Llm Atomic Wiki
D 57 completed
Other
unknown / markdown · tiny
18
Files
1,025
LOC
0
Frameworks
2
Languages
Pipeline State
completedRun ID
#1540754Phase
doneProgress
0%Started
2026-04-16 20:18:09Finished
2026-04-16 20:18:09LLM tokens
0Pipeline Metadata
Stage
CatalogedDecision
proceedNovelty
9.62Framework unique
—Isolation
—Last stage change
2026-05-10 03:34:51Deduplication group #47247
Member of a group with 11,584 similar repo(s) — canonical #1453550 view group →
Methodology: Repobility · https://repobility.com/research/state-of-ai-code-2026/
AI Prompt
Create a documentation framework inspired by Andrej Karpathy's LLM Wiki, but enhanced for scalability. I need a structure that uses "atoms" as the single source of truth—where each atom is a claim with frontmatter (source, type, depth, tags, date). These atoms should be organized into topic-branches at the root level, which then compile into index-friendly wiki pages. The system must include a two-layer linting process: a programmatic layer for deterministic checks (like ghost links) and an LLM layer for semantic checks (like contradictions). Finally, implement a parallel-compile naming lock mechanism so that multiple agents can fill content into pre-named slots without conflicting filenames.
markdown documentation llm wiki knowledge-base schema scripting content-generation
Generated by gemma4:latest
Catalog Information
Create a documentation framework inspired by Andrej Karpathy's LLM Wiki, but enhanced for scalability. I need a structure that uses "atoms" as the single source of truth—where each atom is a claim with frontmatter (source, type, depth, tags, date). These atoms should be organized into topic-branches at the root level, which then compile into index-friendly wiki pages. The system must include a two-layer linting process: a programmatic layer for deterministic checks (like ghost links) and an LLM
Tags
markdown documentation llm wiki knowledge-base schema scripting content-generation
Quality Score
D
56.7/100
Structure
46
Code Quality
70
Documentation
55
Testing
0
Practices
78
Security
100
Dependencies
50
Strengths
- Good security practices — no major issues detected
- Properly licensed project
Weaknesses
- No tests found — high risk of regressions
- No CI/CD configuration — manual testing and deployment
Recommendations
- Add a test suite — start with critical path integration tests
- Set up CI/CD (GitHub Actions recommended) to automate testing and deployment
- Add a linter configuration to enforce code style consistency
Languages
Frameworks
None detected
Embed Badge
Add to your README:
