Documentation that actually gets written.
And actually gets read.

Engineers paste code or describe system behavior in plain language. System prompt: 'Convert this to: a technical reference doc for engineers, a plain-language summary for non-technical stakeholders, and a FAQ based on questions someone new to this system would ask.' One pass covers three audiences.

Interview the operator doing the task (or have them write a rough brain dump). Claude structures this into a formal SOP: purpose, scope, prerequisites, step-by-step procedure, exceptions, and owner. SOP that takes 4 hours to write takes 40 minutes with Claude.

Feed Claude endpoint definitions, parameter descriptions, and example requests/responses. Claude produces developer-ready documentation including: description, parameters, request format, response format, error codes, and code examples in 2-3 languages. Time: 30 minutes per endpoint vs. 3 hours.

For incident response: describe the system, the failure modes, and the resolution steps you know. Claude produces a structured runbook with: symptoms, diagnostic steps, resolution playbook, and escalation path. Saves lives at 2am.

Code, system descriptions, or brain-dump text from the people who actually do the work. The messier the input, the more Claude adds value - it structures unstructured knowledge. Also specify the audience clearly: engineers vs. operators vs. executives.

Claude will produce confident-sounding documentation with errors if given inaccurate source material. All technical documentation requires SME review before publishing. It also cannot test whether instructions actually work - that validation step stays with humans.