Thanks for raising this issue, Adam!
For me, I expect a similar structure and naming for the tool documentation and that lack of consistency (both in the structure and in the language) makes the docs less approachable.
Here's what I'd expect to see for each tool:
- Overview (what problem it solves, typical usage, etc)
- Installation (how to download, install, and configure it)
- Usage (what each button does, how to do the typical things)
- FAQ (e.g., projecting ODK Collect onto another screen)
- Limitations (e.g., any gotchas?)
I think the FAQ (or Tips or Things You Should Know) is important because not everyone is going to dig through all the docs. And it's nice to have it in a list because it lets us document issues people commonly have and help users who browse that list get a sense of their unknown unknowns. It's also nice because it's documentation that contributors can easily add to.
And for each of these sections, there needs to be internal consistency as well. For example what http://docs.opendatakit.org/collect-guide and http://docs.opendatakit.org/aggregate-guide say are different and that should be improved.
I'm also wondering that there needs to be a higher level hierarchy? So the ToC starts focused on individual tools, then goes to Form Building, then Contributing, etc. That likely won't scale, so maybe we have a Tools section with the stuff I described above. Then we have a Techniques section with things like form design, deployment planning, integration, etc?