Docs-as-code is a discipline: docs live in markdown next to the source, reviewed through PRs, deployed via CI. It works — when the team has the time. docs-keeper doesn't replace docs-as-code; it removes the friction. After a code merge, you get a docs PR you can accept, edit, or reject — instead of a Linear ticket nobody picks up.
docs-keeper vs the typical docs-as-code workflow
Docs-as-code puts the burden on engineers. docs-keeper does the first draft.
Feature-by-feature
| Feature | docs-keeper | Docs-as-Code (manual workflow) |
|---|---|---|
| Markdown in repo | Yes | Yes |
| PR review for changes | Yes | Yes |
| Engineer writes the diff | reviews | authors |
| Picks up small API changes | always | often forgotten |
| Brand voice consistency | learned | depends on author |
| Cost per doc update | ~$0.004 / doc PR | 15–30 min eng time |
| Quality ceiling | good draft | as good as the author |
Frequently asked
Will engineers stop writing docs?
No — but they’ll edit instead of author. A draft to react to is a much smaller ask than a blank page, and the grounding gate keeps that draft tied to what actually changed in your diff.
What about big architecture decisions and design docs?
docs-keeper isn't trying to write those — it sticks to the README/CHANGELOG/API-reference layer that mirrors code changes. Design docs and ADRs stay human-authored.
Try docs-keeper free
One public repo, 20 doc PRs per month, no credit card. See if drafts read like your team before committing to a paid plan.