Skip to content

Documentation Standards

Documentation standards should protect the reader from filler, drift, and false confidence.

For agentic-proteins, documentation should treat the package as a compatibility bridge, point readers toward canonical runtime ownership, and keep retirement language concrete.

Documentation Model

flowchart TB
    legacy["legacy path or caller"]
    bridge["bridge explanation and compatibility promise"]
    runtime["canonical runtime owner"]
    retirement["retirement and migration path stays explicit"]

    legacy --> bridge
    bridge --> runtime
    runtime --> retirement

This page should keep the bridge docs from sounding like a product center. Good documentation here teaches readers where the real owner lives and how the old path is supposed to disappear.

Review Rules

  • docs should treat the package as a compatibility bridge, not a product center
  • examples should point readers toward canonical runtime ownership
  • retirement and migration language must stay concrete

First Proof Check

  • packages/agentic-proteins/tests
  • src/agentic_proteins/interfaces/cli.py and api/app.py
  • src/agentic_proteins/runtime/

Design Pressure

The easy failure is to document the bridge so generously that readers stop feeling the pull toward the canonical runtime surface.