Documenting Contracts

作者 riekelt85e53729dd95无许可证28 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库3周前更新

Use when documenting an HTTP API, message payloads, queue contracts, DTOs, file formats, or webhooks - or when writing the api-reference of a legacy campaign, or when callers keep asking what a field means or which errors an endpoint returns. Encodes the four detail levels, the DTO-first catalog, wire types with source anchors, the generated-spec one-home rule, and omitted-versus-null semantics. Use whenever a machine interface needs documenting for its callers, even if nobody says "API docs".

AI 生成的概览

为 HTTP API、消息载荷、Webhook、CLI 命令和文件格式等机器接口编写契约文档。

功能
该技能指导编写供机器调用或解析的接口契约参考文档,涵盖 REST 与 RPC 端点、消息队列与主题、Webhook、CLI 命令和文件格式。它定义了四个细节层级(索引、语义、结构、示例)、以 DTO 为先的目录(含线上类型与来源锚点),以及省略与 null 语义、枚举、约束和错误的编写规则。它还说明当已有 OpenAPI 或 AsyncAPI 规范时如何避免重复维护字段表。产出物是一份 Markdown 格式的 API 参考文档。
适用场景
在记录 HTTP API、消息载荷、队列契约、DTO、文件格式或 Webhook 时使用,也适用于调用方反复询问某字段含义或某端点返回哪些错误的情况。不适用于内部代码接口或配置参考。
运行要求
仅为说明性内容,不附带脚本。文中要求具备技术写作技能背景,并需要能够访问代码、序列化配置以及现有的 OpenAPI 或 AsyncAPI 规范。

Documenting contracts

REQUIRED BACKGROUND: the technical-writing skill (hard rules, truth rules, style).

Overview

A contract document is read by a stranger who cannot see the code and is about to depend on it. Core principle: document the wire, exhaustively, with each detail at its own level; the caller's language is the wire format and domain terms, never the implementation's types. Contract surfaces are reference kind, so the core Reference rule applies: every endpoint, every field, every error.

When to invoke, and not

Invoke when documenting anything machines call or parse: REST and RPC endpoints, message queues and topics, webhooks, CLI commands, file formats. The api-reference.md of a legacy campaign (documenting-legacy-codebases) is this skill's document. Do NOT invoke for internal code interfaces, which the code documents itself, or for configuration references, which belong in config-reference.md under the core Reference rule. Judging whether the contract is well designed is out of scope: this skill documents the contract that exists.

One home versus generated specs

When an OpenAPI or AsyncAPI spec exists, or the code generates one, that spec owns the field tables. The markdown then documents only what the spec cannot say (semantics, side effects, ordering, omitted-versus-null) and links the spec; never hand-maintain field tables beside a generated one; a second home drifts. The catalog below is for the case where no machine spec exists; writing one is not this document's job.

The four detail levels

Each level has its own home; the writer moves detail found at the wrong level into the level that owns it:

LevelThe caller asksHome
IndexWhat exists hereThe endpoint, message, and command tables
SemanticsWhat invoking it doesPer-endpoint, per-message, and per-command prose: side effects, events published, idempotency, redelivery, exit behavior, quirks
ShapeWhat crosses the wireThe DTO catalog: one field table per DTO
ExampleWhat it looks likeAt most one illustrative example per DTO

Repetition across levels is the defect to hunt: an endpoint section restating its DTO's fields, an example smuggling in a field the table lacks.

The DTO catalog

A DTO is defined once and referenced everywhere:

  • Wire types, not language types. string (date, ISO 8601), number (64-bit integer), string (decimal): the column says what crosses the wire, complete enough that no reader needs the implementation's type as a proxy. A 64-bit integer that exceeds the range or precision of a consumer's native number type is wire information; the type name that produced it is not.
  • One Source line per DTO, naming the owning class or schema file. Reference kind sanctions this evidence anchor, as a config reference carries binding evidence.
  • Required is a tri-state: yes, no, or if <condition> with the condition stated.
  • Omitted versus null is stated wherever it matters, and always on a DTO used in a replace-style write, where an omitted field is absent from the result. Where the server assumes a value on omission instead, that value goes in the Default column.
  • Enums get their own table, values with meanings; nested objects link to their own catalog entry, never a second inline copy.
  • Constraints in domain terms: "past date", "1..100 chars", "must reference an existing budget policy", read from validation the code enforces.

The template

markdown
# API reference: <service>
## Conventions[Once, never per endpoint: base path, auth, content type, the errorenvelope, global (de)serialization behavior, idempotency defaults.]
## Endpoints| Method | Path | Purpose | Request | Response | Errors ||---|---|---|---|---|---|| POST | `/thing` | Create a thing | [ThingRequest](#thingrequest) | 200 [Thing](#thing) | 422, 404 |
### POST /thing[Semantics only: side effects, events published, idempotency, quirks.No field lists; the index and catalog are not repeated.]
## Messages| Direction | Destination | Payload | Reply | On error ||---|---|---|---|---|| in | `thing.create` | [ThingRequest](#thingrequest) | `thing.created` | `thing.create.error` |
### thing.create[Semantics only: redelivery, ordering, events published, quirks;what differs from the sibling transport is called out here.]
## Commands| Command | Purpose | Arguments | Output ||---|---|---|---|
### <command>[Semantics only: side effects, idempotency, exit behavior, quirks.]
## DTOs### ThingRequestSource: `api/ThingRequest`
| Field | Type | Required | Default | Constraints | Meaning ||---|---|---|---|---|---|
[Omitted versus null, where it matters. At most one illustrative example.]
### Thing[Response shapes are catalog entries like any other.]
## Errors| Status | When | Body ||---|---|---|

Rules

  • Verify against the serializer, not the class. The wire is what the configured serializer emits and accepts: a global trimmer, a null-omitting mapper, or a custom date format changes the contract without touching any DTO. Read the serialization configuration before writing a single field row.
  • Asymmetries are semantics. The mutation that publishes an event on one transport and nothing on the other, or the endpoint that skips a step its siblings perform, is documented at the semantics level.
  • Examples are illustrative, never normative. One per DTO at most, labeled so, and containing no field the table lacks; the table is the contract.
  • Errors are cataloged once, as envelope plus a status table; an endpoint lists only which entries apply to it. Command failures are cataloged the same way, by exit code.
  • The exhaustiveness is checkable. The endpoint count and the DTO count are denominators like any other (core truth rules): a legacy campaign records them in its coverage ledger with the commands behind them and the date.

来源与署名

来源:riekelt/technical-writer位于plugins/technical-writer/skills/documenting-contracts提交85e5372

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架