Engineering Audit
Audit Date: December 21, 2025 Auditor: Engineering team simulation Status: Complete
Executive Summary
Verdict: A- research quality. Execution plan is feasible.
The research is rigorously sourced with verifiable citations. The core thesis is well-supported. The chosen stack (SvelteKit 2.49 + Supabase + Drizzle + Tailwind 4 + shadcn-svelte) is production-ready with official integrations.
Factual Accuracy
All major claims were verified:
| Claim | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| SvelteKit 2.49.x | GitHub releases | Verified |
| Drizzle 0.45.x | npm | Verified |
| Vitest 4.x | GitHub releases | Verified |
| Tailwind 4.0 | Tailwind blog | Verified |
| Veracode 45% stat | Veracode report | Verified |
| MCP 1,862 exposed servers | Knostic research | Verified |
| Replit incident | The Register | Verified |
| AG-UI Oracle/AWS/Microsoft | CopilotKit blog | Verified |
| A2UI v0.8 preview | a2ui.org | Verified |
| HTMX 67% reduction | htmx.org | Verified |
| Karpathy hand-coded Nanochat | Multiple sources | Verified |
| SvelteKit Remote Functions | Svelte docs | Verified |
| shadcn-svelte Svelte 5 + Tailwind 4 | shadcn-svelte docs | Verified |
| Supabase SvelteKit SSR | Supabase docs | Verified |
Research Methodology Assessment
Strengths
| Aspect | Rating | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Source credibility | A | Academic papers, industry reports, primary sources |
| Red team rigor | A | Genuine criticism, identifies gaps honestly |
| Self-correction | A | LEARNINGS.md shows pivot from "spec-first" to "build-first" |
| Technology maturity assessment | A | Clear "wait" vs "ready" classifications |
| Decision documentation | A- | Rationale for each choice documented |
Areas for Improvement
| Aspect | Issue | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| AI-friendliness scoring | Subjective grades (A/B/C) with no measurement methodology | Define measurement criteria |
| Hypothesis vs conclusion | Some claims stated as fact before testing | Label clearly as hypotheses |
| Training data paradox | Not fully addressed | Added to hypothesis list |
Issues Found and Resolved
1. STACK-COMPARISON.md Contradiction
Issue: Listed rally-hq as "Next.js | Stay" but it was being built fresh in SvelteKit.
Resolution: Updated to reflect rally-hq is an existing Next.js app being rebuilt in SvelteKit as the Forge proof-of-concept.
2. Missing Success Criteria
Issue: PROGRESS.md had milestones but no quantitative success criteria.
Resolution: Added success criteria, failure criteria, and check-in schedule to PROGRESS.md.
3. rally-hq Undefined
Issue: No specification for what rally-hq is or what MVP includes.
Resolution: Created RALLY-HQ.md with scope, data model, user flows, and milestones.
4. Project Identity Confusion
Issue: Documentation oscillated between "personal project" and "industry standard."
Resolution: Added explicit Project Identity section to README.md clarifying this is a personal experiment.
5. Training Data Paradox Not Addressed
Issue: Research identifies React bias in training data but doesn't address that SvelteKit has less training data.
Resolution: Added H2 hypothesis explicitly testing whether simpler patterns overcome training data disadvantage.
Recommendations
Implemented
- Fix STACK-COMPARISON.md contradiction
- Add success metrics to PROGRESS.md
- Add failure criteria to PROGRESS.md
- Add check-in schedule to PROGRESS.md
- Create RALLY-HQ.md specification
- Clarify project identity in README.md
- Add training data hypothesis explicitly (H2)
- Add AI Interaction Log template
Recommended for Development Phase
- Log every AI interaction during rally-hq development
- Run controlled comparison: same feature in Next.js vs SvelteKit
- Document Remote Functions friction honestly
- Time-box Phase 1 with explicit deadline
Document Ratings
| Document | Rating | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| AI-NATIVE-WEB-THESIS.md | A | Well-sourced, accurate citations |
| RED-TEAM-ANALYSIS.md | A | Excellent critical analysis |
| DECISIONS.md | A- | Clear decisions, good rationale |
| STACK-COMPARISON.md | A- | Fixed contradiction, good matrices |
| SCOPE.md | B+ | Good structure |
| PROGRESS.md | A- | Now has success criteria |
| LEARNINGS.md | A | Shows intellectual honesty |
| RALLY-HQ.md | A- | New, provides needed specification |
| OPPORTUNITIES.md | B | Over-scoped for Phase 1 |
Audit Methodology
This audit was conducted by:
- Reading all documentation in
/projects/forge - Verifying all factual claims via web search
- Assessing logical structure of arguments
- Identifying gaps and contradictions
- Providing actionable recommendations
Audit Correction
The initial audit incorrectly claimed several version numbers were "fabricated" without verification. This was corrected by:
- Using WebSearch to verify all version numbers
- Confirming all cited versions are accurate
- Re-running the audit with proper methodology
Lesson: Verify claims before asserting they're false. Distinguish "I don't know" from "this is wrong."
Next Steps
- Initialize rally-hq SvelteKit project with chosen stack
- Begin AI Interaction Log from first code generation
- Check in at Week 1 per schedule in PROGRESS.md