Skip to content

docs: README polish — badges, cost table, architecture diagram#106

Merged
rohitg00 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
docs/readme-polish
Apr 9, 2026
Merged

docs: README polish — badges, cost table, architecture diagram#106
rohitg00 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
docs/readme-polish

Conversation

@rohitg00
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@rohitg00 rohitg00 commented Apr 9, 2026

Summary

  • Badges: npm version, CI status, license, GitHub stars
  • Stats table: Key numbers at a glance (95.2% R@5, 92% token savings, 43 tools, 12 hooks, 0 deps) with dollar framing ($10/yr vs $500+/yr)
  • Cost comparison table: Annual token cost across 4 approaches (full history, LLM extraction, agentmemory, local embeddings)
  • Memory flow diagram: ASCII pipeline from PostToolUse → compress → index → SessionStart → inject
  • Methodology note: Blockquote explicitly stating our numbers are retrieval recall (not QA accuracy), no test-set tuning, scripts reproducible
  • Nav links: Updated to include Benchmarks, shortened labels

Test plan

  • All 646 tests pass
  • Build succeeds
  • Visual: check badges render on GitHub
  • Visual: verify tables and diagram render correctly in markdown preview

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Added centered badges for npm/CI/license/stars at top of README
    • Reorganized top navigation (Agents → Benchmarks, removed Memory Evolution, Configuration → Config)
    • Replaced single-line metric with a comparison table showing retrieval accuracy, token savings, tool/hook counts, and "0 external deps"
    • Added "What it costs" (token/cost estimates) and "How memory flows" pipeline diagram
    • Clarified methodology (recall_any@K vs end-to-end QA) and tightened benchmark wording and formatting tweaks

- Add npm version, CI status, license, and stars badges
- Add stats table below intro (95.2% R@5, 92% fewer tokens, 43 tools, 12 hooks, 0 deps)
- Add cost comparison table ($500/yr extraction-based vs $10/yr agentmemory vs $0 local)
- Add memory flow diagram (observe → compress → index → inject)
- Add methodology transparency note on benchmark section
- Update nav links (add Benchmarks, shorten labels)
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 9, 2026

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 3fa0a548-268f-4a84-a4c4-1ab7b40e811b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e602f6e and 6fd22d3.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • README.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

README.md updated: added centered npm/CI/license/stars badges, revised top navigation anchors (Agents→Benchmarks, removed Memory Evolution, Configuration→Config), replaced a single-line metric with a comparison table showing retrieval accuracy plus token savings and “0 external deps,” and added cost, flow, and methodology notes about retrieval recall metrics.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Documentation Update
README.md
Added centered badges; updated navigation anchors (Agents→Benchmarks, removed Memory Evolution, Configuration→Config); replaced headline metric with a comparison table (retrieval recall, token savings, tool/hook counts, "0 external deps"); added "What it costs" token/cost table, "How memory flows" pipeline diagram, and LongMemEval methodology note clarifying reported metric is retrieval recall (recall_any@K); minor wording and punctuation edits.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Poem

🐰 Badges tucked in a tidy row,
Links reborn where readers go,
Tables, costs, and memory maps in sight,
I nibble docs by soft lamplight,
Hooray — the README hops just right!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the main changes: documentation updates including badges, cost table, and architecture diagram as described in the raw summary and PR objectives.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch docs/readme-polish

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.

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