Source-backed
The report points to a run, source snippet, benchmark, or reproducible path.
Evidence and field reports
AIppocampus should be judged by source-backed runs, bounded claims, and reports that say exactly what was tested.
A useful field report does not have to pretend to be a benchmark. It should show the moment where continuity changed the work, then name the boundary of the claim.
The report points to a run, source snippet, benchmark, or reproducible path.
The report says what it proves, what it only suggests, and what still needs deeper testing.
Private rollouts, local paths, credentials, and private conversation text stay out of public output.
| Surface | Use it for | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Official evidence map | Benchmarks, smoke runs, readiness claims, and known gaps. | Repository docs remain the source of truth. |
| Community reports | Concrete examples from real users and downstream setups. | Signals, not automatic product claims. |
| Discussions | Questions, ideas, design review, and developing interpretation. | Keep exploratory threads in the open conversation. |
## What I tested
Describe the AIppocampus scenario, command, hook, or workflow you tried.
## What continuity changed
Explain what became easier because source-backed continuity was available.
## Source boundary
State whether the result came from exact source, bounded evidence, a route, or a general impression.
## Environment
List the agent host, operating system, AIppocampus version or commit, and any relevant provider.
## Gaps or surprises
Name anything that failed, felt confusing, or needs more evidence before becoming a project claim.
Public site pages summarize. Repository docs keep the magic moments, claim ladder, provenance ledger, benchmark evidence, and readiness boundaries.