📝 docs(front-door): rewrite README and site copy for candidates, not testers#17
Merged
Conversation
…testers
The README read like a QA script ("A 5-minute path to confirm the whole loop
works", "What's normal, not a bug") and the site leaked internal jargon. Rewrote
both for someone who wants a job, not someone smoke-testing a build.
- 📝 docs(readme): lead with what it does for you; replace the test-drive
walkthrough with "Your first hour"; drop the internal naming-decision notes
- 🎨 style(website): "Tells you to GATE, FIT, pass on COMP, or act" was wrong —
those are field names in the verdict block, not verdict values. Now reads
"go for it, skip it, or take a closer look"
- 📝 docs(site): gloss the GATE / FIT / COMP / ACTION block in plain English
before showing the literal token
- 🐛 fix(website): "Clone it. Run it. Own it." told people to clone, but the
command shown is `npm install -g rolester`
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR revises documentation and landing-page copy across README.md, docs-site MDX pages, and website/src/app/page.tsx. README.md is reorganized into new sections for setup, first use, commands, and how it works. The docs-site pages reword the gate output description to cover keep/cut, fit, comp, and next-step output. The landing page copy updates the Gate pull-quote, onboarding and search steps, feature list, install section, and prerequisites. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs-site/content/docs/getting-started/what-is-rolester.mdx`:
- Around line 34-37: The Gate section currently describes `renderGateBlock` as a
fixed four-line `GATE / FIT / COMP / ACTION` block, but it can also include
optional `COMP ANCHOR` and `LEGITIMACY` lines. Update the Gate description in
`what-is-rolester.mdx` to explicitly mention those optional lines, and make the
same wording change in `docs-site/content/docs/index.mdx` so both docs match the
behavior of `renderGateBlock`.
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 15-16: The README privacy statement is too absolute for the
`rolester start` flow because it hands off to external AI CLI/provider tools.
Update the copy near the existing privacy sentence to scope the claim to
Rolester itself, or explicitly qualify that the Claude Code/Codex provider hop
may transmit data outside the laptop. Keep the wording aligned with the
user-facing description in README rather than implying an all-local guarantee.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 19f71ccd-bdb6-49e9-8c74-851c356ba86e
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
README.mddocs-site/content/docs/getting-started/what-is-rolester.mdxdocs-site/content/docs/index.mdxwebsite/src/app/page.tsx
…ate contract Addresses CodeRabbit review on #17. Both findings verified against the code. - 🐛 fix(readme): "Nothing you put in leaves your laptop" was false and contradicted our own docs/advanced/privacy.mdx — the agent CLI sends the work to its provider. Scoped the claim to Rolester and linked the privacy page - 📝 docs(site): the gate block is not a fixed four lines. gate.mjs also pushes COMP ANCHOR, COMP ESTIMATE, and LEGITIMACY conditionally. Say so, in plain words rather than by listing the raw tokens
biggest-littlest
approved these changes
Jul 9, 2026
biggest-littlest
left a comment
biggest-littlest
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copy-only. Verified the two substantive fixes against the source: gate.mjs really does push COMP ANCHOR / COMP ESTIMATE / LEGITIMACY conditionally, and advanced/privacy.mdx already disclosed the provider hop the old README denied. Node stays at 18 to match bin/rolester.mjs and package.json#engines on this branch. LGTM.
ALARGECOMPANY
approved these changes
Jul 9, 2026
ALARGECOMPANY
left a comment
ALARGECOMPANY
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reads much better. The GATE/FIT/COMP/ACTION line was actively confusing before.
scttbnsn
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
…ipping a 404 (#18) * 🐛 fix(deploy): anchor .vercelignore paths so main deploys stop shipping a 404 .vercelignore uses .gitignore semantics: a pattern with no leading slash matches at every depth. The bare `src` entry — meant to drop the CLI source at the repo root — also matched `website/src` and `docs-site/src`, so Vercel's git build deleted both Next apps' source before building. `next build` then found no app directory, emitted a lone `/404` route, and production served a 404. This never surfaced because every deploy so far was `vercel deploy --prebuilt`, which uploads the prebuilt output directory and never applies .vercelignore. Merging #17 fired the first git-integration production deploy and took the site down. Anchors every product-internal path with a leading slash. Verified with `git ls-files -i -c -X .vercelignore` (same semantics): 0 files removed from website/ or docs-site/, 525 root internal files still excluded. * 🧪 test(release-safety): require anchored .vercelignore paths The privacy guard asserted the exact unanchored lines (`^candidate$`), which is what forced the bug: anchoring the paths broke it. Assert the anchored form instead — same privacy intent — and add a regression check that the depth-matching bare forms never come back. Verified the new assertion fails against the old .vercelignore. --------- Co-authored-by: CodesWhat <219361182+CodesWhat@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The README read like a QA script and the marketing site leaked internal jargon. This rewrites both for the person who wants a job, not the person smoke-testing a build. Copy only — no code, no behavior change.
README
The old one led with
## Test drive (start here),A 5-minute path to confirm the whole loop works, andIf those five land, the whole stack — CLI plumbing, skills, agent reasoning, and the live dashboard — is working end to end.That is a test plan, not a front door.A 5-minute path to confirm the whole loop works→Your first hour, written as things you do, not assertions you verifyWhat's Built(a status report) →What it doesrolester doctorcomplaining before onboarding, reworded as a gotcha instead of a bug triage stepProduct Notes/ naming-decision section and the list of rejected names — that is changelog material, still in git historyWebsite
Two real errors, not just tone:
Tells you to GATE, FIT, pass on COMP, or acttreats the field names of the verdict block as if they were verdict values. The actual values areGATE: KEEP|CUT|REVIEW, a fit score, a comp check, and an action. Now readstells you to go for it, skip it, or take a closer look.Clone it. Run it. Own it.told people to clone the repo, but the terminal right beside it showsnpm install -g rolester. NowInstall it. Run it. Own it.Also de-jargoned
Config-driven, not code-driven,guided onboardingphrasing, and thewhat you getchecklist.Docs site
GATE / FIT / COMP / ACTIONis the literal output format, so it stays — but it is now glossed in plain English before the token appears, rather than dropped on the reader cold.Checks
node --test tests/release-safety.test.mjs— 6/6 pass (no PII/comp sentinel leakage)tsc --noEmitonwebsite/— cleanNotes
origin/main, not the in-flightelectron-versionbranch, so this lands independently of the desktop/app-shell work.electron-versionbumpsenginesto>=24, but onmainthe runtime guard inbin/rolester.mjs,package.json#engines, and the publishedrolester@0.5.2all say>=18. The site previously said 18 and was right; that bump should ride with the branch that actually needs it.Tokyo Night / Gruvboxdashboard theme mention after confirmingstyles.mjsreally does shiptokyonight-dark/lightandgruvbox-dark/light.✨ Added
🔧 Changed
rolester doctoronboarding warning as a deliberate “looks broken but isn’t” gotcha.rolester next,rolester doctor,rolester update, plustracker/tracker-dev, and clarifiedstartflags.🐛 Fixed
GATE / FIT / COMP / ACTIONoutput behavior and semantics, including conditional extra lines (e.g., COMP ANCHOR, COMP ESTIMATE, LEGITIMACY).🗑️ Removed
Internal product notes and rejected-name history from README/site copy.
Verify candidate-facing tone stays consistent across README, docs, and landing page.
Double-check no remaining copy implies behavior changes beyond wording (especially gating/tailoring/apply claims and verdict/output formatting).