
.claude/skills/paperclip
.claude/skills/paperclip
Why it matters. link not followed

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-09-23 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha 59d017e6174afull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/paperclipai__doc-maintenance.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
05

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-09-2359d017e6174aCAUTIONB89first audit
06

Questions

What does the Doc Maintenance skill do?

The open-source app everyone uses to manage agents at work

Is Doc Maintenance safe to install?

With care. The audit graded it B (89/100) and found 2 things worth knowing before you trust this skill, listed below with the exact line each was found on.

What can Doc Maintenance access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

Which assistants does Doc Maintenance work with?

Its documentation mentions cursor and openclaw. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (59d017e6174a), read on 2026-09-23. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement