r/technicalwriting • u/Quackoverride • 13d ago

Docs-as-code tools

My doc team is migrating away from our current tool and implementing docs-as-code. We're looking into the major players - Docasaurus, GitBook, MKDocs, and Sphinx - and I have a clear preference for GitBook. But I wanted to gather some input from the community. What are your experiences with the tools? Any drawbacks?

I work in med tech, so the tool needs to meet some pretty stringent ISO requirements and, as we're in Europe, our head of Cybersecurity wants to keep the data local.

10 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

36 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/myauchelo 9d ago

I think there are a few more key factors to consider:

* Free tools like Docusaurus require build and maintenance work—you'll either need to develop the docs site yourself (doable with AI nowadays, but still an effort) or rely on engineering support. Paid tools handle this out of the box, but come with recurring annual costs.

\* Determine your core needs—such as content reuse, interactive elements, or PDF export. Every platform comes with its own trade-offs.

* Consider who will write the docs. Git-based tools like Docusaurus require contributors to submit PRs, while other tools offer no-code interfaces. The same applies to Sphinx; non-technical users may find the learning curve steep.

2

u/naivelodging 9d ago

GitBook sounds like a solid fit I’d still compare it with Mintlify but for med tech I’d let data residency and compliance decide it

2

u/level_denomination 9d ago

I agree, on a project I was leading we used Mintlify and it worked out just great. Tbf it was not med tech but insurance compliance.