Document Review Checklist

Review in priority order: A (highest impact) → B → C. The reviewer prompt specifies which levels to check. Project rules loaded in context override this checklist.

---

A. Accuracy

Issues where the document contains incorrect, contradictory, or incomplete information.

A1. Code-Document Accuracy

• Described behaviors match actual code implementation
• Parameter names, types, default values consistent with code
• Return values and error conditions accurately documented
• Described algorithms / processing steps consistent with implementation
• Version numbers, format identifiers, constants correct
• Value ranges and constraints accurate
• Enum values and meanings consistent with code definitions
• IPC channel names and payload types match IpcChannel.ts definitions

A2. Internal Consistency

• Different sections describing the same concept agree with each other
• Constraints and rules consistent across the document (no contradictions like "must be >= 0" in one section with a negative default in another)
• Same rule appearing in multiple places identical in meaning

A3. Completeness

• All public APIs / features documented
• Newly added features or parameters reflected in the document
• Removed or deprecated features marked accordingly
• Edge cases and limitations documented
• All conditional branches exhaustively covered (no undocumented "else" cases)
• Sequential steps complete with no missing intermediate steps
• Undefined behaviors identified (input combinations with no documented result)

A4. Reference Validity

Do not attempt to verify URL reachability.

• Internal cross-references point to existing sections or files
• External links / URLs well-formed and not obviously outdated
• Referenced file paths, tool names, command examples actually exist

---

B. Clarity & Structure

Improvements to readability, unambiguity, and organization.

B1. Ambiguity Detection

• No descriptions interpretable in multiple ways
• Conditional statements precise ("should" vs "must", "may" vs "will")
• Boundary conditions clearly stated (inclusive vs exclusive, "at least" vs "exactly")

B2. Simplification

Only flag when the same information is stated more than once in different sections.

• Redundant paragraphs or sections repeating the same information consolidated

B3. Logical Flow

• Information presented in logical order
• Related topics grouped together
• Forward references minimized

B4. Examples & Illustrations

• Existing examples correct and consistent with described behavior

B5. Terminology Consistency

• Terms used consistently throughout the document
• Terms match codebase usage (class names, function names, enum values)
• Abbreviations defined on first use

---

C. Formatting & Style

Polish and stylistic consistency.

C1. Formatting Consistency

• Headings, lists, tables formatted consistently
• Code snippets properly formatted and syntax-highlighted

C2. Grammar & Wording

• No grammatical errors or awkward phrasing
• Writing style consistent throughout
• Tone appropriate for target audience

C3. Section Organization

• Sections appropriately sized (not too long or too short)
• Table of contents (if present) consistent with actual sections
• Deprecated or obsolete sections cleaned up

---

Exclusion List

Project rules override this exclusion list.

1. Pure formatting preferences not affecting readability
2. Stylistic rewrites that don't improve clarity or accuracy
3. Suggestions based on assumed future requirements, not current content
4. Suggestions to add content beyond the document's stated scope
5. Removing default or verbose attributes from examples — examples in specs and tutorials are intentionally detailed to demonstrate available options