Review documentation changes for compliance with the Metabase writing style guide. Use when reviewing pull requests, files, or diffs containing documentation markdown files.
View on GitHub.claude/skills/docs-review/SKILL.md
February 5, 2026
Select agents to install to:
npx add-skill https://github.com/Kidoz-SDK/metabase/blob/9d9c1d22dbfa34a18c148c09710e2b827ab2c8b2/.claude/skills/docs-review/SKILL.md -a claude-code --skill docs-reviewInstallation paths:
.claude/skills/docs-review/# Documentation Review Skill
@./../_shared/metabase-style-guide.md
## Review mode detection
**IMPORTANT: Before starting the review, determine which mode to use:**
1. **PR review mode**: If the `mcp__github__create_pending_pull_request_review` tool is available, you are reviewing a GitHub PR
- Use the pending review workflow to post all issues as one cohesive review
- Follow the workflow steps in "PR review mode format" below
2. **Local review mode**: If the MCP tool is NOT available, output issues in the conversation
- Format all issues in a numbered markdown list (as described in "Feedback format" below)
## Review process
1. **Detect review mode** - Check if `mcp__github__create_pending_pull_request_review` is available
2. Read the changes through once to understand intent
3. Check all issues that violate style guide or significantly impact readability
4. Only flag issues worth mentioning - if it won't make a material difference to the reader, skip it
5. **REQUIRED: Number ALL feedback sequentially** - Start from Issue 1 and increment for each issue found
## Review checklist
Run through the diff looking for these issues:
**Tone and voice:**
- [ ] Formal/corporate language ("utilize" not "use", "offerings", etc.)
- [ ] "Users" instead of "people" or "companies"
- [ ] Excessive exclamation points or overly peppy tone
- [ ] Telling readers something is cool instead of showing them
**Structure and clarity:**
- [ ] Important information buried instead of leading
- [ ] Verbose text that adds little value
- [ ] Paragraphs without clear purpose
- [ ] Vague headings that don't convey the point
- [ ] Instructions explain "why" before telling "what to do"
- [ ] Tasks described as "easy" or "simple"
**Links and references:**
- [ ] Linking the word "here" instead of descriptive text
- [ ] Links in headings (unless entire heading is a link)
**Formatting:**
- [ ] Ampersands as "and" substitute (except proper nouns)
- [ ] Inconsistent list formatting
**