Documentation review record¶

Review date: 27 September 2026. This record tracks review of the documentation and publication setup separately from the original code research.

Method¶

The site uses the four reader needs in Diátaxis: guided learning, completing tasks, looking up facts, and understanding concepts. Tutorial progression and reference tables were informed by the FastAPI type tutorial and FastAPI API reference. Their prose was not copied.

The original documentation received three independent subagent reviews in sequence. Revisions from each pass were applied before the next pass. The review areas were information architecture, teaching clarity, and technical accuracy with command reproduction.

Pass 1: information architecture¶

The architecture reviewer read all 14 documentation pages, README, and site navigation against Diátaxis. Two corrections were applied:

• The branch-enforcement exercise now explicitly edits the pull request's source branch.
• The Pages workflow's trigger and permission contract moved from the publishing how-to to the configuration reference.

The reviewer verified both revisions and approved the structure, category boundaries, and reader journeys.

Pass 2: teaching clarity¶

The clarity reviewer independently read the full written site and checked the tutorial progression against the FastAPI examples. Revisions applied:

• The GitHub tutorial shows the dictionary's real indentation and instructs readers to preserve it.
• Configuration descriptions explain command options, skipped directories, and return inference in plain language.
• The command reference defines a gate as a named group of checks.
• The repair guide gives the command for running one failed test and explains its placeholders.

The introductory pages now call the suite tests of the checks themselves. The local documentation exercise was reproduced: the short summary returned status 1 with DOC002; the documented replacement returned status 0 with no violations.

The reviewer verified the revisions and approved pass 2. The correctly indented GitHub tutorial change passed Ruff formatting; the originally unindented pasted entry failed it.

Pass 3: accuracy and reproduction¶

The technical reviewer independently compared all 14 pages, README, configuration, and both workflows with the implementation and official documentation. Two corrections were applied:

• The uv installation link now points to the current standalone-installer section.
• The versions table distinguishes package pins in pyproject.toml, Python selection in .python-version, and uv pins in workflows.

In a disposable checkout with a fresh locked environment, the reviewer reproduced the failing documentation exercise and its repair. The correctly indented GitHub tutorial change passed all five gates and 78 tests. A clean strict Zensical build passed. A deliberately broken internal page link failed with status 1; restoring it passed.

The reviewer verified internal page links, anchors, assets, canonical URLs, the final theme configuration, card markup, stylesheet, and highlighted code blocks. Pass 3 was approved with no remaining actionable findings.

Supplemental theme review¶

After the requested theme refinement, the clarity reviewer checked the new homepage, navigation, and stylesheet. The light palette's custom colors were moved from the root element to the active body scheme, preventing the bundled palette from overriding them. The active-navigation background tint was reduced to preserve text contrast.

Browser inspection verified the actual light primary, accent, and link color as #007f73, and the dark primary/accent as #72dacb. Cards display in two columns with desktop tabs at a 1440-pixel viewport, and one column without horizontal page overflow at the default 693-pixel viewport. Default Markdown extensions retain syntax highlighting and code-copy controls.

Validation before publication¶

The root checkout passed all five quality gates with GitHub annotation output enabled, including 78 tests. ty check, both workflows' actionlint checks, locked dependency synchronization, and whitespace checks passed. The Zensical clean strict build passed; generated links and assets across all 14 authored pages were checked.

The Pages site is configured to use GitHub Actions at https://miguelelgallo.github.io/pythonprs/. The deployment workflow publishes only the named repository's main branch after a successful site build. Pull requests build without publishing. The Actions deployment record is the source of truth for publication status.

iParq examples: three review passes¶

On 27 September 2026, real examples from iParq were added using its saved baseline and repaired source revisions. This addition received three sequential author reviews.

Pass 1: Diátaxis and reader journeys¶

The examples explain what findings mean, so they belong in Explanation. Exact policy remains in Reference, and repair commands remain in the How-to guide. The page is reachable from the explanation navigation, homepage, README, requirements page, and each relevant section of the repair guide.

Pass 2: clarity and example scope¶

Each example identifies the diagnostic, shows source before and after repair, and states the measured result. The page distinguishes whole-function complexity scores from partial code excerpts. Parquet terms were simplified, and the roles of the AST checker and standard output were explained. The docstring example makes both minimums and the first-paragraph boundary explicit.

Pass 3: source accuracy and reproduction¶

Full source files from iParq commits 51dc01d357f923f32a8fd674504906e86a253afe and 7fbda13d2cb35cecd06a235683e764adcfa1336f were inspected in temporary files with this repository's pinned tools:

• Ruff measured inspect McCabe complexity at 14 before / 8 after. The configured maximum of 10 rejected the original and accepted the repaired source.
• complexipy measured inspect at 28 / 13 and print_min_max_statistics at 49 / 11. Every function in the repaired source, including extracted helpers, met the maximum of 15.
• The project AST checker measured output_json summaries at 7 words / 41 characters and 12 words / 62 characters. It reported DOC002 only for the original summary.
• All seven Python excerpts were parsed and checked against the linked revisions; all three diagnostic excerpts matched the saved baseline output. The original inspect source link was extended to include its final branches.

The dated examples link to complete commit hashes, preserving their provenance as iParq changes. The repair report supplies the original behavior-validation evidence.

Documentation validation¶

uv run --no-sync zensical build --clean --strict and git diff --check passed. Generated HTML checks verified 163 relative links across five affected pages, including all three example anchors linked by the repair guide. The README entry, site navigation, and example page's canonical URL were also verified.