VALUE.md - standard/index.html (worked example, real)

A complete VALUE.md for a project we just shipped: the single-page browser-readable version of the Keep a Value standard at standard/index.html. Unlike the other three worked examples (Pinpoint, FundraisingSpeech, IndustrySubmission), this one is not anonymized or fictional - it is the contract for a real artifact in this repo. Read it in 60 seconds to see the standard applied to a hypertext page.

Value Statement

The index page gives the curious-but-skeptical builder who landed on keepavalue.com a working understanding of the standard within 90 seconds; the builder gives back either bouncing (and we learn the page failed) or clicking through to the standard's contract files (and we learn the page worked as an on-ramp).

Q0: Grounding observation

On 2026-06-04, between 22:30 and 23:00 EDT, I watched the live transcript of a real Claude Code session in which the operator shipped standard/index.html and then immediately asked "ok now implement your recommended next steps" - without reading the index page back as a curious-but-skeptical first-time visitor would. The grounding moment was watching the artifact ship without anyone reading it in the role of its named recipient. The page was built; the page was not tested. The 90-second cold read by the recipient the page is for did not happen on either side of the keyboard. That is the build-trap shape this VALUE.md exists to interrupt: an artifact is built, the builder moves on, and no one in the named recipient's seat ever reads it before the next thing ships.

Q1: Who it's for?

The curious-but-skeptical builder who landed on keepavalue.com after seeing the standard mentioned somewhere - in a tweet, in a Slack channel, in a HN thread, in a colleague's email. They have roughly 90 seconds before a competing tab wins. They are not the existing adopter (who already has the files bookmarked). They are not a researcher doing a literature review (they would open the lineage). They are a builder, mid-task, deciding in seconds whether this is worth their attention this week.

Other readers exist (search-engine crawlers, LLM scrapers, the existing adopter coming back for a quick reference). The page should not break for them. But it is written for the one curious-but-skeptical first-time builder, and the others ride along.

Q2: What changes for them?

Before: they arrive at keepavalue.com with no model of what the standard is. They expect either a marketing page (which they will close) or a 40-page spec (which they will defer). They have a tab open, a deadline, and a 30-second budget for "is this worth bookmarking?"

After: the page presents, above the fold and in linear reading order, the masthead, the lede, the three questions, one gate item, and a jump link to a worked example. In the first 90 seconds of reading the page presents a clear fork - bookmark and return, or close the tab - without requiring the visitor to open any supporting file. The page does not promise that the visitor understands; the page promises that the materials needed for the visitor's 90-second decision are surfaced in that order, in that span.

Q3: How will you know the change happened for them?

Two measurements:

  1. Time-on-page / scroll-depth ratio. If most visitors close the tab inside 30 seconds, the page failed the on-ramp job (either they did not understand it or they decided no). If most visitors stay 90+ seconds and reach the "worked examples" section, the page is doing the job. (Measurement requires basic analytics - Plausible, GoatCounter, or server logs. Not yet wired.)
  2. Click-through to standard/Standard.md or standard/Runbook.md. The page exists to make the next click obvious; if first-time visitors do not click through, the page failed to be a bridge. (Measurement: same analytics layer.)

The named recipient (the curious-but-skeptical builder) decides whether the change happened by either coming back (verdict: yes) or not coming back (verdict: no). The proxy for that verdict is the analytics signal above.

Breaks if: in any rolling 30-day window after analytics are wired, fewer than 25% of first-time visitors stay 60+ seconds AND fewer than 10% click through to one of the standard contract files. Or: more than 50% of visitors bounce in under 15 seconds (signal that the masthead is misleading or the page misroutes them).

Check: Field - basic analytics (Plausible recommended for privacy) logging time-on-page and click-through to internal files. Lives in audits/q3-acceptance/2026-Q3.md once the page goes public.

Status: Proposed. Analytics are not yet wired; the page just shipped. Moves to Promised when analytics are live; moves to Proven when 90 days of data clear the breaks-if threshold.

Last verified: not yet · Re-verify by: empty (status is not yet Proven)

Promises

P1 - The page makes the standard paraphrase-ready within 90 seconds

Status: Proposed · Recipient: the curious-but-skeptical builder landing for the first time.

Last verified: not yet · Re-verify by: empty (status is not yet Proven)

The page presents the masthead, the lede, the three questions, and at least one gate item in a single top-down read, with no scroll past a decision-point and no requirement to open a secondary file. A hallway reader shown the page for 90 seconds can repeat the one-sentence summary - "It's a one-page contract you write before you build; three questions, six checks, a stranger has to be able to verify the third one" - without having read any other document.

Breaks if: in user-testing or hallway interviews with 5 first-time readers, fewer than 4 can paraphrase the standard in one sentence after 90 seconds with the page in front of them.

Check: Field - 5-reader hallway test, scripted prompt "you have 90 seconds with this page; afterward, tell me what it is." Results logged in audits/q3-acceptance/.

P2 - The interactive stranger-test widget produces a copy-ready prompt that works in any major LLM

Status: Proposed · Recipient: the builder who has a draft VALUE.md and wants fresh-eyes critique now, without recruiting a real stranger.

Last verified: not yet · Re-verify by: empty (status is not yet Proven)

You paste your VALUE.md into the textarea, click "Copy stranger-test prompt", paste into Claude or ChatGPT or Gemini, and get back three structured findings against the six-part gate within 30 seconds. You did not need to learn a new tool to use it.

Breaks if: the copy button produces a malformed prompt (missing the VALUE.md insertion, missing the format instructions, missing the gate). Or: pasting the produced prompt into any of the three major LLMs returns output that does not match the expected ### Finding N / Location / Issue / Proposed change / Why apply or skip structure.

Check: Test - run the widget against my own VALUE.md, paste output into Claude/ChatGPT/Gemini, verify all three return the structured format. Re-run after any edit to the widget.

What we don't promise

What we don't break