Repository navigation
docs: overhaul README to highlight framework value, visual evidence, and evolution - #148
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
More reviews will be available in 29 minutes and 13 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work. Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more credits in the billing tab to continue. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based credits. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan refill rate. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, the refill rate gradually slows as usage increases. The highest same-day bursts are limited more strictly. Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthrough
ChangesREADME Content Overhaul
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![llamapreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1023541?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
Review Status: Automated Review Skipped
Dear contributor,
Thank you for your Pull Request. LlamaPReview has analyzed your changes and determined that this PR does not require an automated code review.
Analysis Result:
PR contains no meaningful changes
Technical Context:
No significant code changes detected, which may include:
- Comment-only changes
- Empty lines modifications
- Non-functional code adjustments
- Purely structural changes
We're continuously improving our PR analysis capabilities. Have thoughts on when and how LlamaPReview should perform automated reviews? Share your insights in our GitHub Discussions.
Best regards,
LlamaPReview Team
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
README.md (1)
138-145: ⚡ Quick winCall out the manual prediction path too.
The public API and resolver registry also support manual
y_pred/y_probinputs, not just framework-backed models. Leaving that out makes this section read narrower than the actual entrypoint surface.➕ Suggested addition
* **XGBoost** (`XGBClassifier`, `Booster`) * **LightGBM** (`LGBMClassifier`, `Booster`) * **CatBoost** (`CatBoostClassifier`) +* **Manual** (`y_pred` / `y_prob` passthrough)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@README.md` around lines 138 - 145, The "Prediction Resolver Architecture" section in the README only documents framework-backed models (scikit-learn, XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost) but omits documentation for manual prediction inputs. Add a section that clearly indicates users can also provide manual y_pred and y_prob inputs directly to the resolver, not just framework-specific estimators. This will make the API surface appear complete and help users understand all available input options.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 62-123: Add the `alt` attribute to all `<img>` tags in the
README.md file to improve accessibility and satisfy the docs linter. For each
image tag throughout the file (including those at lines 62-123 and also at lines
234-250), add a descriptive `alt` attribute that briefly describes what the
image shows. For example, the summary_dashboard.png image should have an alt
text like "The Deployment Verdict - composite Trust Score dashboard", the
calibration_plot.png should describe it as a "Reliability diagram showing model
calibration", and similarly add meaningful alt text for fairness_gap_region.png,
representation_embedding_2d.png, equalized_odds_region.png, and failure_plot.png
based on their titles and descriptions already present in the HTML.
- Around line 22-24: The anchor fragments in the navigation links all have
leading hyphens that will not match GitHub's auto-generated heading IDs. Remove
the leading hyphen from each of the anchor targets in the navigation line (the
links starting with [**Why TrustLens**](#...) and continuing through
[**Quickstart**](#...)) so that the fragments match the actual heading IDs
GitHub generates without the leading dash.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 138-145: The "Prediction Resolver Architecture" section in the
README only documents framework-backed models (scikit-learn, XGBoost, LightGBM,
CatBoost) but omits documentation for manual prediction inputs. Add a section
that clearly indicates users can also provide manual y_pred and y_prob inputs
directly to the resolver, not just framework-specific estimators. This will make
the API surface appear complete and help users understand all available input
options.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 8c14dae4-78d2-445f-9d32-68b9343ad744
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
assets/banner1.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
README.md
1 participant
Description
This PR completely redesigns the
README.mdto re-position TrustLens as an actively evolving ML Trustworthiness Framework rather than a simple package.Key Changes:
Motivation:
To maximize GitHub discoverability, star conversion, and contributor interest by instantly answering "Why should I care?" within the first 10 seconds of landing on the repository.
Summary by CodeRabbit