Skip to content

Conversation

@Harjun751
Copy link
Contributor

@Harjun751 Harjun751 commented Jan 30, 2026

What is the purpose of this pull request?

  • Documentation update
  • Bug fix
  • Feature addition or enhancement
  • Code maintenance
  • DevOps
  • Improve developer experience
  • Others, please explain:

Overview of changes:

This PR adds the update-docs skill in the /.github/skills/ folder as per discussed in the meeting. It includes the update-docs skill implementation and updates documentation to mention skills and their usage.

This PR was generated using @MoshiMoshiMochi's create-pull-request skill and edited by me for clarity.

Anything you'd like to highlight/discuss:

The documentation in this PR was almost fully-generated by the skill (~90%). Looks good to me but let me know what you think! See it on the netlify preview

I think performance is pretty good, the documentation seems consistent. A key step in achieving this was telling an AI agent to read the "docs" and focus on how the guides were written. I told it to pay attention to unwritten rules and conventions, and formalize them into a "RULES.md" file. So now the agent, when using the update-docs skill, reads the rules that were generated and generally abides by them.

Testing instructions:

No special instructions.

Proposed commit message: (wrap lines at 72 characters)

Add update-docs skill and documentation


Checklist: ☑️

  • Updated the documentation for feature additions and enhancements
  • Added tests for bug fixes or features
  • Linked all related issues
  • No unrelated changes

Reviewer checklist:

Indicate the SEMVER impact of the PR:

  • Major (when you make incompatible API changes)
  • Minor (when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner)
  • Patch (when you make backward compatible bug fixes)

At the end of the review, please label the PR with the appropriate label: r.Major, r.Minor, r.Patch.

Breaking change release note preparation (if applicable):

  • To be included in the release note for any feature that is made obsolete/breaking

Give a brief explanation note about:

  • what was the old feature that was made obsolete
  • any replacement feature (if any), and
  • how the author should modify his website to migrate from the old feature to the replacement feature (if possible).

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.85%. Comparing base (b956547) to head (36835d2).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2813   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.85%   71.85%           
=======================================
  Files         134      134           
  Lines        7340     7340           
  Branches     1565     1538   -27     
=======================================
  Hits         5274     5274           
- Misses       1938     2020   +82     
+ Partials      128       46   -82     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant