Remove deprecated docs

[jayhack]

Motivation

Content

Testing

Please check the following before marking your PR as ready for review

• I have added tests for my changes
• I have updated the documentation or added new documentation as needed

[codegen-sh]

High-level review (diff too large to load via API): I couldn’t fetch the full diff because GitHub reports the patch is over 20k lines. Based on the PR title (“Remove deprecated docs”), here’s a focused review and a checklist of items to ensure this change lands safely without regressions.

Code quality and consistency

• Remove dangling references: Search for any imports, links, or build steps that still point to the removed docs (e.g., docs sidebar config, navigation, route maps, next.config/docusaurus config, scripts in package.json, tsconfig path aliases, ESLint/Prettier ignore lists, CI workflows that build docs).
• Dead components/assets: If MDX components, images, or CSS were used exclusively by the deprecated docs, consider removing them too to avoid dead code and reduce bundle size.
• Broken links and anchors: Internal references from remaining docs/pages to removed pages should be updated or redirected. Run a link checker across the repo to catch breakages.
• Build parity: Ensure local docs build still succeeds (or if docs are fully removed, ensure the site/build system is updated accordingly). If docs are deployed from a monorepo, validate that non-docs apps aren’t importing doc-only utilities.

Architecture and maintainability

• Redirect strategy: If these docs have public backlinks, add permanent redirects (308/301). Options:
  • Next.js: add rewrites/redirects in next.config.js.
  • Vercel/Netlify/Cloudflare: add _redirects or project-level redirects.
  • Static site generator (Docusaurus/Next content): add redirects in the site config or frontmatter where supported.
• SEO/search index: Update sitemap and robots to prevent 404s from being indexed. If using Algolia DocSearch or similar, update crawl config to exclude removed paths and reindex.
• Discoverability: Consider adding a small “Legacy docs have moved” landing page for the most-visited removed paths to guide users.
• Archival: If the content still has reference value, tag a release or create a legacy-docs branch and link it from README or a Deprecated Docs section.

Performance and repo health

• Repo size and assets: Verify that large images/binaries associated with the old docs are removed (or moved to LFS if intentionally kept). Double-check there are no leftover .map files or large generated artifacts.
• CI: Remove any doc-generation jobs that are no longer needed; keep a link-check job if the site remains.

Security/privacy

• If docs contained example keys, credentials, or sensitive screenshots, removing them is positive. Consider running a secret scan (e.g., trufflehog, GitHub code scanning) across the removed paths to ensure nothing critical remains elsewhere.

Testing

• Automated link checking: Add/keep a CI job (e.g., lychee, markdown-link-check) to fail on broken links after this removal.
• Smoke test: Build the website/docs in CI and publish preview to validate there are no runtime errors from missing components or routes.
• Search for references: ripgrep suggestions you can run locally:
  • rg -n "docs/" -g '!node_modules' -S
  • rg -n "(link|href|to):.*(old-path)" -S docs/ app/ packages/

Documentation and comms

• README and external links: Update README badges/links, the main website nav, and any external references (blog posts, Slack pinned messages) that point to removed pages.
• Changelog/Release notes: Note that deprecated docs were removed and include links to replacements or archives.

Questions/requests to help finalize this PR

1. Can you share a quick list of the directories/pages removed and which remain? This helps verify redirects and link updates.
2. Do we have a redirect map for high-traffic URLs? If not, I can propose one based on the removed paths.
3. Does the docs build (if still applicable) and CI pass locally and in the PR checks? Any link-checker failures?
4. Are there any shared components between docs and app that were also removed? If so, we should confirm nothing in the app imports them.

If you can’t easily enumerate the removed paths here, I can look again once a smaller, paginated diff is available or you can paste the list of changed files. Overall, removing deprecated docs is great for repo hygiene—just want to ensure we don’t ship broken links or drop SEO equity without redirects.

[codegen-sh]

Follow-up after reviewing the Mintlify preview (https://codegeninc-jay-fix-docs.mintlify.app): I noticed a few concrete issues likely introduced by the docs cleanup/moves.

1. Broken/odd anchor links on the Overview page

• In the "On this page" section, the anchors contain the domain twice, e.g.:
  https://codegeninc-jay-fix-docs.mintlify.app/codegeninc-jay-fix-docs.mintlify.app#what-can-codegen-agents-do%3F
• Expected: just hash anchors or absolute anchors with a single domain, e.g.:
  https://codegeninc-jay-fix-docs.mintlify.app/#what-can-codegen-agents-do%3F or just #what-can-codegen-agents-do%3F
• Suggestion: Ensure that anchor generation uses relative hashes. If any MDX/Markdown explicitly uses [link](#section), change to link or ensure the site builder doesn’t prefix the domain twice.

2. Likely incorrect internal link

• In the Overview page’s "Code Execution Sandbox" capability, the link points to /integrations/sandboxes. The Sandboxes section in the nav lives under /sandboxes/... (e.g., /sandboxes/overview). Suggest updating that link to the correct sandboxes route.

3. Duplicate hero CTA links

• The Overview page shows "Documentation | API Reference" duplicated back-to-back in the hero area. This looks like a template or content duplication. Recommend removing one instance.

4. Path naming nit

• Capabilities "Overview" currently lives at /capabilities/capabilities. Consider renaming that file/slug to /capabilities/overview for clarity and consistency with the other sections.

5. Redirects for removed content

• Since significant pages were removed or moved, please add a redirects stanza (Mintlify supports redirects in docs.json). This will prevent SEO regressions and user 404s. Example:
  "redirects": [
  { "from": "/old-section/old-page", "to": "/new-section/new-page" },
  { "from": "/capabilities", "to": "/capabilities/overview" }
  ]
  If you share the list of removed/moved paths, I can propose a concrete map.

6. Link checking

• Consider running a link checker across the built site (lychee or Mintlify’s built-in if available) to catch any additional breakages introduced by this change.

Everything else in the preview looks coherent and the Mintlify CI check is green. If you can confirm the removed path list, I’ll suggest an explicit redirects map in a follow-up review.