navidocs/INFRAFABRIC_EVAL_PASTE_PROMPT.txt

# InfraFabric Comprehensive Evaluation

I'm the developer of InfraFabric (https://github.com/dannystocker/infrafabric), a research project on AI agent coordination and civilizational resilience. I need a brutally honest, multi-phase evaluation.

## Your Mission

**Phase 1: Survey & Strategy**
1. Clone the repository and analyze structure
2. Propose a segmentation strategy for multi-session review (manage context windows)
3. Start with `/papers/` directory to understand conceptual foundation

**Phase 2: Comprehensive Evaluation** (across multiple sessions if needed)

For each segment, assess:

**A. Conceptual Quality**
- Substance: Grounded research or speculation?
- Novelty: What's genuinely new?
- Rigor: Are claims verifiable and traceable?
- Coherence: Do ideas connect or drift?

**B. Technical Implementation**
- Code quality (architecture, security, performance, tests)
- **IF.* Component Inventory:**
  - ✅ Fully implemented (with file paths)
  - 🟡 Designed but not built
  - ❌ Vaporware (mentioned but no spec/code)
- Dependencies and infrastructure requirements

**B.1. Citation & Documentation Verification (CRITICAL)**
- **Verify all papers in `/papers/` directory:**
  - Check every citation is traceable (DOI, URL, or file reference)
  - Flag claims without supporting evidence
  - Check if citations are current (papers from last 3 years = bonus, 10+ years old = flag for review)
  - Verify external URLs are not 404 (check at least 10 random citations)
- **README.md audit:**
  - Does it accurately reflect current codebase state?
  - Are install instructions up-to-date and correct?
  - Do all links work?
  - Is project description aligned with actual implementation?
  - Are examples/screenshots current?

**C. Market Fit**
- What problems does this solve?
- Who would buy this? (Rank top 3 buyer personas)
- Viable business model?
- Competitive landscape

**D. Style & Presentation**
- Documentation quality and accessibility
- Narrative coherence
- Jargon density

## Deliverables

**1. Evaluation Report** with:
- Executive summary (1 page)
- Conceptual foundation analysis
- Technical architecture review (IF.* component status)
- Market & utility analysis (who would buy this, why)
- Gap analysis (what's missing)
- Style assessment

**2. Debug Session Prompt** (separate file) containing:
- IF.* component status (implemented/partial/missing)
- Foundational gaps inventory
- P0/P1/P2 prioritized issues
- Step-by-step debug workflow

## Context Window Strategy

To prevent information loss:
- Create `EVALUATION_PROGRESS.md` tracking:
  - Segments reviewed
  - Key findings per segment
  - IF.* component inventory
  - Running gap list
- Each session: Read EVALUATION_PROGRESS.md → Review new segment → Update files

## Critical Questions

**Strategic:**
- Is this a product, research project, or marketing deck?
- What's the fastest path to demonstrable value?
- Would the top 3 buyer personas actually pay?
- Production-ready, prototype, or concept-only?

**Technical:**
- Ratio of docs to working code?
- Any complete, end-to-end features?
- External dependencies?
- Coherent architecture or collection of experiments?

**Market:**
- Total addressable market (TAM)?
- Go-to-market strategy?
- Existing competitors?
- What's unique and defensible?

## Output Format (MANDATORY)

**Use this exact YAML structure for easy parsing and comparison:**

```yaml
evaluator: "Codex" # or "Gemini" or "Claude"
evaluation_date: "2025-11-14"
repository: "https://github.com/dannystocker/infrafabric"
commit_hash: "<git commit sha>"

executive_summary:
  overall_score: 6.5  # 0-10 scale
  one_liner: "Research-heavy AI governance framework with limited production code"
  key_strength: "Novel epistemic coordination concepts"
  key_weakness: "90% documentation, 10% working implementations"
  buyer_fit: "Academic/research institutions (7/10), Enterprise (3/10)"
  recommended_action: "Focus on 3 core IF.* components, ship MVP"

conceptual_quality:
  substance_score: 7  # 0-10
  novelty_score: 8
  rigor_score: 6
  coherence_score: 7
  findings:
    - text: "Guardian Council framework shows originality"
      file: "papers/epistemic-governance.md"
      evidence: "Cites 15+ academic sources"
      severity: "info"
    - text: "Civilizational collapse claims lack quantitative models"
      file: "papers/collapse-patterns.md"
      evidence: "Lines 45-120 - no mathematical formalization"
      severity: "medium"

technical_implementation:
  code_quality_score: 4  # 0-10
  test_coverage: 15  # percentage
  documentation_ratio: 0.9  # docs / (docs + code)

  if_components:
    implemented:
      - name: "IF.guard"
        files: ["tools/guard.py", "schemas/guard-v1.json"]
        completeness: 75  # percentage
        test_coverage: 40
        issues: ["Missing async support", "No rate limiting"]
      - name: "IF.citate"
        files: ["tools/citation_validate.py"]
        completeness: 60
        test_coverage: 30
        issues: ["Validation incomplete", "No batch processing"]

    partial:
      - name: "IF.sam"
        design_file: "docs/IF-sam-specification.md"
        implementation_file: null
        blockers: ["Requires OpenAI API integration", "No test framework"]
        priority: "P1"
      - name: "IF.optimize"
        design_file: "agents.md:L234-289"
        implementation_file: null
        blockers: ["Needs token tracking infrastructure"]
        priority: "P2"

    vaporware:
      - name: "IF.swarm"
        mentions: ["agents.md:L45", "papers/coordination.md:L89"]
        spec_exists: false
        priority: "P3"

  dependencies:
    - name: "Meilisearch"
      used_by: ["IF.search"]
      status: "external"
      risk: "low"
    - name: "OpenRouter API"
      used_by: ["IF.sam", "IF.council"]
      status: "external"
      risk: "medium - API key exposed in docs"

  security_issues:
    - severity: "critical"
      issue: "API key in CLAUDE.md (sk-or-v1-...)"
      file: "/home/setup/.claude/CLAUDE.md:L12"
      fix: "Rotate key, use environment variables"
    - severity: "high"
      issue: "No input validation in guard.py"
      file: "tools/guard.py:L89-120"
      fix: "Add schema validation before processing"

  citation_verification:
    papers_reviewed: 12  # Total papers in /papers/ directory
    total_citations: 87
    citations_verified: 67  # How many you actually checked
    issues:
      - severity: "high"
        issue: "Claim about AGI timelines lacks citation"
        file: "papers/epistemic-governance.md:L234"
        fix: "Add citation or mark as speculation"
      - severity: "medium"
        issue: "DOI link returns 404"
        file: "papers/collapse-patterns.md:L89"
        citation: "https://doi.org/10.1234/broken"
        fix: "Find working link or cite archived version"
      - severity: "low"
        issue: "Citation from 2005 (20 years old)"
        file: "papers/coordination.md:L45"
        citation: "Smith et al. 2005"
        fix: "Find more recent citation or note 'foundational work'"

    readme_audit:
      accuracy_score: 6  # 0-10, does README match reality?
      links_checked: 15
      broken_links: 3
      install_instructions_current: true
      examples_current: false
      issues:
        - severity: "medium"
          issue: "README claims 'production-ready' but code is prototype"
          fix: "Change to 'research prototype' or 'MVP in development'"
        - severity: "low"
          issue: "Screenshot shows old UI"
          fix: "Update screenshot or remove"

market_analysis:
  tam_estimate: "$50M-$200M (AI governance/observability niche)"
  buyer_personas:
    - rank: 1
      name: "Academic AI Safety Researchers"
      fit_score: 8  # 0-10
      willingness_to_pay: 3  # 0-10
      rationale: "Novel frameworks, citations, but expect open-source"
    - rank: 2
      name: "Enterprise AI Governance Teams"
      fit_score: 6
      willingness_to_pay: 7
      rationale: "Useful concepts but needs production-ready implementation"
    - rank: 3
      name: "Open-Source Community"
      fit_score: 7
      willingness_to_pay: 1
      rationale: "Interesting project, low monetization potential"

  competitors:
    - name: "LangSmith (LangChain)"
      overlap: "Agent tracing, observability"
      differentiation: "InfraFabric adds epistemic governance layer"
    - name: "Weights & Biases"
      overlap: "ML experiment tracking"
      differentiation: "InfraFabric focuses on agent coordination vs ML training"

  monetization_paths:
    - strategy: "Open-core SaaS"
      viability: 7  # 0-10
      timeline: "12-18 months"
    - strategy: "Consulting + Custom Implementations"
      viability: 8
      timeline: "Immediate"

gaps_and_issues:
  p0_blockers:
    - issue: "No authentication system"
      impact: "Cannot deploy any multi-user features"
      effort: "3-5 days"
      files: []
    - issue: "API keys exposed in documentation"
      impact: "Security vulnerability"
      effort: "1 hour"
      files: ["/home/setup/.claude/CLAUDE.md"]

  p1_high_priority:
    - issue: "IF.sam has design but no implementation"
      impact: "Core feature missing"
      effort: "1-2 weeks"
      files: ["agents.md"]
    - issue: "No end-to-end integration tests"
      impact: "Cannot verify system behavior"
      effort: "1 week"
      files: []

  p2_medium_priority:
    - issue: "Documentation scattered across 50+ markdown files"
      impact: "Hard to onboard new developers"
      effort: "2-3 days (consolidation)"
      files: ["papers/*", "docs/*"]

style_assessment:
  documentation_quality: 7  # 0-10
  narrative_coherence: 6
  jargon_density: 8  # higher = more jargon
  accessibility: 5
  recommendations:
    - "Create single-page 'What is InfraFabric' overview"
    - "Add 5-minute video demo of working features"
    - "Glossary for IF.* components (many files use without definition)"
    - "Reduce academic tone in marketing materials"

metrics:
  total_files: 127
  total_lines_code: 2847
  total_lines_docs: 25691
  code_to_docs_ratio: 0.11
  languages:
    Python: 1823
    JavaScript: 891
    Markdown: 25691
    YAML: 133
  test_files: 8
  test_lines: 342

next_steps:
  immediate:
    - action: "Rotate exposed API keys"
      effort: "15 minutes"
    - action: "Create EVALUATION_PROGRESS.md for session tracking"
      effort: "30 minutes"
  short_term:
    - action: "Implement IF.sam (75% designed, 0% built)"
      effort: "1-2 weeks"
    - action: "Add integration tests for IF.guard + IF.citate"
      effort: "3-5 days"
  long_term:
    - action: "Consolidate documentation into coherent guide"
      effort: "1-2 weeks"
    - action: "Build authentication layer for multi-user deployment"
      effort: "2-3 weeks"

attachments:
  - name: "IF_COMPONENT_INVENTORY.yaml"
    description: "Complete IF.* component status (all 47 components)"
  - name: "DEBUG_SESSION_PROMPT.md"
    description: "Prioritized debug workflow based on findings"
```

**Format Requirements:**
- **Be brutally honest** (I need truth, not validation)
- **Use exact YAML schema above** (makes diff/merge trivial)
- **Quantify everything** (0-10 scores, percentages, counts, effort estimates)
- **Cite specific files/lines** (file:line format for traceability)
- **Flag vaporware clearly** (implemented/partial/vaporware categories)
- **All findings must be actionable** (include fix/effort estimates)

## Starting Point

Begin with `/papers/` directory to understand conceptual foundation, then propose next segments.

**Ready to begin. Please start with repository survey and `/papers/` analysis.**