# SMOA Documentation Review Checklist **Version:** 1.0 **Last Updated:** 2024 **Status:** Active --- ## Purpose This checklist ensures all documentation meets quality standards before publication. Use this checklist for all documentation reviews. --- ## General Documentation Quality ### Content Quality - [ ] Content is accurate and up-to-date - [ ] Content is complete (all required sections present) - [ ] Content is clear and understandable - [ ] Content is relevant to target audience - [ ] Content follows style guide - [ ] Content uses consistent terminology - [ ] Content is free of spelling and grammar errors ### Structure and Organization - [ ] Document has clear structure - [ ] Headings are hierarchical and logical - [ ] Table of contents is present (for long documents) - [ ] Sections are well-organized - [ ] Information flows logically - [ ] Related information is grouped together ### Formatting - [ ] Formatting is consistent throughout - [ ] Text formatting (bold, italic, code) is used appropriately - [ ] Lists are formatted correctly - [ ] Tables are formatted correctly - [ ] Code blocks are formatted correctly - [ ] Diagrams are formatted correctly --- ## Technical Documentation ### Technical Accuracy - [ ] Technical information is accurate - [ ] Code examples are correct and tested - [ ] API documentation matches implementation - [ ] Architecture diagrams are accurate - [ ] Configuration examples are correct - [ ] Procedures are accurate and tested ### Completeness - [ ] All APIs are documented - [ ] All configuration parameters are documented - [ ] All error codes are documented - [ ] All examples are complete - [ ] All diagrams are included - [ ] All references are valid ### Code Examples - [ ] Code examples are complete and working - [ ] Code examples are properly formatted - [ ] Code examples include necessary imports - [ ] Code examples include comments - [ ] Code examples show expected output - [ ] Code examples include error handling --- ## User Documentation ### Clarity - [ ] Language is clear and simple - [ ] Jargon is avoided or explained - [ ] Procedures are step-by-step - [ ] Examples are provided - [ ] Screenshots are clear and relevant ### Completeness - [ ] All features are documented - [ ] All procedures are documented - [ ] Common tasks are covered - [ ] Troubleshooting information is included - [ ] FAQ is included (if applicable) ### Usability - [ ] Information is easy to find - [ ] Navigation is clear - [ ] Cross-references are accurate - [ ] Index is present (if applicable) - [ ] Search functionality works (if applicable) --- ## Administrator Documentation ### Completeness - [ ] All installation procedures are documented - [ ] All configuration parameters are documented - [ ] All administrative tasks are documented - [ ] All troubleshooting procedures are documented - [ ] All security considerations are documented ### Accuracy - [ ] Procedures are accurate and tested - [ ] Configuration examples are correct - [ ] Command examples are correct - [ ] File paths are correct - [ ] Version information is accurate ### Security - [ ] Security considerations are documented - [ ] Security configurations are documented - [ ] Security best practices are included - [ ] Security warnings are prominent --- ## Status Reports ### Completeness - [ ] All required sections are present - [ ] All metrics are included - [ ] All modules are covered - [ ] All risks are documented - [ ] All issues are documented ### Accuracy - [ ] Metrics are accurate - [ ] Status indicators are correct - [ ] Dates are correct - [ ] Numbers are correct - [ ] References are valid ### Clarity - [ ] Executive summary is clear - [ ] Status is clearly indicated - [ ] Next steps are clear - [ ] Risks are clearly described --- ## Diagrams and Visuals ### Quality - [ ] Diagrams are clear and readable - [ ] Diagrams use consistent styling - [ ] Diagrams are appropriately sized - [ ] Diagrams include captions - [ ] Diagrams are referenced in text ### Accuracy - [ ] Diagrams are accurate - [ ] Diagrams reflect current state - [ ] Diagrams use correct symbols - [ ] Diagrams show correct relationships ### Accessibility - [ ] Diagrams have alt text - [ ] Diagrams use high contrast - [ ] Diagrams are accessible to screen readers - [ ] Color is not the only means of conveying information --- ## Links and References ### Internal Links - [ ] All internal links are valid - [ ] All internal links point to correct documents - [ ] All internal links use relative paths - [ ] All referenced documents exist ### External Links - [ ] All external links are valid - [ ] All external links are accessible - [ ] All external links are appropriate - [ ] External links open in new tab (if applicable) ### References - [ ] All references are cited correctly - [ ] All references are accessible - [ ] All references are relevant - [ ] Reference format is consistent --- ## Version Control ### Version Information - [ ] Version number is present - [ ] Version number is correct - [ ] Last updated date is present - [ ] Last updated date is correct - [ ] Change history is present (if applicable) ### Document Metadata - [ ] Document owner is identified - [ ] Review date is present - [ ] Approval status is indicated - [ ] Classification is correct (if applicable) --- ## Review Process ### Technical Review - [ ] Reviewed by subject matter expert - [ ] Technical accuracy verified - [ ] Code examples tested - [ ] Procedures tested - [ ] Technical review comments addressed ### Quality Review - [ ] Reviewed by technical writer - [ ] Style guide compliance verified - [ ] Grammar and spelling checked - [ ] Formatting verified - [ ] Quality review comments addressed ### Approval - [ ] Approved by appropriate authority - [ ] Approval documented - [ ] Approval date recorded --- ## Publication Readiness ### Final Checks - [ ] All checklist items completed - [ ] All review comments addressed - [ ] Document is approved - [ ] Document is ready for publication - [ ] Document is published to correct location ### Post-Publication - [ ] Document is accessible - [ ] Links are working - [ ] Document is indexed (if applicable) - [ ] Document is announced (if applicable) --- ## Review Sign-off ### Technical Reviewer - **Name:** ________________ - **Date:** ________________ - **Comments:** [Attach review comments] ### Quality Reviewer - **Name:** ________________ - **Date:** ________________ - **Comments:** [Attach review comments] ### Approver - **Name:** ________________ - **Date:** ________________ - **Approval:** ✅ Approved / ❌ Rejected --- **Document Owner:** Documentation Lead **Last Updated:** 2024 **Next Review:** Quarterly