What shapes the details you include in a technical description.

What actually drives the details you describe in a technical write-up? If you’ve ever faced a description you had to pull together, you know there are a lot of moving parts. The short answer to the classic multiple-choice question you might see in a technical communication course is simple: your personal preferences aren’t the main driver. The details you include come from three things—your reader’s needs, how the description will be used, and the writing situation. Those elements shape content more than any taste or vibe you personally prefer.

Let me explain the three factors in plain terms, then we’ll look at concrete examples and quick rules you can carry with you.

Who is this for? (Your user information needs)

Think about the person who will read your description. What do they already know? what are they trying to accomplish? What barriers stand in their way? In technical writing, you’re not just telling someone what something is—you’re helping them do something with it.

• If your reader is a field technician, they need clear steps, concise warnings, and visuals that map to a real workspace.

• If your reader is a software developer, they want precise parameters, data types, return values, and concrete usage examples.

• If your reader is a general consumer, they benefit from language that explains features in everyday terms, supported by quick reference data and intuitive diagrams.

The point is: the level of detail, the terminology, and even the order in which you present information should match what the reader will do with it. It’s about information needs, not personal taste.

What will this description be used for? (The intended use)

Context matters. A description for a user manual may need different elements than one for API reference, a quick-start guide, or a compliance report. The intended use drives:

• Depth of technical detail: Do you outline every parameter, or just the essential ones?

• Precision and measurements: Are units necessary? Do you include tolerances or environmental limits?

• Visuals and layout: Will charts, diagrams, or step-by-step screenshots help more than blocks of text?

• Tone and structure: Should the writing sound formal and precise, or approachable and compact?

For instance, a thermostat’s operating range in a consumer manual benefits from simple language, clear ranges in both Celsius and Fahrenheit, and safety cautions. An API description of the same feature might focus on input types, edge cases, and example call/response payloads. Two different uses, two different detail sets, both faithful to the product. Personal taste? It stays backstage where it belongs.

What’s the writing situation? (The context in which you’ll publish)

This one can feel a little wonky, but it’s crucial. Where will readers encounter your description? In print, on a website, in an internal knowledge base, or embedded in a software help panel? What are the constraints?

• Time and place: Is there a hard deadline? Will readers access this in a noisy workshop, or in a quiet office?

• Medium and format: Is this a PDF manual, a web page, or a plain-text README? The format limits how much you can rely on graphics, how much scrolling users will tolerate, and how you present lists and steps.

• Audience expertise: A seasoned user may skim for specifics; a novice may need more context and definitions.

When you factor in where and how readers interact with your content, you start to see why personal preferences don’t carry the same weight as the three elements above.

Personal preferences? Not the boss here

Yes, you might have a preferred style, a favorite way to phrase things, or a knack for witty asides. Great. But in professional technical writing, letting personal taste dictate what details you include is a risky move. It can tilt your content toward what you enjoy saying rather than what your readers need to know. And that’s a fast path to confusion, errors, or wasted time.

A quick mental check: am I writing to help someone complete a task safely and efficiently? If yes, you’re likely guided by user needs, use, and situation—not your own preferences.

Two quick real-world illustrations

1. Consumer device manual

• Reader: Everyday user setting up a home router.

• Use: Reference for setup and troubleshooting.

• Details to include: clear safety notes, minimum and recommended speeds, power requirements, step-by-step setup with visuals, and a troubleshooting flow.

• Why this fits the three factors: the reader’s goal (connect to the internet), the environment (home, possibly distracted), and the medium (guide with pictures and short paragraphs).

2. Developer-oriented API reference

• Reader: Software developers integrating a service.

• Use: Precise parameters, data types, examples, error handling.

• Details to include: function signature, input/output types, example requests, status codes, edge cases, and a succinct rationale for each parameter.

• Why this fits the three factors: the reader’s task (integration), the usage context (code), and the publication channel (reference doc in a tech portal or GitHub wiki).

A practical framework you can apply

• Start with the reader’s goal. What is the user trying to accomplish with this description?

• List the essential details that directly support that goal.

• Decide what the reader must know to perform the task safely and effectively.

• Trim anything that doesn’t serve those aims, even if it’s interesting or fun to write.

• Add visuals, but only if they clarify a point that text alone cannot.

A small, doable example you can steal for your notes

Imagine you’re writing a short description for a new button on a medical device. Here’s how you’d decide what to include:

• The reader’s goal: hospital staff need to activate the device quickly without messing with safety protocols.

• The essential details: where the button is, what label it has, what happens when pressed (including any indicators), safety notes, and a one-line “how to” for the standard action.

• The right level of detail: brief, action-oriented, with a high-contrast image showing the button and its label.

• The publication context: a clinical quick-reference card paired with the device, designed to be read at a glance.

Personal preferences don’t decide the content. The card would still be useful if written by someone who prefers long sentences or prefers bullet lists; what matters is that it helps clinicians perform a task safely and efficiently.

A few practical rules of thumb for students and professionals

• Always anchor your content to the user’s task. If you can’t map a sentence to a user action, trim it.

• Use a three-question lens for every section: Who is reading? What will they do? Where will they read this?

• Provide the right level of precision. If a spec is critical for safety or interoperability, include it; if it’s optional background, keep it in an appendix or a linked note.

• Favor consistent terminology. Define terms once, then reuse them. It reduces cognitive load and minimizes misinterpretation.

• Leverage visuals where words alone would be too verbose. A good diagram can replace a paragraph or two of text.

• Test with real readers when possible. A quick review from someone who represents your target audience can reveal holes you didn’t notice.

Helpful tools and methods

• Information design: chunk content with clear headings, action verbs, and scannable lists.

• Personas and user journeys: even a rough, quickly sketched persona helps you keep focus on real readers.

• Task analysis: outline the steps a user will take with the description and verify every step has a purpose.

• Documentation tools: MadCap Flare and RoboHelp are popular for structured docs; FrameMaker still shines for long-form content; lightweight teams often lean on Markdown or Google Docs for speed.

• Consistency checks: glossaries, style guides, and terminology databases keep language stable and predictable.

A final thought to carry with you

If you’re ever unsure which details to include, shift the question from “What do I want to say?” to “What does my reader need to do this task well?” The answer almost always points to three headers: user needs, use, and situation. Personal taste fades into the background when you’re laser-focused on helping someone achieve a clear goal.

Plug-in opportunity: quick self-check

• Who will read this, and what do they need to accomplish?

• Is every included detail necessary for that goal, or can something be moved to a footnote or appendix?

• Will readers encounter this description in a context that benefits from visuals or a step-by-step format?

If you can answer these three prompts for each section, you’re building content that’s not only correct but genuinely useful. And isn’t that what good technical communication is all about?

In closing

Describing features, procedures, or configurations is a craft of balancing clarity, completeness, and practicality. The driving forces behind what you put in are user needs, how the description will be used, and the writing context. Personal preferences may color your voice or your favorite examples, but they shouldn’t steer the essential details you share. When you keep the focus where it belongs, your writing becomes a reliable assistant for readers—someone who helps them get the job done, safely and efficiently.

If you’re compiling notes for your next technical write-up, try this approach: start with your reader in mind, map the task, then align the content to the channel. It’s a straightforward habit, but one that pays off in fewer clarifications, better usability, and a smoother reading experience. And that’s the real win in technical documentation.