We all know we should document our code, but when you are in the zone, stopping to write extensive READMEs or inline comments feels like hitting a brick wall.
I’m trying to build a better habit this year. Right now, my approach is self-documenting code (clear naming) combined with a quick Markdown summary at the end of every feature branch.
What is your workflow? Do you use specific documentation tools, AI assistants, or just strict linting rules to force yourself to do it?
Portfolio: ahmershah.dev
GitHub: ahmershahdev
Focus on the "why," not the "what"—this is gold. If code structure handles the readability, documentation can do what it does best: capture intent, architecture, and edge cases. Thanks for sharing, Varsha!
I automate the boilerplate with inline JSDoc/TS types as I code, then use tools to extract it. If it needs a wiki, I write it before coding to clarify my own design. Saves time later.
The reality is that code comments often lie because code changes and comments get left behind. Clear naming conventions and comprehensive unit tests are the ultimate form of active documentation. If a developer wants to know how my feature behaves, they should be able to read the test suites. For everything else—like API endpoints—we force the use of OpenAPI/Swagger specs. The tooling generates the documentation automatically, ensuring it never drifts from the actual implementation.
We actually automated a huge chunk of this using our CI/CD pipeline and GitHub Copilot. We set up a rule that generates automated PR summaries based on the git diff. It gives team members a clear, high-level overview of what changed without forcing the author to spend 15 minutes typing it out. For internal team knowledge, we pair that with a strict Architecture Decision Record (ADR) template—just a simple, 5-line markdown file for any major technical pivot.
If writing documentation feels like hitting a wall, the scope of what you are trying to document is probably too big. I try to treat docs like atomic commits. Instead of waiting until the end of a massive feature branch, I write a single paragraph in the README the moment a core architectural decision is made. If you document the "why" while the context is still fresh in your head, it takes 30 seconds. If you wait until Friday afternoon, it takes two hours of mental backtracking.
Self-documenting code is great for how a function works, but it almost always fails to explain why it was built that way. I’ve started using an AI assistant (like Claude Code or Cursor) to handle the tedious part. At the end of a feature, I’ll just prompt it to generate standard JSDoc or docstrings for the new modules. I still have to review it to ensure the business context is correct, but it completely eliminates the "hitting a brick wall" feeling of writing syntax from scratch.
The "clean naming + Markdown summary" approach is honestly 80% of the battle won. The secret to not slowing down is keeping documentation as close to the code as possible. I've moved completely to a docs-as-code workflow using tools like Mintlify and Swimm. They pull straight from Markdown files in the repo and automatically flag when a PR changes a function but leaves the corresponding documentation untouched. If it’s not part of the standard git workflow, it simply doesn’t get done.
Varsha
Writing about AI, SaaS, and Modern Product Development
I keep docs close to the code and update them only when they explain why something exists, not what every line does. Good names and simple structure reduce the need for heavy docs. The useful documentation is usually around setup, decisions, edge cases, and things future devs might break.