About writing-lean
writing-lean is a skill for agents writing concise code, documentation, and collaboration text. It treats code and specifications as the source of truth, assigning each kind of content a role and applying a deletion test.
Key features
- 01Express information in code and specifications first
- 02Use project terminology consistently
- 03Assign content to the appropriate channel
- 04Apply a deletion test to trim text
- 05Keep discussion history in collaboration records
Use cases
- 01Trim project documentation and README files
- 02Write code and API documentation comments
- 03Draft agent briefs or review comments
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/After installing, type/writing-leanin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Details
From the project READMEWriting lean
The code and its specs are the first source of truth: a reader new to the project should learn it by reading them. Writing is lean when it carries only what they cannot say.
- Code first. Reach for a clearer name, a smaller function or a sharper spec before a longer explanation.
- One word per idea. Use the project's term for a concept, from
GLOSSARY.mdor the code, every time; a synonym reads as a second concept. - Say what to do. State the target ("one-line comments"), not the ban; a prohibition earns its place only as a hard guardrail, paired with what to do instead.
- Once, where it bites. Each fact has a single source of truth, below; anywhere else, link to it.
- History goes to the story. What was weighed and what was rejected belong in the issue, pull
request or commit, where the discussion and the diff sit beside them and
git blameleads back.
The deletion test is the bar for every sentence you write or touch: delete it and ask what a competent reader loses. If nothing, the code already said it, and it stays deleted.
Where it goes
| Channel | Its one job |
|---|---|
| Code | Fluent: concise function and variable names that say what it does |
| Code comment | A constraint, trap, citation or non-obvious why, at the line it bites |
| Doc comment | What the member is for, in one sentence |
| README | The common path: what it is, how to use it, where to go next |
| Repo docs | A decision or context the code cannot show |
| Issue | What's wanted and why, in the issue form's fields |
| Agent brief | The contract: behaviour, acceptance criteria, scope |
| Pull request | What changed and why, linked to its issue |
| Commit message | What changed, and why when the diff cannot show it |
| Review comment | One finding and its fix |
| Thread comment | The new fact or decision, linked to what it answers |
Skill, AGENTS.md | How an agent does the work: the steps and the reference behind them |
Links from code
Cite an issue in code only when it changes how the code may be modified later: a workaround to
remove when clhbid/api#123 ships, or a constraint an open decision still holds. Otherwise
git blame leads to the pull request and its issue.