docs: add procedural-memory investor FAQ#277
Conversation
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your free trial has ended. If you'd like to continue receiving code reviews, you can add a payment method here.
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📜 Recent review details🔇 Additional comments (2)
📝 Walkthrough
WalkthroughThis PR adds a new investor FAQ document addressing diligence objections to Gradata's procedural-memory category framing, structuring verified facts vs assumptions, 12 objection/answer sections with explicit "Proof needed next" items, and scope constraints on claims. ChangesProcedural-Memory Investor Diligence FAQ
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Suggested labels
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/investor-faq/GRA-2535-procedural-memory-diligence.md`:
- Line 111: Replace the sentence "Verified: The founder's own environment
heavily dogfoods agentic coding and operations workflows." with a more polished
phrasing; for example, change "heavily dogfoods" to "extensively uses" or
"practices extensive internal use" so the line reads along the lines of
"Verified: The founder's own environment extensively uses agentic coding and
operations workflows." This keeps the meaning but removes informal jargon for
investor-facing material.
- Line 17: Update the founder background sentence ("The founder is Oliver, solo,
with AE experience at Sprites AI and previously PayPal.") to spell out the
abbreviation "AE" (e.g., "Account Executive" or "Application Engineer") —
confirm which meaning is correct, replace "AE" with the full title, and
optionally include the abbreviation in parentheses (e.g., "Account Executive
(AE)") for clarity in investor-facing materials.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 3015f583-180e-41e9-b28f-1f553f5e2924
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/investor-faq/GRA-2535-procedural-memory-diligence.md
📜 Review details
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (6)
- GitHub Check: pytest macos-latest / py3.11
- GitHub Check: pytest ubuntu-latest / py3.12
- GitHub Check: pytest macos-latest / py3.12
- GitHub Check: pytest ubuntu-latest / py3.11
- GitHub Check: pytest windows-latest / py3.12
- GitHub Check: pytest windows-latest / py3.11
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/investor-faq/GRA-2535-procedural-memory-diligence.md
[style] ~119-~119: To elevate your writing, try using a synonym here.
Context: ...or objection: "Memory infrastructure is hard to distribute. What's the go-to-market ...
(HARD_TO)
[grammar] ~128-~128: Ensure spelling is correct
Context: ...horts; publish a simple case study from dogfood or external alpha users. ## 9. Is this...
(QB_NEW_EN_ORTHOGRAPHY_ERROR_IDS_1)
[grammar] ~158-~158: Ensure spelling is correct
Context: ...tion: "Is this real evidence or founder dogfood theater?" Answer: - Verified: Current...
(QB_NEW_EN_ORTHOGRAPHY_ERROR_IDS_1)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
docs/investor-faq/GRA-2535-procedural-memory-diligence.md (1)
1-189: Fix potential leakage: ensuredocs/investor-faq/isn’t published publiclyCurrent file is under
docs/investor-faq/, but the prior check couldn’t verify anything becausemkdocs.ymlis not present in the repo root (so we don’t know whether MkDocs publishes it). Run/confirm the docs build configuration: locate the actual MkDocs config file(s), then ensuredocs/investor-faq/is either excluded from the public build or only included in a private/internal artifact path; otherwise this “diligence-safe” investor material (proof gaps/hypotheses + founder background + lack of customers) may leak togradata.ai/docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your free trial has ended. If you'd like to continue receiving code reviews, you can add a payment method here.
1 participant
Summary
Adds a diligence-safe investor FAQ artifact for GRA-2535 covering procedural-memory objections:
Issue UUID: 4e1a1fb6-8099-4b75-9004-609cc45aa69b
Verification
python3artifact check: 12 objection pairs, 12 proof-needed-next lines, explicit verified/hypothesis separationgit diff --cached --checkArtifact
docs/investor-faq/GRA-2535-procedural-memory-diligence.md