Restore trigger phrases as ## Usage Examples across 10 engineering skills

Renamed ## Example Trigger Phrases → ## Usage Examples to make the section clearly human-facing documentation rather than a system instruction. Restores content that was removed in the previous quality pass. Skills updated (both skills/ and plugins/pm-engineering/skills/): code-review-checklist, debugging-log-analyser, changelog-generator, pr-description-writer, system-design-interview, test-strategy-doc, runbook-writer, incident-postmortem, api-docs-writer, architecture-decision-record https://claude.ai/code/session_01C3HwChrccJd145vJ6Z7ajF
2026-05-20 07:57:08 +00:00
parent e366a77cf0
commit 929fa3ad7f
20 changed files with 132 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -137,3 +137,9 @@ data = response.json()
 - [ ] Auth method is clearly stated at the top
 - [ ] Enum values are listed where applicable
 - [ ] Pagination documented if the endpoint is a list endpoint
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Document this API endpoint: [paste spec or description]"
+- "Turn this Postman collection into developer docs"
+- "Write API reference docs for [endpoint]"
+- "Write a developer guide for our [product] API"
@@ -108,3 +108,9 @@ For each option, produce:
 - [ ] Decision is stated in plain language in the Decision section
 - [ ] Risks section identifies what would invalidate this decision
 - [ ] Written for someone with no prior context on this decision
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write an ADR for using [technology]"
+- "Document our decision to [architectural choice]"
+- "Create an architecture decision record for [topic]"
+- "Help me write up why we chose [option] over [alternative]"
@@ -73,3 +73,10 @@ Follow [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com) format:
 - [ ] Version and date header is correct
 - [ ] Empty sections are omitted
 - [ ] Tone is imperative mood throughout
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write a changelog for version [X]" + [paste commits]
+- "Generate release notes from these commits"
+- "Turn this git log into a CHANGELOG entry"
+- "Write the CHANGELOG.md update for this release"
+- "What changed in this release?" + [paste commit list]
@@ -103,3 +103,9 @@ Based on the change type and language, flag 2-3 things reviewers typically miss
 - [ ] Change-type-specific section is included
 - [ ] Risk-appropriate depth matches stated risk level
 - [ ] Decision framework is explicit
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Generate a code review checklist for [PR description]"
+- "What should I check in this pull request?"
+- "Give me a code review checklist for a [language] [change type]"
+- "Review checklist for a high-risk PR in [language]"
@@ -75,3 +75,10 @@ One or two concrete things that would prevent this class of error recurring:
 - [ ] Next steps are actionable commands, not vague advice
 - [ ] Language-specific idioms are used correctly
 - [ ] Prevention is proactive (not just "add error handling")
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Why is this crashing?" + [paste log]
+- "Can you analyse this stack trace?"
+- "I'm getting this error, what does it mean?"
+- "Debug this log for me"
+- "What's causing this exception?"
@@ -135,3 +135,9 @@ Rules for action items:
 - [ ] Every action item has an owner and due date
 - [ ] "What went well" section is genuine, not token
 - [ ] Executive summary is readable by non-technical leadership
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write a postmortem for the [incident name] outage"
+- "Help me write a P1 incident report"
+- "Generate an RCA document for [service] going down on [date]"
+- "Draft a blameless postmortem from these notes: [paste notes]"
@@ -78,3 +78,10 @@ Flag anything that warrants extra attention:
 - [ ] Changes list describes logical changes (not file-by-file changes)
 - [ ] Testing steps are reproducible by someone unfamiliar with the code
 - [ ] Risk-appropriate reviewer guidance is included
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write a PR description for these changes" + [paste diff or description]
+- "Draft a pull request for [feature]"
+- "I need a PR description — here's what I changed"
+- "Summarise these commits into a PR description"
+- "Write the PR body for this branch"
@@ -135,3 +135,10 @@ After completing the runbook:
 - [ ] Rollback procedure is complete and independently testable
 - [ ] Escalation paths name specific contacts, not just team names
 - [ ] Runbook can be followed by someone who has never touched this system
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write a runbook for [service] deployment"
+- "Create an incident response runbook for [alert type]"
+- "I need a runbook for [procedure]"
+- "Document the operational procedure for [X]"
+- "Write an ops playbook for [scenario]"
@@ -126,3 +126,10 @@ Things to tackle in production but out of scope for this design session:
 - [ ] At least 2 component deep-dives with technology choices justified
 - [ ] Trade-offs section is honest (not just benefits of chosen approach)
 - [ ] Data flow is described end-to-end for the critical path
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Help me answer a system design interview: [question]"
+- "Design [system] for a system design interview"
+- "How would I architect [system] at scale?"
+- "I have a system design interview — the question is [X]"
+- "Design a [URL shortener / chat system / notification service / feed]"
@@ -118,3 +118,10 @@ Testing is complete when:
 - [ ] P0 test cases cover the highest-risk paths specifically
 - [ ] Each test type names a concrete tool (not "some testing framework")
 - [ ] Definition of Done is measurable (not "tests are done when QA is happy")
+
+## Usage Examples
+- "Write a test strategy for [feature]" + [paste spec or PRD]
+- "Create a test plan for [system]"
+- "How should we test [feature]?"
+- "I need a QA plan for this sprint"
+- "What tests do we need for [X]?"