Skip to content

Conversation

@hadley
Copy link
Member

@hadley hadley commented Jan 22, 2026

Fixes #2525

@gadenbuie can you take a look too please? I think this should be a nice tool for a coding agent to verify that it's updated all the needed docs.

@hadley hadley requested a review from jennybc January 22, 2026 16:00
@gadenbuie
Copy link

I've never used it, but I just discovered check_man(). Should this function name be check_man_fields() then? Or roll these checks into check_man(), maybe behind a flag?

It'd be nice to have one function for coding agents. I think agents also tend to call document() separately, so it'd be nice to skip documenting by default to speed up the check. So something like this

check_man <- function(pkg = ".", document = FALSE, check_fields = TRUE) {
  # ...
}

@hadley
Copy link
Member Author

hadley commented Jan 22, 2026

I'm not convinced that check_man() is that helpful. It can save you a little time compared to R CMD check but I generally find it detects problems that we don't tend to make any more.

@gadenbuie
Copy link

gadenbuie commented Jan 22, 2026

I agree for human usage, but at a quick glance I think check_man() would catch mistakes that are common among coding assistants. In particular, updating a function signature but not documenting the parameter is a common coding agent miss. In my experience, check_man() is much faster than a full check() (2s vs a full minute or more in btw for example).

That said, I haven't fully looked into what's covered by check_man()

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Provide helper for missing returns/examples

3 participants