Totally fair question. If you only want one agent to sanity-check one doc change, a skill&#x2F;prompt is probably enough.We actually aren’t rebuilding a harness here, it’s Pi with several LLM options to select from. The reason this is a project is that the useful workflow is more like a docs test suite: run realistic user tasks across multiple models, isolate each run in a greenfield sandbox, keep the transcripts&#x2F;results, and make failures reproducible in CI.You could ask an existing coding agent to spawn subagents for every task&#x2F;model pair, but once that matrix grows, running hundreds of subagents on your computer gets messy. It’s also the wrong isolation boundary: for docs testing, you usually want the agent to start from a clean environment with access only to the docs&#x2F;product surface you’re testing, not your whole working tree or local setup.

I read the GitHub repo, but still don&#x27;t quite understand-What exactly is the advantage of doing this vs just running a prompt in my existing coding agent?I don&#x27;t understand why this is a harness&#x2F;project vs just for example, a skill?I&#x27;m confident there&#x27;s a good reason, I just don&#x27;t understand.

Nice! I want to use this for my product at ngram.com. Btw, I also created a sample teaser video: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ngram.com&#x2F;watch&#x2F;dari-explainer-video-brief-d7991bc84d53469f9b7233d6a60f1e73" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ngram.com&#x2F;watch&#x2F;dari-explainer-video-brief-d7991...</a>. Feel free to use it on your social media

Cool approach actually letting agents test the docs makes debugging way more practical than just reading them

Show HN: Dari-docs – Optimize your docs using parallel coding agents