Prompt construction

[hannesrudolph]

Important

Reorganized tool documentation from features to advanced-usage, updated links, added prompt structure doc, and adjusted configuration files.

• Documentation Reorganization:
  • Moved tool-related docs from features/tools to advanced-usage/available-tools.
  • Updated links in various files to reflect new paths, e.g., how-tools-work.md, using-modes.md, boomerang-tasks.mdx.
• New Documentation:
  • Added prompt-structure.md to advanced-usage.
• Configuration Updates:
  • Updated docusaurus.config.ts and sidebars.ts for new paths and redirects.
• Miscellaneous:
  • Removed outdated experimental features from experimental-features.md.

^{This description was created by for 93eeec7. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
roo-code-docs	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Apr 28, 2025 9:17pm

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to 0ad00df in 2 minutes and 1 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 644 lines of code in 31 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 13 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. docusaurus.config.ts:34

• Draft comment:
  Changing onBrokenLinks from 'throw' to 'warn' may allow broken links to go unnoticed. Consider ensuring that broken link issues are caught in CI or pre-release checks.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% This is a documentation site configuration. The change makes broken links less strict by warning instead of throwing. While the comment raises a valid concern about potentially missing broken links, it's more of a suggestion/speculation rather than pointing out a clear issue. It starts with "Consider ensuring..." which falls into the category of asking for verification or making speculative suggestions. The comment does highlight a potential regression in quality control. Missing broken links could degrade documentation quality. However, the comment violates our rules by being speculative and asking for verification rather than pointing out a clear issue. The change from throw to warn was likely intentional to handle edge cases more gracefully. Delete the comment as it is speculative and asks for verification rather than pointing out a clear issue that needs to be fixed.

2. docusaurus.config.ts:161

• Draft comment:
  The URL redirects for the moved tools pages are well configured. Ensure that any future moves follow this pattern for consistent navigation.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 20% <= threshold 50% None

3. sidebars.ts:76

• Draft comment:
  The sidebar configuration for 'Available Tools' is very detailed. Make sure it remains updated with any future tool additions for consistent documentation navigation.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 20% <= threshold 50% None

4. docs/update-notes/v3.14.0.md:5

• Draft comment:
  The release notes update documentation links to new tools paths. Verify that all links resolve correctly after moving the docs directory.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 30% <= threshold 50% None

5. docs/advanced-usage/available-tools/tool-use-overview.md:11

• Draft comment:
  Great work updating all tool links from /features/tools/... to /advanced-usage/available-tools/.... The changes are consistent and improve modular organization of the docs.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

6. docusaurus.config.ts:34

• Draft comment:
  Changed onBrokenLinks setting from 'throw' to 'warn'. This softens build failures for broken links. Ensure this is an intentional design decision.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

7. docusaurus.config.ts:161

• Draft comment:
  Extensive redirect rules have been added for the moved tools docs. Verify that all old paths map correctly to the new '/advanced-usage/available-tools/…' routes.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

8. sidebars.ts:75

• Draft comment:
  The 'Available Tools' category in the Advanced Usage sidebar now lists pages under the new path. The structure is clear and follows the new modular organization.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

9. various docs update files (e.g., update-notes, basic-usage, using-modes, boomerang-tasks):1

• Draft comment:
  All internal documentation links referencing tool endpoints have been updated to reflect the new file structure. The consistency across docs, update notes, and mode descriptions is commendable.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

10. docs/advanced-usage/available-tools/write-to-file.md:51

• Draft comment:
  Consider replacing 'missing/invalid' with 'missing or invalid' for improved clarity and consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

11. docs/basic-usage/using-modes.md:5

• Draft comment:
  It looks like there's a typographical error on line 5: "::::info Sticky Models". Typically, the syntax for an info box should use three colons (e.g., ":::info Sticky Models"). Please check if the extra colon is unintended and correct it if needed.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

12. docs/features/shell-integration.md:36

• Draft comment:
  It looks like the description for 'Terminal Output Limit' is duplicated (lines 35-36), with both lines explaining what happens when the limit is exceeded. Consider removing one of these sentences to avoid redundancy and improve clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

13. docs/index.md:7

• Draft comment:
  In the introduction (line 7), it reads 'Roo Code (formerly Roo Cline)'. Please verify if 'Roo Cline' is the intended legacy name or if it should be corrected.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

Workflow ID: wflow_bikeDfUBAcp9IZaE

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 93eeec7 in 1 minute and 20 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 117 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 8 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. docs/advanced-usage/prompt-structure.md:48

• Draft comment:
  Clarify why 'Token/cost information' is split into its own bullet. Ensure consistency in listing context details across sections.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% This comment is asking for clarification on why a specific item is split into its own bullet point. It also suggests ensuring consistency across sections. This seems to be asking for confirmation and explanation, which violates the rules.

2. docs/features/experimental/experimental-features.md:17

• Draft comment:
  Removal of 'Search and Replace' and 'Insert Content' experimental features should be documented as a breaking change if external users rely on them.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

3. sidebars.ts:64

• Draft comment:
  Sidebar order for 'Advanced Usage' has been restructured; double-check that reordering meets the intended navigation flow.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

4. docs/advanced-usage/prompt-structure.md:7

• Draft comment:
  The addition of the 'Tool Messages' role clarifies the API-level message types. Please ensure all related documentation and API references are updated to reflect this new role.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

5. docs/advanced-usage/prompt-structure.md:64

• Draft comment:
  The note clarifying that tool results are sent in separate tool messages (and not within assistant messages) is helpful. Verify that this separation is consistently described in other documentation sections.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

6. docs/features/experimental/experimental-features.md:18

• Draft comment:
  The removal of the 'Search and Replace' and 'Insert Content' sections suggests these experimental features have been deprecated. Please confirm that the underlying functionality has been removed or updated accordingly to avoid any documentation mismatch.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

7. sidebars.ts:39

• Draft comment:
  The reordering of 'features/suggested-responses' relative to 'features/shell-integration' appears intentional. Please double-check that this new order aligns with the overall documentation structure.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

8. sidebars.ts:67

• Draft comment:
  The Advanced Usage category has been reorganized by moving prompt-related docs to follow the 'Available Tools' group. Ensure that all links (like 'prompt-engineering', 'prompt-structure', etc.) remain valid and that the grouping enhances navigability.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_3AZIGUVQlTaFOcgG

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}