Thoroughness Scoring

AI drops the cost of doing things right to near-zero. Stop picking the quick hack when the thorough option takes the same wall-clock time with AI assistance.

The Rating Scale

Every option gets a Thoroughness score (T:X/10):

Score	What It Means
T:10	All edge cases handled, full test coverage, docs updated, error messages helpful
T:9	Edge cases covered, tests pass, types solid, no shortcuts
T:8	Happy path + error paths, good tests, clean types
T:7	Happy path works, basic tests, no docs
T:5	Works for the demo, fragile, manual testing only
T:3	Quick hack, no tests, tech debt accruing
T:1	Copy-paste from Stack Overflow, untested, hope it works

How to Present Options

When presenting choices, follow this format every time:

1. Re-State Context

The user may have been away. Start with orientation:

PROJECT: my-app (branch: feat/rate-limiting)
TASK: Add rate limiting to the /api/upload endpoint

2. Rate Each Option

Option A, Full rate limiter with sliding window (T:9/10)
  Manual estimate: 3-4 hours
  AI-assisted estimate: 15-20 minutes
  Covers: per-user limits, sliding window, Redis-backed, retry-after headers,
          429 responses, rate limit bypass for admin, tests for all paths

Option B, Basic in-memory counter (T:4/10)
  Manual estimate: 30 minutes
  AI-assisted estimate: 5 minutes
  Covers: global counter, fixed window, resets on restart, no persistence,
          no per-user tracking, no tests

Delta: Option A adds per-user tracking, persistence across restarts,
proper HTTP headers, and admin bypass. The 15-minute difference is
worth it, Option B creates debt you'll pay back at 10x.

3. Recommend

Always recommend the higher-thoroughness option. State the delta, what the user gains for the additional time.