Skip to main content

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://mehen.ophi.dev/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

A Markdown file in a software project should connect to repository reality — files, commands, packages, APIs, configs, tests, and versioned facts — or at least acknowledge that it doesn’t.

​
Formula

RepositoryGroundingScore = clamp01(
    0.25 · sat(repo_link_density;    0.5, 4.0)
  + 0.25 · path_resolution_rate
  + 0.20 · sat(code_example_density; 0.5, 3.0)
  + 0.15 · sat(identifier_density;   0.02, 0.12)
  + 0.15 · sat(version_fact_density; 0.01, 0.08)
)

​
Components

  • Repo link density — relative repo links per 100 words.
  • Path resolution rate — how many path-like tokens resolve to actual files.
  • Code example density — labelled code-fence count per 100 words.
  • Identifier density — identifier-like tokens (CamelCase, snake_case, dotted paths) per word.
  • Version fact density — version pins, semver, dates, hash references per word.

​
Bands

ScoreMeaning
0.00–0.20Almost none.
0.21–0.50Weak.
0.51–0.80Useful.
0.81–1.00Very grounded.

​
How downstream metrics use it

  • Filler / Lazy Risk consumes 1 − RepositoryGroundingScore as one of its sub-scores.
  • The PR comment surfaces a 🔴 callout when grounding crosses a band downward.

​
References

  • Pirolli, P. & Card, S. (1999). Information Foraging. Psychological Review 106(4): 643–675 — underpins the “scent” intuition behind link-density and identifier-density. DOI.
  • Spence, R. (1999). A framework for navigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 51(5): 919–945 — navigation framework that motivates resolved-link weighting. DOI.

​
See also