You%20need%20an%20AI%20policy%20for%20your%20docs (passo.uno)

AI-written documentation contributions are already increasing and may soon overwhelm docs-as-code workflows, so the practical response is not prohibition but policy. The article urges technical writers to craft an "AI & Docs" policy—a clear declaration of intent that defines principles (human responsibility, final quality ownership), when LLMs may be used, and how AI-assisted contributions are reviewed. This matters because generative models are becoming ubiquitous and indistinguishable in output; without a stance, doc quality, maintainability, and the visibility of human expertise are at risk. Concretely, recommended controls include: treating AI-generated or AI-assisted PRs like any other contribution while requiring disclosure of the tool, prompts, edit history and failure modes; specifying allowed augmentations (e.g., pattern edits, auto-completions) and forbidding high-risk uses (architectural writing, entire new docsets); and relying on deterministic safety nets—linters, link/check/build tests in CI—to catch hallucinations (fake commands, invented APIs) at scale. Teams should piggyback on org-wide GenAI policies or lead by example, iterate the policy as patterns emerge, and extend test suites to treat docs as infrastructure. The goal: redirect LLM power to augment human expertise, preserve quality standards, and keep technical writing a strategic discipline.