Skip to main content
Version: Next

Quality Assurance Checklist

This comprehensive checklist ensures that all documentation meets our quality standards before publication. Use this for both self-review and peer review of documentation changes.

Pre-Submission Checklist​

Content Quality​

Accuracy and Completeness​

  • Technical accuracy: All technical information is correct and up-to-date
  • Code examples work: All code examples have been tested and execute successfully
  • Complete coverage: All necessary information is included
  • No assumptions: Prerequisites and setup requirements are clearly stated
  • Current versions: Examples use current library versions and best practices

Clarity and Usability​

  • Clear purpose: The document's purpose and audience are evident
  • Logical flow: Information is organized in a logical sequence
  • Scannable structure: Headings, lists, and formatting aid comprehension
  • Actionable content: Users can follow instructions and achieve goals
  • Appropriate detail level: Content matches the target audience's expertise

Style and Consistency​

  • Style guide compliance: Follows the Style Guide
  • Consistent terminology: Uses established terms throughout
  • Voice and tone: Maintains consistent, professional, and friendly tone
  • Grammar and spelling: Free of grammatical errors and typos
  • Formatting consistency: Consistent use of headings, lists, and code blocks

Technical Review​

Code Examples​

  • Syntax correctness: All code examples use correct syntax
  • Imports included: All necessary imports are shown
  • Working examples: Code examples execute without errors
  • Realistic scenarios: Examples represent real-world usage
  • Error handling: Examples include appropriate error handling
  • Resource cleanup: Examples show proper resource management

API Documentation​

  • Parameter documentation: All parameters are documented with types and descriptions
  • Return value documentation: Return types and values are clearly described
  • Exception documentation: All possible exceptions are documented
  • TypeScript integration: TypeScript types are accurate and helpful
  • JSDoc compliance: Follows JSDoc standards for auto-generated documentation
  • Internal links work: All internal links point to existing content
  • External links work: All external links are accessible and relevant
  • Link text is descriptive: Link text clearly indicates the destination
  • No broken references: All cross-references are valid
  • Appropriate link targets: External links open appropriately

Accessibility and Inclusivity​

Content Accessibility​

  • Heading hierarchy: Proper heading structure (H1 → H2 → H3)
  • Alt text for images: All images have descriptive alt text
  • Color independence: Information doesn't rely solely on color
  • Readable fonts: Text is legible and appropriately sized
  • Sufficient contrast: Text has adequate contrast with background

Inclusive Language​

  • Gender-neutral language: Avoids assumptions about gender
  • Ability-inclusive language: Doesn't exclude people with disabilities
  • Cultural sensitivity: Respectful of different backgrounds and perspectives
  • Plain language: Avoids unnecessary jargon and complex terminology
  • Beginner-friendly: Accessible to users with varying experience levels

Mobile and Cross-Platform​

Responsive Design​

  • Mobile readability: Content is readable on mobile devices
  • Touch-friendly navigation: Links and buttons are appropriately sized
  • Horizontal scrolling: Code blocks don't cause excessive horizontal scrolling
  • Image scaling: Images scale appropriately on different screen sizes

Cross-Browser Compatibility​

  • Modern browser support: Works in current versions of major browsers
  • Graceful degradation: Functions acceptably in older browsers
  • JavaScript independence: Core content accessible without JavaScript

Review Process​

Self-Review​

Before submitting documentation for review:

  1. Read aloud: Read the content aloud to catch awkward phrasing
  2. Fresh perspective: Take a break and review with fresh eyes
  3. User journey: Follow the documentation as if you're a new user
  4. Test all examples: Execute every code example to ensure they work
  5. Check all links: Click every link to verify they work

Peer Review​

Reviewer Responsibilities​

When reviewing documentation:

  1. Focus on user experience: Consider how users will interact with the content
  2. Verify technical accuracy: Check that all technical information is correct
  3. Test examples: Run code examples to ensure they work
  4. Check for gaps: Identify missing information or unclear sections
  5. Provide constructive feedback: Offer specific, actionable suggestions

Review Criteria​

Rate each area on a scale of 1-5 (5 being excellent):

Content Quality

  • Accuracy and completeness: ___/5
  • Clarity and organization: ___/5
  • Usefulness to target audience: ___/5

Technical Quality

  • Code example quality: ___/5
  • API documentation completeness: ___/5
  • Link and reference accuracy: ___/5

Style and Consistency

  • Style guide compliance: ___/5
  • Grammar and spelling: ___/5
  • Formatting consistency: ___/5

Overall Score: ___/40

Minimum passing score: 32/40 (80%)

Expert Review​

For complex or critical documentation, seek expert review:

When to Request Expert Review​

  • New feature documentation: First documentation for new features
  • Architecture documentation: System design and technical decisions
  • Security-related content: Security guidelines and best practices
  • Migration guides: Breaking changes and upgrade instructions
  • Performance documentation: Optimization and troubleshooting guides

Expert Reviewer Qualifications​

  • Domain expertise: Deep knowledge of the relevant technology area
  • User perspective: Understanding of how users will interact with the feature
  • Documentation experience: Experience writing or reviewing technical documentation

Testing Procedures​

Functional Testing​

Documentation Build Testing​

# Test local development build
pnpm docs:start
# Verify: Site loads without errors, navigation works

# Test production build
pnpm docs:build
# Verify: Build completes without errors or warnings

# Test API documentation generation
pnpm docs:api
# Verify: API docs generate correctly, no TypeScript errors
# Install link checker
npm install -g markdown-link-check

# Check all documentation files
find docs -name "*.md" -exec markdown-link-check {} \;

# Check specific file
markdown-link-check docs/contributing/README.md

Code Example Testing​

# Create test environment
mkdir doc-test && cd doc-test
npm init -y
npm install age-schema-client

# Test each code example
# Copy example code to test file and run
node test-example.js

User Testing​

New User Testing​

  1. Find a new user: Someone unfamiliar with the library
  2. Provide documentation: Give them only the documentation to work with
  3. Observe their experience: Watch how they navigate and use the docs
  4. Collect feedback: Ask about confusing or missing information
  5. Iterate based on feedback: Improve documentation based on observations

Task-Based Testing​

  1. Define common tasks: Identify typical user goals
  2. Create test scenarios: Specific tasks users should be able to complete
  3. Test with documentation: Use only documentation to complete tasks
  4. Measure success: Track completion rates and time to completion
  5. Identify pain points: Note where users struggle or get confused

Performance Testing​

Page Load Testing​

# Install Lighthouse CLI
npm install -g lighthouse

# Test page performance
lighthouse http://localhost:3000/docs/intro --output html --output-path ./lighthouse-report.html

# Check for performance issues
# Target scores: Performance > 90, Accessibility > 95, Best Practices > 90, SEO > 90

Search Performance​

  • Search response time: Verify search results appear quickly
  • Search accuracy: Ensure relevant results appear for common queries
  • Search coverage: Verify all important content is searchable

Quality Metrics​

Quantitative Metrics​

Content Metrics​

  • Page views: Track which documentation is most/least used
  • Time on page: Measure user engagement with content
  • Bounce rate: Identify content that doesn't meet user needs
  • Search queries: Understand what users are looking for

Technical Metrics​

  • Build time: Monitor documentation build performance
  • Error rates: Track build failures and broken links
  • Load time: Measure page load performance
  • Mobile usage: Track mobile vs desktop usage patterns

Qualitative Metrics​

User Feedback​

  • Support tickets: Track documentation-related support requests
  • GitHub issues: Monitor documentation improvement requests
  • User surveys: Regular feedback on documentation quality
  • Community feedback: Input from forums and discussions

Content Quality Indicators​

  • Clarity scores: User ratings of content clarity
  • Completeness ratings: User assessment of information completeness
  • Usefulness ratings: How helpful users find the documentation
  • Accuracy reports: User-reported errors or outdated information

Continuous Improvement​

Regular Audits​

Monthly Reviews​

  • Link checking: Automated check for broken links
  • Content freshness: Review for outdated information
  • User feedback: Review and address user feedback
  • Analytics review: Analyze usage patterns and popular content

Quarterly Assessments​

  • Comprehensive content audit: Review all documentation for quality
  • User experience testing: Test documentation with real users
  • Performance optimization: Optimize for speed and accessibility
  • Style guide updates: Refine style guide based on learnings

Annual Overhauls​

  • Complete restructuring review: Assess overall organization
  • Technology updates: Update for new tools and best practices
  • Accessibility audit: Comprehensive accessibility review
  • Competitive analysis: Compare with industry best practices

Feedback Integration​

Collecting Feedback​

  1. Multiple channels: GitHub issues, surveys, support tickets, analytics
  2. Regular solicitation: Actively ask for feedback, don't just wait for it
  3. Specific questions: Ask targeted questions about specific areas
  4. User interviews: Conduct detailed interviews with key users

Acting on Feedback​

  1. Prioritize by impact: Focus on changes that help the most users
  2. Quick wins first: Address easy fixes immediately
  3. Plan major changes: Include significant improvements in sprint planning
  4. Communicate changes: Let users know when their feedback is addressed

Documentation Evolution​

Emerging Patterns​

  • New user needs: Adapt to changing user requirements
  • Technology changes: Update for new library features and capabilities
  • Best practices: Incorporate new documentation best practices
  • Tool improvements: Leverage new tools and technologies

Innovation Opportunities​

  • Interactive examples: Explore interactive code examples
  • Video content: Consider video tutorials for complex topics
  • Community contributions: Enable and encourage community documentation
  • Automation: Automate more quality checks and content generation

This quality assurance checklist ensures that all documentation meets high standards for accuracy, usability, and accessibility. Regular use of this checklist will maintain and improve documentation quality over time.