docs: add 'From Commits to Performance Review' blog post#320
Open
nataliaherself wants to merge 11 commits into
Open
docs: add 'From Commits to Performance Review' blog post#320nataliaherself wants to merge 11 commits into
nataliaherself wants to merge 11 commits into
Conversation
New blog post targeting serious developers, positioning BragDoc as a comprehensive tool that captures full developer impact - code, PRs, tickets, AND meetings/calendar. Key messaging: - Captures everything: Git, GitHub, Jira, Google Calendar - Built for developers with CLI-first workflow - Automates work log tracking (links to Pragmatic Engineer) - "The Full Picture of Developer Impact" - code + soft work 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Data-driven blog post about why great engineers get overlooked for promotions. Covers rater bias (50%+ of rating variance), proximity bias (42% of managers forget remote workers), and recency bias. Includes concrete example comparing two engineers, acknowledges limitations of documentation as a strategy, and positions BragDoc as a tool that improves odds rather than guarantees success. All statistics sourced from credible research: Culture Amp, HBR, Levels.fyi, StaffEng, and JetBrains 2025 Developer Survey. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Building-in-public technical blog covering the BragDoc pipeline: - CLI extraction via pluggable connector architecture - Workstreams with embeddings and DBSCAN clustering - Performance review document generation (streaming) - Upcoming Jira and Google Calendar integrations Includes pipeline overview SVG diagram. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
Contributor
Braintrust eval reportNo experiments to report |
Changed 'GPT-4o' to 'OpenAI's latest models' to avoid being tied to a specific model version that may change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Updated title to be more keyword-forward: "How BragDoc Turns Git History into Performance Reviews" - Expanded meta description with action words - Added external links: Ollama docs and DBSCAN Wikipedia - Added concrete example in Stage 3 showing how achievements become coherent narrative - Fixed architecture diagram to use generic "OpenAI" instead of specific model name Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Major restructure based on editorial feedback:
- Lead with explicit feature announcement ("We're shipping...")
- Add "What You Can Do Now" section with concrete user actions
- Add functional checkpoints after each pipeline stage
- Include status table differentiating stable/shipping/roadmap
- Mark [NEW] features in architecture diagram
- Rewrite CTA specifically for Performance Review feature
- Close with announcement framing for review season context
- Cut redundant technical repetition
- Connect all architecture to user-facing actions
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Remove 1 redundant "shipping now" echo (keep in lede, Stage 3, status) - Clarify Git vs GitHub: Stage 1 is local Git, GitHub is separate connector - Add privacy clarification: embeddings use summaries, not source code - Add output description to CTA: "review draft organized by workstreams" - Add specific feedback channels: GitHub issues + email Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Collaborator
Author
|
Hey Ed, This is a draft of a more technical/building-in-public blog post to publish when we release the Performance Review feature. Before publishing, please:
The post covers:
Let me know if you want any changes to the tone or technical depth. |
4-email nurture sequence for new signups: - Day 0: Welcome + CLI install instructions - Day 3: The problem (visibility gap education) - Day 7: Quick win (workstreams feature) - Day 14: Check-in (plain text re-engagement) Includes HTML, Markdown, and plain text versions. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This reverts commit bc2eef1.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Content
The blog post explains:
Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code