# AGENTS.md — Build guide for Rankhog ## Project scope Review permitted community threads that appear in a supplied search-result set, assess relevance and draft a helpful rules-aware response for manual posting. Catalogue verdict: kinda. The code here is the easy half, and it is worth building. A script that watches subreddits, keeps the threads already ranking in Google, and drafts a reply against the sub's rules is a one-sitting build that will genuinely find you the conversations worth joining. The gap is what happens next. No agent writes you a Reddit account with a year of comment history in the subs you care about, and Reddit's spam enforcement is aimed exactly at accounts that show up new and start mentioning a product. A shadowban is silent: your comments look live to you and are invisible to everyone else, so you learn about it weeks later. Build the finder, then spend the weeks yourself, or pay someone to have already spent them. Use the implementation prompt below to define the deliverable. Complete each phase's acceptance checks before extending the scope. ## Working agreement - Inspect the repository and its existing instructions before choosing paths, dependencies or commands. Keep one coherent stack and explain changes to the proposed architecture. - Plan a vertical slice that accepts a real input and produces the useful output described below. Persist only the state the prompt calls for; respect memory-only and upstream-managed workflows. Use fixtures only when they are clearly labelled. - After scaffolding, document the actual install, development, check and build commands in README and keep them synchronized with the package or project manifest. Do not report commands as successful unless they ran. - Work in small steps. At handoff, list implemented flows, checks actually performed, remaining blockers, and any credentials or provider setup the owner must supply. - Do not publish, spend money, contact customers, delete source data or run irreversible migrations without the project owner's authorization. ## Prerequisites - Runtime and tools: Node, TypeScript, better-sqlite3 and a local review page with authorized community/search adapters. - Before starting: A reviewed keyword/community list, current authorized API access or user imports, and dated search-result evidence. ## Stack and architecture - Node, TypeScript, better-sqlite3 and a local review page with authorized community/search adapters - Data design: Store SearchSnapshot, ThreadSnapshot, RuleNote and ReplyDraft; the claimed search position belongs to a specific query/date/provider and each recommendation cites thread evidence. - Setup: A reviewed keyword/community list, current authorized API access or user imports, and dated search-result evidence ## Security and data integrity - Preserve source hashes, page/section anchors and exact quotations. OCR and optional generated summaries are derived views, never replacements for originals; label missing text and unsupported claims. - Do not auto-post, vote, log into accounts or promise durable Google rankings. Search visibility is a dated observation, and community rules override a marketing opportunity. - Keep secrets outside client bundles and exported projects; document what leaves the device and make retention/deletion controls visible. ## Agent implementation rules - Project rule — domain: Store SearchSnapshot, ThreadSnapshot, RuleNote and ReplyDraft; the claimed search position belongs to a specific query/date/provider and each recommendation cites thread evidence. - Project rule — scope and recovery: Do not auto-post, vote, log into accounts or promise durable Google rankings. Search visibility is a dated observation, and community rules override a marketing opportunity. - Project rule — acceptance: A relevant thread is locked or prohibits promotion; keep it as research evidence but remove its reply from the actionable queue. - Project rule — delivery: document real setup commands and permissions; do not claim a build, accuracy level, performance result or security certification that has not been demonstrated. ## Optional agent skills and references - Recommended skill: [sharp-edges](https://github.com/trailofbits/skills/blob/main/plugins/sharp-edges/skills/sharp-edges/SKILL.md) — review configuration and API defaults against the app-specific invariants and recovery boundaries above; this is not a security certification. Follow the maintainer's installation instructions and match its requirements to the chosen runtime. - Recommended skill: [copywriting](https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills/blob/main/skills/copywriting/SKILL.md) — write clear, evidence-grounded draft copy or notifications without invented claims; sending/publishing remains separately approved. Follow the maintainer's installation instructions and match its requirements to the chosen runtime. Read the linked SKILL.md and its dependencies before adding a skill. Select only the skills matching this project's runtime and task; their documentation does not supply API access, credentials or approval to perform external actions. Pin the reviewed revision where the tool supports it. Follow the chosen agent's documented project-level installation mechanism. ## Distribution ideas These are optional planning notes. Obtain the owner's approval before publishing or contacting anyone. - Demonstrate this working slice using synthetic or explicitly authorized non-sensitive examples: Review permitted community threads that appear in a supplied search-result set, assess relevance and draft a helpful rules-aware response for manual posting. - Share a synthetic example export and the acceptance walkthrough; keep real customer, health, financial and source data private: A relevant thread is locked or prohibits promotion; keep it as research evidence but remove its reply from the actionable queue. - State the limits before asking someone to replace their existing tool: Do not auto-post, vote, log into accounts or promise durable Google rankings. Search visibility is a dated observation, and community rules override a marketing opportunity. ## Engineering roadmap 1. Phase 1 — Pin the working slice and create its example input: Review permitted community threads that appear in a supplied search-result set, assess relevance and draft a helpful rules-aware response for manual posting. Confirm setup: A reviewed keyword/community list, current authorized API access or user imports, and dated search-result evidence. 2. Phase 2 — Implement persistence and write-time invariants before decorating the UI: Store SearchSnapshot, ThreadSnapshot, RuleNote and ReplyDraft; the claimed search position belongs to a specific query/date/provider and each recommendation cites thread evidence. 3. Phase 3 — Connect the working view to real saved state. Preserve source hashes, page/section anchors and exact quotations. OCR and optional generated summaries are derived views, never replacements for originals; label missing text and unsupported claims. 4. Phase 4 — Expose the app-specific limits and recovery path in context: Do not auto-post, vote, log into accounts or promise durable Google rankings. Search visibility is a dated observation, and community rules override a marketing opportunity. 5. Phase 5 — Walk through this concrete acceptance case and preserve its exported evidence: A relevant thread is locked or prohibits promotion; keep it as research evidence but remove its reply from the actionable queue. Finish the README and backup/restore instructions; report unfinished capabilities explicitly. ## Paid-product capabilities outside this build - account age, karma, and comment history in the subs that matter - the warm-up: weeks of ordinary participation before you can mention a product - posting through a real browser session rather than the API, which is what keeps accounts unflagged - per-subreddit rule knowledge and pacing judgment - shared accounts across a team, and the managed service ## Implementation prompt Build the following focused alternative to Rankhog. This is a deliberately limited personal or small-team substitute, not parity with the paid service. WORKING SLICE Review permitted community threads that appear in a supplied search-result set, assess relevance and draft a helpful rules-aware response for manual posting. SETUP AND ARCHITECTURE Use Node, TypeScript, better-sqlite3 and a local review page with authorized community/search adapters. Prerequisites: A reviewed keyword/community list, current authorized API access or user imports, and dated search-result evidence. Before integrating anything, record actual versions and permissions, plus model files or provider limits only where used, in the README; make unavailable dependencies visible rather than simulating success. DOMAIN MODEL AND INVARIANTS Store SearchSnapshot, ThreadSnapshot, RuleNote and ReplyDraft; the claimed search position belongs to a specific query/date/provider and each recommendation cites thread evidence. IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT Preserve source hashes, page/section anchors and exact quotations. OCR and optional generated summaries are derived views, never replacements for originals; label missing text and unsupported claims. Provide an input/setup view, the main work view, and a review/export view appropriate to this workflow. Preserve the last saved state if a job or save fails. Include empty, loading, permission-denied, partial and retryable-error states. Log identifiers and error categories without secret values or unnecessary private content. APP-SPECIFIC BOUNDARY AND RECOVERY Do not auto-post, vote, log into accounts or promise durable Google rankings. Search visibility is a dated observation, and community rules override a marketing opportunity. ACCEPTANCE SCENARIO A relevant thread is locked or prohibits promotion; keep it as research evidence but remove its reply from the actionable queue. Also reopen the app after an interrupted operation, confirm the saved record/export remains inspectable, and document the recovery action. These are implementation acceptance requirements, not a claim that this guide has been tested. DELIVERY Deliver a runnable repository with migrations or project-format versioning, a non-sensitive example, environment/permission setup, the exact manual acceptance steps, and a backup/export-and-restore walkthrough. Implement the working slice before optional integrations; list any deferred paid-product capabilities honestly. Do not add capabilities outside the working slice just to resemble the original product. PROJECT RULES FOR AGENTS.md Keep the domain invariants above executable at the write boundary. Propose scope changes before adding providers or permissions. Never fabricate source evidence, publish results, identity matches or successful delivery. Preserve user originals and require an explicit confirmation for destructive changes or external publication. ## Completion evidence Demonstrate the prompt's acceptance scenarios against the scoped workflow. Include setup from a clean checkout and failure recovery. Check persistence across restart and export/restore only for the state the prompt says to store; for memory-only tools, confirm that temporary content is discarded as specified. Record actual results and remaining limitations. A detailed plan alone does not establish a working replacement.