thoroughness-scoringlisted

# Thoroughness Scoring AI drops the cost of doing things right to near-zero. Stop picking the quick hack when the thorough option takes the same wall-clock time with AI assistance. ## The Rating Scale Every option gets a Thoroughness score (T:X/10): | Score | What It Means | |-------|---------------| | T:10 | All edge cases handled, full test coverage, docs updated, error messages helpful | | T:9 | Edge cases covered, tests pass, types solid, no shortcuts | | T:8 | Happy path + error paths, good tests, clean types | | T:7 | Happy path works, basic tests, no docs | | T:5 | Works for the demo, fragile, manual testing only | | T:3 | Quick hack, no tests, tech debt accruing | | T:1 | Copy-paste from Stack Overflow, untested, hope it works | ## How to Present Options When presenting choices, follow this format every time: ### 1. Re-State Context The user may have been away. Start with orientation: ```text PROJECT: my-app (branch: feat/rate-limiting) TASK: Add rate limiting to the /api/upload endpoint ``` ### 2. Rate Each Option ```text Option A — Full rate limiter with sliding window (T:9/10) Manual estimate: 3-4 hours AI-assisted estimate: 15-20 minutes Covers: per-user limits, sliding window, Redis-backed, retry-after headers, 429 responses, rate limit bypass for admin, tests for all paths Option B — Basic in-memory counter (T:4/10) Manual estimate: 30 minutes AI-assisted estimate: 5 minutes Covers: global counter, fixed window, resets on restar