Adopt robertdelanghe.dev's row grammar: a labelled schema forces concrete copy in a way prose cannot

[bdelanghe]

Child of #205. Cold read of both sites, 2026-09-03.

#205 diagnoses this site as too verbose and asks for cognitive-load reduction. robertdelanghe.dev already solved the same problem for the same author, and the solution is structural rather than editorial. Worth copying the structure, not the words.

What the sibling does

Every entry in "Selected work" is a four-row definition list with the label in a mono small-caps gutter and the content in a serif measure:

PROBLEM       Agent-authored commits reached main without review, and afterwards
              nobody could say which writes the agent had been authorized to make.
INTERVENTION  Moved privileged git effects behind capability-checked operations,
              and routed the work through one pipeline whose only exit is a merged
              pull request.
EVIDENCE      prx drives a work unit to an attributed pull request; ocap-provenance
              records which capabilities each effect held, and which were denied.
              Both are public, and both name what is still outside the check.
ROLE          System model, schemas, implementation, and the operational testing.

The schema is doing the work. You cannot write "the bet" into a PROBLEM row, or "convergence is in progress" into an EVIDENCE row. The form rejects the register that #205 objects to. Compare the third entry, which lands a number and its instrument in one breath:

EVIDENCE — Critical bugs fell 20% — critical-severity tickets per quarter, the four quarters before against the four after.

That is the house epistemics — claim, then the measurement behind it — expressed as a layout rather than as a policy.

The sharpest observation

The Bounded Systems row on the personal site explains Bounded Systems better than bounded.tools does. Four rows, roughly 70 words, and a stranger comes away knowing what broke, what was done, and what is still uncovered. bounded.tools spends a hero, a demo block, three cards and a graded-status band getting somewhere less concrete.

The origin story in that PROBLEM row — agent commits reaching main, and nobody able to say afterwards what the agent had been authorized to do — does not appear anywhere on bounded.tools. It is the best sentence either site has about why this project exists, and it is on the wrong domain.

Measured differences in how the two pages are built

	robertdelanghe.dev	bounded.tools
Page height, desktop	2,928 px	3,623 px
Content column	880 px, single measure	alternating full-bleed bands
Type roles	3, consistently assigned (mono labels, serif prose, sans headings)	mixed
Colour	one accent, on the item numbers	large green and black section blocks
Whole career on one page	yes	n/a

The sibling fits more information into less height because hairline rules and a gutter carry the hierarchy. This site spends vertical space on coloured bands that signal "new section" and little else. That is a straight trade of scroll depth for decoration.

Suggested shape

1. Rebuild "What's here" as the four-row grammar. guest-room, claude-box and prx each have a real problem, a real intervention, and public evidence; the current cards give a tagline and a paragraph.
2. Move the origin story onto the home page, in the PROBLEM row where it belongs.
3. Drop the full-bleed bands for rules and a single measure, and let the accent colour mark items rather than regions.
4. Make the EVIDENCE row link to the code, as the sibling does inline. That is the same discipline /conformance applies to claims, applied to the landing page.

Note the honest limit: the sibling also fails cognitive.coga-obj5, so this will not automatically clear that gate. The argument for it is legibility to a stranger, not a green row.

Filed from a cold read, unclaimed and unassigned. Related: #205, #273, #274.