Turns the documentation you already write into tests that run. A failing test means your product and your docs disagree, and names the section.
The week brought a new landing page for AI-focused experts alongside an MCP server for developers, expanding the platform's reach. Dashboard improvements simplified workspace display preferences, while a series of fixes restored compatibility across LLM providers (Gemini, tool schemas), data…
Get this in your inbox every Monday →A deterministic 0–100 hygiene score — README, license, CI, tests, docs, and freshness.
Who ships this repo — author concentration and the bus factor across the last 300 mainline commits.
How welcoming this repo is to contributors — issue throughput, close time, responsiveness, and good-first-issue count.
What this project is built on — dependency count by ecosystem, the license mix, and anything worth a legal look before you adopt it.
Whether this project's CI can be trusted — pass rate, run times, flaky runs, and which workflow is the weak link.
Grounded in truecourse's README, structure, and recent commits — answers won't invent code they haven't seen.
A Monday email with what shipped, in plain English — no account needed.
Showing raw commit titles for the newest commits. Sign in to generate AI summaries.
fix(landing): /builders glows no longer widen the page or slow scrolling (#951)
feat(landing): /builders sells the AI CTO by outcome, price and text (#949)
feat(dashboard): simplify views with workspace display preferences (#945)
fix(guard): seed proof passes origin-checking and single-page apps; matching reuses the cached catalog (#941)
A floor, not a guess: counts only commits whose author, co-author trailer, or message explicitly credits an AI tool (Claude, Copilot, Cursor, aider, Codex…). Based on 30 mainline commits. Unattributed AI code isn't counted here — the full audit estimates that separately.
