How a Fern Technical Writer Uses AI Drafting: ~20,000 New Doc Lines a Month, With Human Review on Every Page
Task guide: AI-assisted technical documentation
Fern technical writer Devin Logan feeds engineering discussions to Fern Writer (Devin), which drafts documentation changes and opens PRs; she then continues adjusting locally with Claude Code. She states that with multiple AI tools she delivers roughly 20,000 lines of new documentation per month across about 500 pages — a figure not independently verified and not fully attributable to any single tool. Task: 1. Fed engineering discussions to Fern Writer in Slack. [Preparation] 2. Fern Writer drafted documentation changes and opened PRs. [—] 3. The author continued adjusting locally with Claude Code. [Oversight · Review] 4. The author reviewed and edited every page; engineers supplied technical content and corrected misunderstandings. [Review · Exception handling]; tools: Devin, Claude Code. Human role: - Review: the author reads and edits every page. Exception handling: engineers correct conceptual misunderstandings. - Other division of labor: Not disclosed by the source.; limitations: - The first draft of PDF-export documentation was organized differently than expected and omitted the changelog. - One authentication-doc rewrite needed an engineer to correct a concept — conceptual errors in drafts require a domain expert as the safety net. - This site verified only that the source link is reachable; the outcome was not independently re-tested..
Tools
Published on Agent Work Atlas:
Overview
Fern technical writer Devin Logan feeds engineering discussions to Fern Writer (Devin), which drafts documentation changes and opens PRs; she then continues adjusting locally with Claude Code. She states that with multiple AI tools she delivers roughly 20,000 lines of new documentation per month across about 500 pages — a figure not independently verified and not fully attributable to any single tool.
Workflow
1. Fed engineering discussions to Fern Writer in Slack. [Preparation] 2. Fern Writer drafted documentation changes and opened PRs. [—] 3. The author continued adjusting locally with Claude Code. [Oversight · Review] 4. The author reviewed and edited every page; engineers supplied technical content and corrected misunderstandings. [Review · Exception handling]
Reported result
- Roughly 20,000 new documentation lines and about 500 pages per month (self-reported, not independently verified, produced with multiple AI tools — not attributable to a single one).
Human role
- Review: the author reads and edits every page. Exception handling: engineers correct conceptual misunderstandings. - Other division of labor: Not disclosed by the source.
Limitations
- The first draft of PDF-export documentation was organized differently than expected and omitted the changelog. - One authentication-doc rewrite needed an engineer to correct a concept — conceptual errors in drafts require a domain expert as the safety net. - This site verified only that the source link is reachable; the outcome was not independently re-tested.
Try it
Act as a technical writer for [Product Name]. I will provide a recent engineering Slack thread discussing [Feature Name]. Step 1: Use [Tool Name, e.g., Fern Writer/Devin] to draft a documentation update based on the thread. Step 2: Submit a PR or draft file. Step 3: I will review the draft for technical accuracy and structure. Step 4: Use [Local Tool, e.g., Claude Code] to refine wording and fix any missing elements like changelog entries. Deliverables: A revised documentation page and a changelog entry. Success Metric: The draft requires minimal technical corrections from engineers. Note: Do not publish or merge without my explicit approval. If the tool lacks context, ask for specific code snippets or API definitions before drafting.
Source reports are not independently verified. Publication date is the catalog publication date, not the original article date.