---
name: rem-page-project
description: A project page with a short visual overview and evidence-backed detail.
---

# A project's page

Why these rules: docs/rem-skills/rem-page-project.md

Read the page and material. Write once, check once, fix once, stop.
Do not search examples, logs or the repo for a format.

Explain purpose and flow first, for a new teammate.
After investigation, **keep the core headings** `Facts`, `Insight`, `What it is`,
`Where it stands`, `Paths`, `Open threads`, `Uncertainties`, and `Sources`.
Use the other headings only when evidence fills them; omit an optional heading
whose whole body would be `Unknown`. Keep the following order for those shown:

```markdown
# <Name>

## Facts

## Insight

## What it is

## Overview

## Try it

## Where it stands

## Latest issues

## People and ownership

## Getting started

## Why it exists

## Key decisions

## How it is built

## Architecture map

## Paths

## Open threads

## Uncertainties

## Sources
```

**Facts and Insight first**

- `Facts`, one line a field, labels exact, all present, missing exactly
  `Unknown`: `Repository`, `Stack`, `Status`, `People`, `Organisation`,
  `Started`, `Last activity`. Several values `; ` between, each
  `value (qualifier) [n]`; dates `YYYY-MM-DD`; every value cited.
- `Insight`: 2–4 cited bullets of at most 30 words, starting `Now:`, `Changed:`,
  `At stake:` or `Pattern:`. Lead with a verified state, mismatch or decision
  or requirement change that matters to the user. Read the local
  repository packet first. When its README, manifest, checkout or commits bear
  on a dated user message, join them in one bullet and cite both. If unrelated,
  keep them separate; do not infer no fix from commit subjects. Checkout
  freshness alone is housekeeping, not the lead. `Changed:` needs a verified
  change; label changed requirements as requirements. A local commit does not
  prove tests or deployment. Thin material: `- Unknown`.
  With requests only, surface precise operating constraints; preserve branch
  versus organization scope.

**Opening**

- `What it is`: one sentence naming a verified product and purpose, or state
  the user's requested work as a goal when product identity is unverified.
- `Overview`, when supported: 3–7 narrow-screen ASCII steps in a `text` fence,
  showing user start, actions and outcome. Modules go in `Architecture map`.
- `Try it`, when supported: entry point, tiny example and visible result,
  at most three steps. Say if access is needed. No invented URLs, runs or credentials.

An unknown flow is omitted; a plausible diagram is not evidence.

**Current work and joining the team**

- `Where it stands`: 3–5 bullets, now, not a log: project-relevant activity date (say if
  quiet for months); current phase and goal; latest verified run or test result
  with date, or none found. The past goes in `Key decisions`.
- When shown, `Latest issues` lists bugs, regressions, blockers, newest first: date, symptom,
  impact, status, evidence, next step. A report is not a diagnosis; a proposed
  fix is not a resolution.
- When shown, `People and ownership` says who to ask, by area, where known; link person pages.
  Never infer someone else's ownership from one commit or message; the user's
  sessions identify the requester, not a project ownership role.
- When shown, `Getting started` is per relevant role (designer, engineer, operator); commands
  and expected outputs only when verified.

**Background and technical detail**

- `Why it exists`: original problem, user needs, intended outcome, scope.
- `Key decisions`: dated choices, why, tradeoffs, sources; label proposals and
  superseded ones. Current behaviour alone is not a decision.
- `How it is built`: main components and responsibilities; link deeper docs.
- `Architecture map`: ASCII diagram of verified modules and data flow; cite
  inspected paths and revision outside it; label proposed apart from built.
- `Paths`: observed repositories, directories, design/doc locations, each with
  its purpose. Never guess paths.
- `Open threads`: confirmed pending work, owner when known, date. Missing
  completion evidence is unknown status, not proof a historical request is open.
- `Uncertainties`: missing, unread, stale or conflicting evidence, said once
  here rather than as a tail on every bullet elsewhere.
- `Sources`: numbered, `- [n] <source id> — <date>`, nothing more; each inspected
  file its own entry. Mark inference; never copy facts from examples.
  Use supplied `source` IDs; `git:` origins and paths are not IDs. Dates do
  not establish project activity or release.
  Check inherited clauses, quantities and dates against exact originals,
  not summaries or adjacent inputs. Valid IDs are not support; cite each
  joined clause and both messages.

Keep claims short. Omit mapper, collector, counts and prior-page metadata.

**Two stages, one page**

Mapping writes observed metadata only; other sections stay
`Unknown — not investigated yet` until investigation fills them from evidence.
User-only coding transcripts show intent, not implementation or passing tests:
verify those from repository or execution evidence. On an older page, add
missing core sections and reorder to this shape, keeping supported optional
content. Never reuse the architecture diagram as the overview. Leave the
`Investigation:` line unchanged. Keep the mapped `Sessions`, `First seen` and
`Last seen` fields in `Paths` exactly.