QAIYU Docs

Documentation fails in one of two ways. Either nobody can find the answer, or the answer is three versions out of date. Both look identical to the person reading it.

Structure fixes the first: pages named after the question someone has, rather than after the feature they are using. A review rhythm fixes the second, and without one every documentation project decays into the same state within a year.

Your documentation is also your chatbot

Anything you put in writing is what a support bot answers from. Vague documentation produces a vague bot, and the fastest way to improve automated support is usually to fix the source rather than the model.

What we need from you

Whatever exists today, however messy. A messy starting point is worth more than a blank page.

Organised by question, not by feature

Documentation structured around the product mirrors how the people who built it think. Documentation structured around questions mirrors how the people using it think, and those two are rarely the same shape.

A page named “Permissions” is a feature. A page named “Why can a colleague not see my project” is a question, and it is the one that got typed into the search box. Renaming is the cheapest improvement most documentation can get.

A review rhythm, or it decays

Every documentation project is accurate on the day it ships and drifting by the end of the quarter. Without a fixed moment to check it, that drift is invisible until someone follows an instruction that no longer works.

So a review interval gets set per section, based on how fast that part changes. Sections nobody reviews get flagged rather than silently ageing.

This is what your chatbot answers from

Anything you put in writing is the source a support agent draws on. That makes documentation quality and automated support quality the same problem, which is not obvious until you have seen a bot give a vague answer and traced it to a vague page.

The fastest route to better automated support is usually to fix the source rather than to change the model. That is unwelcome advice because it means writing before buying, and it is still the right order.

What comes back first

Before anything is rewritten, you get a list of the gaps: questions your users ask that nothing answers, pages that contradict each other, and instructions that no longer match the product. That list is often the most useful part of the engagement, and it exists whether or not the writing continues. That pattern, a document you keep even if you stop, holds for every stage described under how a project runs.

Documentation is rarely commissioned on its own, because its value shows up in whatever answers from it. Book a demo and the gap list comes out of that first conversation.