Skip to content

docs: improve LLM discovery surfaces - #57280

Open
Logan1x wants to merge 1 commit into
NousResearch:mainfrom
Logan1x:llm-discovery
Open

docs: improve LLM discovery surfaces#57280
Logan1x wants to merge 1 commit into
NousResearch:mainfrom
Logan1x:llm-discovery

Conversation

@Logan1x

@Logan1x Logan1x commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Add repo-root llms.txt for GitHub/raw and agent discovery
  • Mirror llms.txt, llms-full.txt, robots.txt, and sitemap.xml at the site root on deploy
  • Surface the root and docs LLM entry points in the docs homepage and README

Verification

  • Ran npm ci and npm run build in website/ successfully
  • Build completes with pre-existing docs warnings, but the site artifacts are generated

Notes

  • I couldn't push directly to the upstream repo from this environment, so the change is opened from my fork for review/merge.

@alt-glitch alt-glitch added type/docs Documentation improvements P3 Low — cosmetic, nice to have sweeper:risk-automation Sweeper risk: may affect CI, automerge, label sync, or maintainer automation labels Jul 2, 2026
@alt-glitch

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

This was generated by AI during triage.

Related to the llms.txt discovery lineage: merged #18276 already publishes website/static/llms.txt (#42398 restructured it), and closed #48750 previously attempted a root-level llms.txt + link-validation CI. Not a duplicate — this adds a NEW repo-root llms.txt, deploy-time mirroring of llms/robots/sitemap at the site root, a generation script, and README/docs surfacing. Also related to open #28505 (bundle llms-full.txt as a self-documentation skill — a different surface). Worth de-conflicting the root vs website/static/ copy so they don't drift.

@Logan1x
Logan1x requested a review from a team July 2, 2026 18:28

@teknium1 teknium1 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for improving discovery surfaces. Current main already publishes generated llms.txt and llms-full.txt at both the root and /docs/ via .github/workflows/deploy-site.yml:164-173, and documents those root URLs in website/docs/index.mdx:134-141.

Problems

  • The new llms.txt:35 says the live site mirrors that file, but deployment copies the generated website/build/llms.txt; the generator owns that content in website/scripts/generate-llms-txt.py:197-232. This creates a second independently maintained index and makes the stated mirroring relationship incorrect. The existing member comment correctly flagged this drift risk.

Suggested changes

  • Rework the repo-root and deployed indexes to use one canonical source, or make the repository-root file an explicit pointer rather than a competing curated copy.
  • Salvage the robots/sitemap and README work only after reconciling with the root LLM publication already on main.

Automated hermes-sweeper review.

Comment thread llms.txt
- Supports 20+ messaging platforms and agent tooling integrations

## Agent-friendly docs
- The live site mirrors this file at the root and under `/docs/`

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The deploy workflow copies generated website/build/llms.txt, not this independently maintained root file (.github/workflows/deploy-site.yml:164-173). Please make one source canonical or change this statement; otherwise the two indexes can drift immediately.

@teknium1 teknium1 added the sweeper:blast-moderate Sweeper blast radius: moderate — a subsystem or single platform label Jul 15, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

P3 Low — cosmetic, nice to have sweeper:blast-moderate Sweeper blast radius: moderate — a subsystem or single platform sweeper:risk-automation Sweeper risk: may affect CI, automerge, label sync, or maintainer automation type/docs Documentation improvements

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants