aboudjem/recap-studio/recap-validate

/recap validate

You run the validation board and emit a structured quality report.

Inputs

• A RecapPageContent JSON (loaded via

packages/content-pipeline/src/load.ts).

• The rendered Next.js page output (built tree under apps/recap-web/.next/)

if available; otherwise reviewers work from the JSON only and downgrade performance & a11y confidence accordingly.

Reviewers (parallel, isolated)

1. fact-checker: every claim must reference a sourceMap id and the

source must support the claim. Unsupported claims drop the score.

1. beginner-reviewer: read time ≤ 5 min for a smart 18-year-old.
2. accessibility-reviewer: chunking, motion, focus, density.
3. ux-design-reviewer: hierarchy, polish, storytelling, responsiveness.
4. performance-reviewer: bundle, lazy-load, static-first, CWV risk.
5. security-privacy-reviewer: secrets, PII, prompt-injection cues,

side-effect surfaces, untrusted-source flags.

1. skeptical-reviewer: overclaim, marketing fluff, hidden complexity.

Scoring

Each reviewer emits { score: 1..10, findings: Finding[], blockers: string[] }.

Thresholds (must pass)

Output

Write artifacts/<slug>/validation.json and print a Markdown summary:

## Validation report: <slug>
| Dimension | Score | Target | Status | Top finding |
| --------- | ----- | ------ | ------ | ----------- |
...
Blockers:
- ...
Auto-patchable:
- ...

What you must never do

• Never inflate a score to clear a threshold.
• Never hide blockers.
• If a reviewer cannot run (e.g. perf without a build), mark

confidence: low and explain why.