What exactly demonstrates AI proficiency on the site, as evidence rather than claims? Decide the content of: (a) the "How I work" section: the concrete workflow with Claude Code (skills, wayfinder maps, TDD, review), stated in a few lines a hiring manager believes; (b) the "How this site was built" page: how much of this map and its tickets is shown, whether the repo is linked, whether session transcripts or the research files are exposed; (c) the list of things built with AI assistance worth linking (the neon sign, the ngrx signal store demo, signal forms playground, others Reto names). Decide the tone: matter-of-fact, no hype.
The AI / Claude Code showcase content
Question
Answer
Resolved 2026-10-14. Text in content/how-i-work.md.
- "How I work": the drafted paragraph stands (map → tickets → prototypes → test-first code by Claude Code → review against spec and standards → "I read every diff"; guardrails named). Client work phrased cautiously: "at clients I use it where the client allows".
- "How this site was built": the map and every ticket rendered from the repo markdown, repo and commit history linked, prototype and research reachable by branch. No session transcripts.
- Tool named explicitly (Claude Code) and the mattpocock-skills plugin credited.
- The "built with AI" link list is skipped for v1 (Reto: "skip for now"); candidates recorded in the content file.