Here's the question I ask about every project that claims to make a LLMs output so much better: If it works so well then why would the model provider not just put it in the system prompt?

Is this really where we've landed? I refuse to believe that any of this markdown insanity will continue indefinitely.

The one thing I do not understand is that here you say:

"Ensure stakeholders are aligned on what matters most and why"

But it is instructions for LLMs, right? A way to describe something that the humans know and the LLMs don't.

LLMs literally cannot be stakeholders, by definition.

Whats the revenue model for this NBPaaS? (No Bugs Please As A Service)

I'm less interested in this than in what people are willing to aggressively trade off against in order to get the stuff they truly care about.

For example, readability. Where are the developers out there saying "I am very willing to sacrifice a lot of readability to get even a small improvement on e.g. abstraction cleanliness", and sticking with it?

Or "performance can take a huge hit at the cost of being dead easy to read and reason about". Coming up with a list of abstractly good-sounding qualities is just prosocial signaling without knowing what you're willing to sacrifice. There should be a FUCKIT.md that enumerates these.

This is perfectly encapsulated in xkcd's "Standards" strip [https://xkcd.com/927/].

Useful Nice

Pure slop.

What?