Reviewing Documentation in Pull Requests
Documentation deserves the same review rigour as code. Learn what to look for, how to give effective feedback, and practices for documentation review.
Documentation in Git means documentation in pull requests. And pull requests mean review. But reviewing documentation is different from reviewing code. The skills overlap, but the focus shifts from correctness and performance to clarity, accuracy, and usefulness.
What to Review
Documentation review covers several dimensions. Not every review needs to cover all of them, but knowing the full scope helps you be thorough when needed.
The Review Process
Giving Feedback
Be Specific
Instead of "this is unclear", point to the specific sentence and explain what is confusing. Suggest an alternative if you can.
Distinguish Requirements from Suggestions
Not all feedback is equally important. Make it clear what must change versus what is a suggestion.
| Category | Examples |
|---|---|
| Must fix | Factual errors, missing critical information, broken examples |
| Should consider | Clarity improvements, structural changes, style adjustments |
| Nit | Minor preferences, typos (can be fixed later) |
Explain Why
Feedback is more useful when reviewers understand the reasoning. "Move this section before the installation steps because users need to understand requirements first" is better than "move this section up."
Offer Alternatives
When pointing out a problem, suggest a solution when possible. The author may have a better solution, but your suggestion gives them a starting point.
Review Checklist
A checklist for thorough documentation review.
Handling Combined Code and Documentation
When a PR includes both code and documentation.
Turnaround Time
Documentation PRs should not languish. They often block feature releases (docs must be ready at launch), customer communication, and internal training.
These review practices are how we maintain this documentation site. Every page you read has been through the same pull request review process.