Skip to content

docs: adopt Lost-in-the-Middle motivation + tokens-not-bytes positioning#62

Merged
ayhammouda merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/positioning-lost-in-the-middle
Jun 1, 2026
Merged

docs: adopt Lost-in-the-Middle motivation + tokens-not-bytes positioning#62
ayhammouda merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/positioning-lost-in-the-middle

Conversation

@ayhammouda
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Adopt the research-backed positioning narrative

Separates three layers of evidence the project must keep distinct, and makes the first one public:

  • External citation (now): the README "Why this exists" section now opens with the Lost in the Middle failure mode as honest motivation for precise retrieval. Cited as external research only — not a claim that we benchmarked anything.
  • Internal token study (Study A, v0.3.0): stays internal; gates format="toon". Unchanged here.
  • Public benchmark (Study B, v0.5.0): the only artifact licensed to make a comparative claim, and only once it has data. Tracked separately as an issue.

Changes

  • README.md — Lost-in-the-Middle motivation in "Why this exists" (locked hero sentence untouched).
  • STRATEGIC-ROADMAP-2026-05-29.md## Amendment 2026-06-01 + locked decisions 5.15 (Lost-in-the-Middle citation), 5.16 (tokens are the business problem, bytes an implementation detail), 5.17 (evidence ladder: no premature comparative claims).

Notes

  • The narrative-discipline note originally planned for .planning/POSITIONING.md was folded into the roadmap amendment instead, since .planning/ is now a local-only (untracked) workspace on main.
  • README wording was chosen for minimal AI-writing tells.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Fold an external research citation (Lost in the Middle, Liu et al. 2023) into the README "Why this exists" section as honest motivation for precise retrieval — no self-benchmark claim. Record the supporting strategy as a roadmap amendment: locked decisions 5.15 (citation), 5.16 (tokens are the business problem, bytes an implementation detail), and 5.17 (no public comparative claim until the v0.5.0 benchmark harness has data).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Important

Review skipped

Review was skipped due to path filters

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
  • README.md is excluded by none and included by none
  • STRATEGIC-ROADMAP-2026-05-29.md is excluded by none and included by none

CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including **/dist/** will override the default block on the dist directory, by removing the pattern from both the lists.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 3de4912b-c685-47bd-b083-6b53d8f32b2e

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch docs/positioning-lost-in-the-middle

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@ayhammouda ayhammouda merged commit 8601093 into main Jun 1, 2026
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant