You can even write unit tests that verify that certain things are mentioned in the documentation: https://simonwillison.net/2018/Jul/28/documentation-unit-tes...
Totally agree, code review is a huge plus for many reasons.
If your company/project has a build graph (bazel, pants etc), you can even make the source file a dependency of the document, so whenever the source file changes, it's trivial to generate an automated "hey don't forget to update <doc> if it's relevant to this change".
Looks like a thin wrapper around the confluence API and a homebrewed md to html converter, that supports inter-document links. Looks like most of the code was written by folks at Twitter.
Personally, I'd advocate for using pandoc (https://pandoc.org/) unless a custom solution like this makes sense and you have the eng resources to maintain/support it.
Pandoc will give you a pretty sensible html document by default, and with some fine-tuning you can make the outputs look pretty great.
Pandoc also generates beautiful and customizable latex-powered pdfs. We have a policy of publishing those to G Drive every minor version.
benefits: versioning, code review of docs, portability, plaintext search tools, docs show up while grepping for code, can change code and docs in same commit, git blame, you can "guess" where documentation for a service lives if you know it's location in the repo.
downsides: not everyone enjoys learning markdown syntax, it's a skill orthogonal to communication. eng is a gatekeeper for changes to documentation, i.e. product can't go through it and fix typos. our code review tool does not have as good inline comment-discussion UX as G Docs (biggest one).