How we move from a codebase review to a finished internal manual, with the checkpoints and constraints that keep each delivery consistent.
Each engagement follows the same sequence: discovery, drafting, review cycles, and final sign-off. Dates below reflect the typical cadence for a mid-size web team documentation project.
We start by mapping your internal repos, identifying the modules that need manuals, and agreeing on the output format. You receive a short questionnaire and a list of the exact files we need access to.
We build the documentation skeleton: page hierarchy, code snippet placeholders, and cross-reference plan. You get a structural draft for review before any deep writing begins.
The complete manual draft is delivered in Markdown and HTML. This includes all code examples, edge-case notes, and a changelog section. We flag any gaps where your team input is required.
Your lead engineers annotate the draft directly. We run a consistency check against your style guide and fix any ambiguous wording or incorrect code references.
We incorporate all feedback, verify that every code snippet matches the current branch, and deliver the final package. You receive a summary of what changed since the first draft.
If your team spots a factual error or a missing section within 30 days, we fix it at no extra cost. This window is limited to corrections, not new feature documentation.
Workflow overview
Every engagement follows the same sequence: intake, source review, drafting, internal verification, and handover. The steps below describe what you can expect at each stage and where your team needs to be involved.
We map your repository structure, identify the modules that need coverage, and agree on the document set before any writing starts.
You receive a documentation plan with section outlines, target audiences per document, and a timeline. This is the point to raise concerns about depth or format.
Technical writers work directly against your codebase, not against screenshots or verbal summaries. Every procedure is traced back to the actual implementation.
Each manual is checked by a second writer for accuracy, then run through a consistency pass that verifies naming, error codes, and configuration references.
Your lead developers review the final draft and flag anything that has changed since the audit. We incorporate feedback within the agreed revision window.
You receive the approved documents in your preferred format, plus a short note on what to update when the codebase changes. See how we keep manuals current.