Opendirectory docs-from-code
Generates and updates README.md and API reference docs by reading your codebase's functions, routes, types, schemas, and architecture. Uses graphify to build a knowledge graph first, then writes accurate docs from it. Use when asked to write docs, generate a README, document an API, update stale docs, create an API reference from code, add an architecture section, or document a project in any language. Trigger when a user says their docs are missing, outdated, or wants to document their codebase without writing it manually.
git clone https://github.com/Varnan-Tech/opendirectory
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/Varnan-Tech/opendirectory "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/packages/cli/skills/docs-from-code" ~/.claude/skills/varnan-tech-opendirectory-docs-from-code && rm -rf "$T"
packages/cli/skills/docs-from-code/SKILL.mddocs-from-code
You are a technical writer. Your job is to generate accurate, developer-friendly docs by first building a knowledge graph of the codebase with graphify, then using that graph to write docs grounded in what actually exists.
DO NOT invent code. If you cannot find a clear description for something, write
[Description needed]. Accurate but sparse docs are better than confident but wrong docs.
Before starting: Confirm you are inside a codebase directory. If the user pointed you at a remote repo, clone it first. If neither, ask: "Can you point me to the project directory or repository URL?"
Workflow
Step 1: Install graphify and Build the Knowledge Graph
graphify uses tree-sitter AST (20 languages, no LLM) for code structure and Claude subagents for semantic understanding of docs and comments.
pip install graphifyy graphify . --no-viz
--no-viz skips HTML output. You only need GRAPH_REPORT.md and graph.json.
This produces
graphify-out/ in the project root:
— god nodes, community clusters, surprising connections, suggested questionsGRAPH_REPORT.md
— full queryable knowledge graph (persistent, SHA256-cached)graph.json
QA: Did
graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md get created? How many nodes and edges? If graphify fails, go to Step 1B.
Step 1B: Fallback (if graphify unavailable)
# TypeScript/JS projects: cd <skill-directory>/scripts && npm install npx ts-node extract_ts.ts <project-root> <project-root>/.docs-extract.json # Python projects: python3 <skill-directory>/scripts/extract_py.py <project-root> <project-root>/.docs-extract.json
Read
references/extraction-guide.md for framework-specific notes on the fallback output.
Step 2: Read the Graph Report
Read
graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md in full. This gives you:
- God nodes — highest-degree concepts (what everything connects through). Use these for the Architecture section.
- Community clusters — logical groupings of related code. Use these for module documentation.
- Surprising connections — non-obvious cross-file relationships. Note these in Architecture.
- Suggested questions — graphify's assessment of what is worth documenting.
Then run targeted queries for specific doc sections:
# API routes graphify query "show all API routes and endpoints" --graph graphify-out/graph.json # Data models graphify query "what are the main data models and types?" --graph graphify-out/graph.json # Auth flow graphify query "how does authentication work?" --graph graphify-out/graph.json # Entry points graphify query "what is the entry point and how is the app initialised?" --graph graphify-out/graph.json
Each query returns a focused subgraph. Relationships are tagged
EXTRACTED (found in source) or INFERRED (with confidence score). Trust EXTRACTED fully. Use INFERRED but flag uncertainty.
QA: Cross-check 2-3 routes from the query against actual source files before writing docs.
Step 3: Read Existing Documentation
Before writing anything new, check what already exists:
- Read
if present. Note which sections exist and which are stale or missing.README.md - Read
,docs/API.md
, ordocs/api.md
if present.API.md - Read
for context on recent changes worth noting.CHANGELOG.md
Decide what to generate:
- No README — generate a full README from Template 1 in
references/output-template.md - README exists, API section stale — update only that section (Template 3)
- README exists, fully outdated — ask: "Your README exists but appears outdated. Rewrite fully or update specific sections?"
QA: List exactly what you will write or update before starting.
Step 4: Generate Documentation
Read
references/output-template.md for the exact templates to use.
README — Project Description: From
package.json or pyproject.toml description + god nodes summary from GRAPH_REPORT.md.
README — Architecture Section: Use god nodes and community clusters to write a plain-English architecture overview. Example:
"The system is organised around 3 core modules:
(god node, connects to 14 other components),AuthService(bridges all data access), andDatabaseAdapter(central to async flows). The auth and request-handling modules are tightly coupled; the analytics module is independent."EventBus
README — Installation and Quick Start: From the entry point file +
scripts in package.json or Makefile.
API Reference (
):
From the docs/API.md
graphify query "show all API routes" output. One section per resource, grouped by path prefix. For each route: method, path, description (from docstring or rationale node), request/response shape (from linked type nodes), curl example.
Flag anything without a docstring as
[Description needed]. Do not invent behaviour.
QA: Check 3 random routes in the generated
docs/API.md against the actual source file. Do the paths and descriptions match?
Step 5: Write Files, Clean Up, and Open PR
- Write
to the project root (full file or updated sections only).README.md - Write
if routes were found. Createdocs/API.md
if needed.docs/ - Clean up:
rm -rf graphify-out/ .docs-extract.json
Ask the user: "Docs written. Should I open a GitHub PR with these changes?"
If yes:
git checkout -b docs/auto-generated-$(date +%Y%m%d) git add README.md docs/ git commit -m "docs: auto-generate README and API reference from codebase" gh pr create \ --title "docs: auto-generated README and API reference" \ --body "Generated by docs-from-code skill using graphify knowledge graph. All routes and types verified against source."
QA: Did the files write? Do paths exist? Did the PR open cleanly?
What Good Output Looks Like
- Architecture section explains god nodes and module relationships in plain English
- Every route in
matches a real path from the graphify query outputdocs/API.md - README Quick Start has a runnable snippet from tests or the entry point
- INFERRED relationships that influenced descriptions are noted as "likely" or "appears to"
- Missing descriptions are flagged
, not fabricated[Description needed]
What Bad Output Looks Like
- Routes or functions that do not appear in the graphify query results
- Architecture section that is generic ("the app has controllers, services, and models")
- Examples using wrong function names or parameter types
- INFERRED edges described as definite facts without a confidence qualifier