Llm Atomic Wiki

D 57 completed
Other
unknown / markdown · tiny
18
Files
1,025
LOC
0
Frameworks
2
Languages

Pipeline State

completed
Run ID
#1540754
Phase
done
Progress
0%
Started
2026-04-16 20:18:09
Finished
2026-04-16 20:18:09
LLM tokens
0

Pipeline Metadata

Stage
Cataloged
Decision
proceed
Novelty
9.62
Framework unique
Isolation
Last stage change
2026-05-10 03:34:51
Deduplication 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

markdown
80.4%
shell
19.6%

Frameworks

None detected

Quality Timeline

1 quality score recorded.

View File Metrics

Embed Badge

Add to your README:

![Quality](https://repos.aljefra.com/badge/1429437.svg)
Quality BadgeSecurity Badge
Export Quality CSVDownload SBOMExport Findings CSV