Che Docs From Pr

1c. All PR comments (review comments, general comments, and review summaries):

gh pr view <URL> --json comments,reviews,reviewDecision

This captures:

• General PR comments (discussion, questions, clarifications)
• Review comments (inline code review feedback)
• Review decisions (approved, changes requested)

1d. Discover related PRs and issues:

Parse the PR body and comments for references to:

• Other PRs: patterns like #123, org/repo#123, or full GitHub PR URLs
• Issues: patterns like fixes #123, closes #123, resolves #123, or full GitHub issue URLs
• Cross-repo references: org/repo#123

1e. Fetch related PRs and issues:

For each discovered reference, fetch:

• Related PRs:

  gh pr view <ref> --json title,body,comments,reviews,state,url
  

• Related issues:

  gh issue view <ref> --json title,body,comments,state,url
  

Extract from related PRs/issues:

• Title and description/body
• All comments (these often contain design decisions, requirements, and context)
• State (open/closed/merged)

1f. Subagent output:

Each subagent must return a structured summary containing:

• PR title, URL, state, labels
• PR description/body (full text)
• List of changed files (with paths)
• Full diff content
• All PR comments and review comments (with authors)
• List of related PRs/issues with their titles, descriptions, and comments

After all subagents complete

Build a combined summary of all changes from all subagent results. Group related changes together. Identify:

• What component or feature is affected
• What kind of change it is (new feature, configuration change, API update, behavioral change, bug fix, deprecation, etc.)
• Key technical details from the diff (new flags, config options, API fields, environment variables, CLI arguments, etc.)
• Design decisions and context from PR/issue comments
• Requirements or constraints mentioned in related issues
• Reviewer feedback that clarifies intent or correct behavior

Step 2: Analyze and Suggest

Based on the combined summary from Step 1, determine the best article to write.

2a. Determine article type

Choose one:

2b. Determine target module

List available modules by running:

ls modules/

Common modules:

• end-user-guide — for features users interact with directly
• administration-guide — for admin/operator configuration
• overview — for high-level concepts and architecture

Choose the module that best fits the content.

2c. Suggest a filename

• Use lowercase with dashes: configuring-workspace-idle-timeout.adoc
• Use a verb prefix matching the article type:
  • Procedure: configuring-*, setting-up-*, using-*, creating-*
  • Concept: understanding-*, or a noun phrase like workspace-idle-timeout
  • Reference: noun phrase like devfile-reference, cli-flags
  • Assembly: noun phrase describing the feature area

2d. Present suggestions to the user

Use AskUserQuestion to present your suggestions. Format the question exactly like this:

Based on my analysis of the PR(s), here are my suggestions:

**PR Summary:** <one-paragraph summary of what the PR(s) change>

**Article type:** <Procedure | Concept | Reference | Assembly>
**Rationale:** <why this type fits>

**Target module:** <module name>
**Filename:** <suggested-filename.adoc>
**Article title:** <Suggested Title>

Do you agree with these suggestions? You can:
- Confirm as-is
- Change the article type, module, filename, or title
- Provide additional context about what the article should cover

Step 3: User Confirms

Wait for the user's response. They may:

• Confirm everything as-is
• Override any of: article type, target module, filename, article title
• Provide additional context or instructions

Apply any overrides before proceeding.

Step 4: Generate the Article

4a. Read the template

Read the matching template from the che-docs repo:

templates/concept.adoc
templates/procedure.adoc
templates/reference.adoc
templates/assembly.adoc

Use Read to get the template content for the chosen article type. If the template file does not exist, use the format rules below as a fallback.

4b. Read product variables

Read the antora.yml file at the repo root to discover available product attributes. Common ones include:

• {prod} — full product name
• {prod-short} — short product name
• {prod-id-short} — product ID (for URLs, IDs)
• {prod-url} — product URL
• {orch-name} — orchestrator name (e.g., Kubernetes)
• {ocp} — OpenShift Container Platform
• {platforms-name} — platform name
• {prod-checluster} — CheCluster CR name

Critical rule: NEVER hardcode product names, platform names, or orchestrator names. Always use the attribute variables from antora.yml. For example, write {prod-short} instead of "Che" or "Eclipse Che".

4c. Study existing articles

Scan 2-3 existing articles in the target module to match the writing style:

ls modules/<module>/pages/

Then read 2-3 representative files to understand:

• How they structure content
• How they use metadata headers
• How they format sections, lists, code blocks
• How they reference other pages with xref:

4d. Write the article

Generate the .adoc file following this structure:

:description: <A concise description derived from the PR summary>
:keywords: <comma-separated relevant keywords>
:navtitle: <Short navigation title>
:page-aliases:

[id="<filename-without-adoc-extension>"]
= <Article Title>

<body content>

Content rules:

1. Metadata headers — Always include :description:, :keywords:, :navtitle:, and :page-aliases: (leave :page-aliases: empty for new articles).

2. Section ID — The first [id="..."] must match the filename without the .adoc extension. All subsequent section IDs must also use the [id="section-name"] format.

3. Product variables — Use attribute references from antora.yml. Never write literal product names.

4. Content by article type:

   • Procedure:

     [id="<filename-without-extension>"]
     = <Title>
     
     <Introductory sentence explaining what this procedure achieves.>
     
     .Prerequisites
     * <prerequisite 1>
     * <prerequisite 2>
     
     .Procedure
     . <Step 1 — use imperative mood: "Configure", "Create", "Run">
     +
     <optional additional detail, code blocks, etc.>
     . <Step 2>
     
     .Verification
     * <How to verify the procedure worked>
     

     Note: Only include the .Verification section if there is a meaningful, practical way for the user to verify the result. If the change is purely declarative (e.g., patching a CheCluster CR field) and there is no observable outcome to check beyond "the command succeeded", omit the .Verification section entirely.

   • Concept:

     [id="<filename-without-extension>"]
     = <Title>
     
     <Explanatory content. Describe what it is, why it matters, how it works.>
     
     == <Subsection>
     
     <More detail>
     

   • Reference:

     [id="<filename-without-extension>"]
     = <Title>
     
     <Brief intro sentence.>
     
     [cols="1,1,2", options="header"]
     |===
     | Parameter | Default | Description
     | `<param>` | `<default>` | <description>
     |===
     

   • Assembly:

     [id="<filename-without-extension>"]
     = <Title>
     
     <Introductory paragraph.>
     
     include::partial$<included-file>.adoc[]
     

// TODO: <describe what needs to be clarified or added>

11. Writing style:

• Follow the Red Hat Style Guide and Modular Documentation Initiative
• Use active voice ("Configure the timeout" not "The timeout is configured")
• Be concise and direct
• Do not invent information beyond what the PR changes show
• Write for the target audience of the module (end users vs. administrators)
• Use second person ("you") when addressing the reader

4e. Save the article

Write the file to:

modules/<module>/pages/<filename>.adoc

Step 5: Update Navigation

1. Read the navigation file:

   modules/<module>/nav.adoc
   

2. Determine the best position for the new entry. Look at the existing structure and place the new xref: near related topics.

3. Add the entry:

   * xref:<filename>.adoc[]
   

4. Save the updated nav.adoc.

If the navigation file has a nested structure, place the entry at the appropriate nesting level. If unsure, add it at the end of the most relevant section.

Step 6: Run CQA Quality Assessment

Run the CQA 2.1 content quality assessment against the generated article to detect and automatically fix all possible issues before the user previews the content.

Invoke the /cqa-tools:cqa-assess skill with these pre-set parameters (do not prompt the user for scope or mode — they are already decided):

• Docs repo path: the current working directory (the eclipse-che/che-docs clone)
• Scope: topic — the single file generated in Step 4: modules/<module>/pages/<filename>.adoc
• Mode: fix — automatically fix all fixable issues, then re-verify
• Severity filtering: all — run all parameters

The CQA assessment runs 10 sub-skills in dependency order. Fixes from earlier steps prevent false positives in later ones:

For each sub-skill:

1. Invoke the skill using Skill tool
2. Run checks scoped to the generated topic file only
3. Fix all fixable issues directly in the .adoc file
4. Re-run checks to verify 0 issues remain
5. Record the score (1-4) with evidence

After all 10 sub-skills complete, invoke cqa-tools:cqa-report to generate a summary. Print a brief CQA results overview to the user:

**CQA Assessment Complete**

- Parameters checked: <N>
- Issues found: <N>
- Issues fixed: <N>
- Remaining (manual): <N>

<list any issues that could not be auto-fixed and need manual attention>

If any issues require manual attention, note them but proceed to the next step — the user will review during the preview.

Step 7: Build and Preview

Run the preview script in the background to build the docs and start a local preview server:

tools/runnerpreview.sh > /tmp/preview.log 2>&1 &
PREVIEW_PID=$!

The script runs a container that stays alive — it does not exit on its own. Monitor the output for errors or the preview URL:

tail -f /tmp/preview.log

Watch the output for:

1. Build errors — If the build fails, kill the preview process (kill $PREVIEW_PID), fix AsciiDoc syntax errors or broken xref: references, and re-run the preview.
2. Preview URL — Once the build succeeds, a preview URL will be printed in the output. Stop tail as soon as you see the URL.

Present the preview URL to the user using AskUserQuestion:

The preview is ready:

<preview URL>

Please review the rendered article. Is the article OK to proceed?

Wait for the user to confirm the article looks correct. Once confirmed, terminate the preview:

kill $PREVIEW_PID

Step 8: Create a PR against che-docs

After completing all steps, commit the changes and create a PR against eclipse-che/che-docs.

8a. Determine PR title prefix

Choose the correct prefix based on the article type:

8b. Format the PR body

Use the che-docs PR template format. The PR body must follow this structure:

## What does this pull request change?

<Describe the article created and what documentation it adds. Reference the source PR(s) that prompted this change.>

## What issues does this pull request fix or reference?

<List the source PR URLs. If they reference issues, list those too. Use "N/A" if none.>

## Specify the version of the product this pull request applies to

<Specify the version, or "next" if it applies to the upcoming release.>

## Pull Request checklist

The author and the reviewers validate the content of this pull request with the following checklist, in addition to the [automated tests](code_review_checklist.adoc).

- Any procedure:
  - [ ] Successfully tested.
- Any page or link rename:
  - [ ] The page contains a redirection for the previous URL.
  - Propagate the URL change in:
    - [ ] Dashboard [default branding data](https://github.com/eclipse-che/che-dashboard/blob/main/packages/dashboard-frontend/src/services/bootstrap/branding.constant.ts)
- [ ] Builds on [Eclipse Che hosted by Red Hat](https://workspaces.openshift.com).
- [ ] the *`Validate language on files added or modified`* step reports no vale warnings.

8c. Create the PR

Commit and push the changes, then create the PR:

gh pr create --repo eclipse-che/che-docs --title "<prefix> <Short description>" --body "<formatted body from 8b>"

8d. Print summary

## Done

**Article created:** `modules/<module>/pages/<filename>.adoc`
**Navigation updated:** `modules/<module>/nav.adoc`
**PR created:** <PR URL>

### Next steps
1. Review the generated article and address any `// TODO:` comments
2. Wait for CI checks and address any vale warnings

Error Handling

• If gh is not installed or not authenticated, tell the user to install and authenticate the GitHub CLI first.
• If the PR URL is invalid or the PR cannot be fetched, report the error and ask the user to verify the URL.
• If a template file is missing from templates/, proceed using the format rules in Step 4d as a fallback.
• If antora.yml is missing, warn the user but proceed — use {prod} and {prod-short} as defaults and add a // TODO: verify product variables comment.
• If the target module directory does not exist, ask the user to pick from the available modules.