Architecture Docs Always Outdated? Let Code "Grow" Them Automatically
SopacoDev.to (EN Zone)
2 views
Terrain — prepares the ground so agents don't have to guess where to stand.
🔗 GitHub: https://github.com/sopaco/terrain
The Tech Lead's Pain: Documentation as Technical Debt
As a Tech Lead, you've definitely experienced:
Architecture docs that took two weeks to write become unrecognizable after one iteration
Every code review requires explaining "that's not how it's actually designed anymore"
When newcomers ask "how is this system organized?" you can only answer verbally because the Wiki is long outdated
When you ask a new AI assistant to explain the system architecture, it can only guess from the code
Once architecture docs drift from code, they become liabilities—worse than having no docs at all.
Terrain's solution: let documentation emerge from code automatically, instead of being manually written from memory.
Knowledge Factory: Code as the Source of Documentation
Terrain's core is a "knowledge factory"—starting from a Git repository, it auto-generates three layers of documentation:
Git Code Repository
│
├── scan ──► index.md (Project Index)
│
├── pack ──► repomix.md (Source Index)
│
├── context (LLM) ──► agent/context.md (Agent Macro Architecture Context)
│
├── docs (ACP) ──► human/ (Five C4 Architecture Docs + Mermaid Diagrams)
│
└── track ──► freshness.json (Freshness Score)
Five C4 architecture documents auto-generated, covering all levels from containers to code, with Mermaid diagrams.
Why Can It Stay "Always in Sync"?
Incremental Updates Instead of Full Regeneration
Traditional documentation tools regenerate everything each time. Terrain doesn't:
Tracks Git HEAD — Precisely knows which files changed since the last scan.
Only regenerates changed portions — Changes involve a module → update corresponding C4 doc; unrelated modules → reuse existing artifacts.
Baseline ledger — Records the Git HEAD for each scan; subsequent refreshes do incremental diffs only.
This means refreshing knowledge for a large project might take seconds instead of minutes.
Freshness Scoring System
Every knowledge asset carries a freshness score, based on:
Git code change volume vs. documentation's last generation time
CodeGraph symbol graph drift detection results
When the score drops below 50, Agents automatically reduce the weight of that knowledge asset—ensuring incorrect suggestions are never made based on outdated architectural information.
The project list interface clearly displays each project's freshness score. Stale assets are instantly visible.
Dual-Track Output: Human-Readable, AI-Consumable
Audience
Document Path
Format
Human Developers / Tech Leads
.terrain/human/
Narrative C4 docs + Mermaid diagrams
AI Coding Assistants
.terrain/agent/context.md
Structured architecture overview (≤ 14 KiB)
AI Source Retrieval
.terrain/agent/repomix.md
Repomix source packs
Business Knowledge
.terrain/knowledge/
Glossary and internal conventions
C4 docs cover four levels: Container → Component → Code → Dynamic, paired with Mermaid diagrams, unfolding layer by layer from macro architecture to micro implementation.
Source-First Trust Model
When documentation conflicts with code, Terrain follows clear priority:
repomix source code > CodeGraph symbol graph > context.md > human docs
This isn't empty talk—repomix packages real source code, CodeGraph indexes real symbol relationships. Architecture docs are just "visual interpretations" of source code. When interpretation conflicts with source, source code is always right.
Four-Phase SDD: Making Design Reviewable
Terrain's SDD (Specification-Driven Development) workflow divides development into four phases, each producing reviewable Markdown artifacts:
Phase
Output
Execution Engine
Requirements Analysis
1.requirements.md
Native LLM
Technical Design
2.tech-design.md
Native LLM
Code Generation
3.implementation.md + repo changes
ACP Agent
Code Review
4.code-review.md
Native LLM
SDD four-phase workflow. Each phase produces reviewable Markdown artifacts that Tech Leads can examine step by step.
This means Tech Leads can:
Review whether requirements specifications are accurate
Examine whether technical design is reasonable
Confirm whether code generation matches the design
Verify whether code review is thorough
Every step is documented and traceable. Every step is reviewable.
Quick Start
# Initialize a project (auto-generate C4 docs and Agent context)
terrain init ./my-repo
# View architecture overview
terrain project overview --project my-repo
# Run SDD requirements analysis phase
terrain sdd run --project my-repo --phase requirements
# Refresh knowledge (incremental, only update changed parts)
terrain refresh ./my-repo
Who Is This For?
Tech Leads — Architecture docs never go stale, always in sync with code.
Architects — C4 docs auto-generated from code, eliminating massive maintenance overhead.
Team Managers — New member onboarding compressed from days to minutes.
Code Reviewers — SDD workflow makes every design step traceable and reviewable.
"Great architecture isn't written—it grows from code."
Hello, I’m simply asking because I’m aspiring to become a web developer, and I’m curious about how viable the field is nowadays. I don’t think you can really blame people for asking this either, because front-end development has been heavily trivialised by AI(not my opinion), or at least that’s what
Project Name: Podcode Repo/Website Link: https://podcode.io Description: Quick background, since this matters for the rest. I run a small private AI stack for my own work. Coding agents like Claude Code and Codex are part of my daily flow. They are great when they work. The thing that drove me nuts
ChatGPT.com reached about 1.09 billion monthly US visits in July 2026, a 48.38% year-over-year increase, according to Semrush Traffic Analytics data. In the same comparison, Bing.com traffic fell about 50.43%. The contrast does not show AI replacing conventional search overnight. Google and YouTube