For people building brains
How to build a brain
worth connecting.
The difference between a brain an agent reads and a folder of screenshots is almost entirely in the first two steps. The rest is a loop.
- 01
Pick one job, not one topic
A brain about “our frontend” produces a vague goal, a vague exam and answers nobody trusts. A brain about “match our design system exactly” has a boundary, so it can be checked. When you catch yourself writing “and also”, that is the second brain asking to exist.
Rule of thumb: if two people would draw the boundary differently, it is two brains.
- 02
Write the goal as an outcome, not a subject
The goal is not a label — it becomes the exam. “Design system” generates nothing testable. “Match our design system exactly: colour, type scale, spacing, component rules, and the empty and error states we actually ship” generates thirty concrete questions, including ones about material you have not uploaded yet. Those failures are the point.
Name the specifics you care about. Every noun in the goal turns into checks.
- 03
Feed it primary material
Screenshots of the real screens, the actual docs pages, the actual config file. Not your summary of them — a summary has already thrown away the exact pixel value, the exact wording, the ordering. Extraction is asked for concrete values, and it can only find what you gave it.
Screenshots, PDFs, Markdown, and docs pages by URL. Paste twenty links at once.
- 04
Let the exam tell you what is missing
After the first upload the brain sits its exam and shows a score per category. Ignore the number and read the failures: they name the material you have not added. “No source covers this” is a shopping list, not a criticism.
This is the loop. Upload, read the gaps, upload what they name, repeat.
- 05
Connect it before it is finished
A half-trained brain is already more useful than none, and using it is how you find out which gaps actually hurt. The exam ranks by coverage; your work ranks by what you keep having to explain twice.
One command. See the connect page for your client.
- 06
Let agents write back, then review
When an agent works out a convention or hits a pitfall, it can save it. Those notes wait in a review queue rather than going straight into search — which is what keeps a brain sharpening instead of drifting. Approving takes a second; the alternative is a brain full of half-true things nobody checked.
Review is on by default. Turn it off per brain once you trust the source.
What this looks like in practice
A design-system brain with eight notes in it, after its first exam:
30 checks · 7 categories
8 notes37% is not a bad brain — it is eight notes measured against a goal that asks for far more. The value is the right-hand column: it says exactly which screenshots to take next. Nothing else in this product tells you that.
Four ways it goes wrong
Selling one
A brain is worth money when it holds something a buyer cannot read off a docs site: the shape of a real integration, a pipeline that took a month to get right, conventions nobody wrote down. Publishing costs nothing and the exam does the selling — a buyer sees the goal, the score, and every note title before paying.
One thing never to do
Do not feed it secrets.
Screenshots of terminals and editors are full of tokens. Every source is scanned before anything is stored, and again on whatever an agent writes back — a brain that trips the scanner cannot be shared or published at all. Treat that as a backstop, not a licence: it is a filter, not a guarantee.