Yeah, you're right, it should be in there. Honestly this makes me want to rework the README in general. Right now it reads a bit like a showcase, and it doesn't really say why the thing exists. I'll put the canvas / tied-together-links idea up front so people can tell quickly whether it's for them or not.

Also, I'm enjoying the vibe here. People just say what they think, which is what I wanted.

Fair question. It started with Obsidian's canvas. I used it for bookmarks for a while and liked how it felt like tying a bunch of links together with string, kind of branching out like neurons. But I didn't want to open Obsidian every time, so I just built a canvas with drag and drop and connecting lines into the new tab page instead.

Honestly this is exactly the kind of blunt feedback I was hoping for. It helps a lot, thanks.

Yeah, fair. That actually makes me more sure the README needs a proper human pass. A lot of the defensive LLM wording in there came from a writing skill I used for the docs, that's just its style. I do like getting roasted though, and Lemmy has been really useful for that.

The code isn't slop though. I compared it against a bunch of similar projects and iterated and tested it myself for a good while before asking anyone else to try it. A fair amount of my own coursework was done with this MCP too.

ADR = Architecture Decision Record. Not tickets, more like short notes, one per decision: what the problem was, what I picked, what I gave up. e.g. why there's no free hue slider anymore, or why boxes have zero shadow until you hover. Mostly so future me doesn't undo something I already argued with myself about. They're in docs/adr if you're curious.