[delight] User Experience Analysis Report - 2026-02-09

[github-actions[bot]]

Today's targeted analysis evaluated user-facing aspects across documentation, CLI commands, workflow messages, and validation error messages. The analysis focused on enterprise software design principles: clarity, professional communication, efficiency, trust, and documentation quality.

Overall Quality: Strong professional foundation with specific opportunities for enhanced clarity and consistency.

Key Finding: Documentation examples could benefit from more inline concrete examples to reduce cognitive load and improve the "first-run" experience for new users.

---

Quality Highlights ✅

The analysis identified several examples of excellent user experience design:

Example 1: MCP Configuration Documentation Structure

• File: docs/src/content/docs/guides/getting-started-mcp.md
• What works well:
  • Clear progressive disclosure with "Quick Start" to advanced patterns
  • Practical configuration patterns with side-by-side comparisons
  • Comprehensive troubleshooting section with specific error scenarios
  • Appropriate use of callouts (CAUTION, TIP) to highlight important information
• Quote/Reference: Lines 14-56 provide an excellent 5-minute quick start that gets users to a working state before diving into complexity

Example 2: Professional Error Message Structure

• File: pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go
• What works well:
  • Clear problem statement with specific invalid value
  • Lists all valid options explicitly
  • Provides concrete YAML examples inline (lines 82-93)
  • Includes documentation link for deeper reference
  • "Did you mean" suggestions for close matches (lines 88-93)
• Quote/Reference: Lines 82-94 demonstrate excellent error message design: problem → valid options → suggestion → example → documentation

---

Improvement Opportunities 💡

High Priority

Opportunity 1: Add Inline MCP Configuration Example - Single File Improvement

• File: docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx
• Current State: Lines 14-23 describe the Daily Repo Status workflow and mention customization options, but the workflow configuration details are not shown inline until much later (lines 85-109)
• Issue: First-time users must scroll through prerequisites and installation steps before seeing what the workflow configuration looks like
• User Impact: Increases cognitive load for enterprise users evaluating the technology. Users often want to understand "what am I installing" before committing to installation steps.
• Design Principle: Efficiency and Productivity - Provide direct paths to outcomes, minimize unnecessary steps

Proposed Improvement

Add a collapsible preview section right after the workflow introduction to show what users will be working with:

Before (Lines 14-23):

## Adding an Automated Daily Status Workflow to Your Repo

In this guide you will add an existing, pre-backed workflow to an existing GitHub repository where you are a maintainer - the automated [**Daily Repo Status Report**](https://github.com/githubnext/agentics/blob/main/workflows/daily-repo-status.md?plain=1), running in GitHub Actions.

The aim here is to become familiar with **automated AI**: to install something that will run **automatically**, **recurringly**, in the context of your repository. In this case the workflow will run daily, though you can also invoke it manually. Every day, the workflow will create or update a fresh status report issue in your repository, without any further manual intervention. If you're familiar with GitHub Actions, you will be aware of the power of automation in repositories; this is simply taking that to the next level with AI.

Alternatively:
- To add a custom workflow of your own design, see [Creating Agentic Workflows](/gh-aw/setup/creating-workflows/).
- You can find more examples of pre-baked workflows in [Peli's Agent Factory](https://github.github.com/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-12-welcome-to-pelis-agent-factory/).

After:

## Adding an Automated Daily Status Workflow to Your Repo

In this guide you will add an existing, pre-backed workflow to an existing GitHub repository where you are a maintainer - the automated [**Daily Repo Status Report**](https://github.com/githubnext/agentics/blob/main/workflows/daily-repo-status.md?plain=1), running in GitHub Actions.

The aim here is to become familiar with **automated AI**: to install something that will run **automatically**, **recurringly**, in the context of your repository. In this case the workflow will run daily, though you can also invoke it manually. Every day, the workflow will create or update a fresh status report issue in your repository, without any further manual intervention. If you're familiar with GitHub Actions, you will be aware of the power of automation in repositories; this is simply taking that to the next level with AI.

<details>
<summary><b>Preview: What the workflow looks like</b></summary>

The workflow is defined in a markdown file with YAML frontmatter:

````markdown
---
on: daily
permissions:
  contents: read
  issues: write
tools:
  github:
    toolsets: [default]
---

# Daily Repo Status Report

Analyze recent repository activity and create a status report issue.

The add-wizard command will help you configure the engine and secrets.

Alternatively:

• To add a custom workflow of your own design, see Creating Agentic Workflows.
• You can find more examples of pre-baked workflows in Peli's Agent Factory.

**Why This Matters**
- **User Impact**: Reduces uncertainty and allows users to make informed decisions before committing time to installation
- **Quality Factor**: Enhances **Clarity and Precision** by showing concrete structure early
- **Frequency**: This is the primary getting-started guide - every new user encounters this

**Success Criteria**
- [ ] Changes made to `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx` only
- [ ] Preview section added between lines 23-24
- [ ] Quality rating improves from ✅ Professional to ✅ Excellent

**Scope Constraint**
- **Single file only**: `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx`
- No changes to other documentation files required
- Can be completed independently

---

#### Opportunity 2: Improve Engine Validation Error Message Formatting - Single File Improvement
- **File**: `pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go`
- **Current State**: Lines 82-94 provide excellent error messages, but the multi-line format could be more readable with better line breaks
- **Issue**: The error message combines problem statement, valid options, suggestion, example, and documentation link in a single paragraph-like format
- **User Impact**: While the content is excellent, the visual presentation could be improved for scannability
- **Design Principle**: **Clarity and Precision** - Clear, unambiguous language with visual hierarchy

**Proposed Improvement**

Add explicit section separators to improve scannability:

**Before (Lines 82-94):**
```go
errMsg := fmt.Sprintf("invalid engine: %s. Valid engines are: %s.\n\nExample:\nengine: copilot\n\nSee: %s",
    engineID,
    enginesStr,
    constants.DocsEnginesURL)

// Add "did you mean" suggestion if we found a close match
if len(suggestions) > 0 {
    errMsg = fmt.Sprintf("invalid engine: %s. Valid engines are: %s.\n\nDid you mean: %s?\n\nExample:\nengine: copilot\n\nSee: %s",
        engineID,
        enginesStr,
        suggestions[0],
        constants.DocsEnginesURL)
}
```

**After:**
```go
errMsg := fmt.Sprintf("Invalid engine: %s\n\nValid engines:\n  %s\n\nExample:\n  engine: copilot\n\nDocumentation: %s",
    engineID,
    strings.Replace(enginesStr, ", ", "\n  ", -1), // Convert to bulleted list
    constants.DocsEnginesURL)

// Add "did you mean" suggestion if we found a close match
if len(suggestions) > 0 {
    errMsg = fmt.Sprintf("Invalid engine: %s\n\nDid you mean: %s?\n\nValid engines:\n  %s\n\nExample:\n  engine: copilot\n\nDocumentation: %s",
        engineID,
        suggestions[0],
        strings.Replace(enginesStr, ", ", "\n  ", -1), // Convert to bulleted list
        constants.DocsEnginesURL)
}
```

**Why This Matters**
- **User Impact**: Improves scannability of error messages when debugging workflow configuration issues
- **Quality Factor**: Enhances **Trust and Reliability** through clearer error communication
- **Frequency**: Engine validation errors are common during initial workflow setup

**Success Criteria**
- [ ] Changes made to `pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go` only
- [ ] Error messages use consistent visual hierarchy with section labels
- [ ] Quality rating improves from ✅ Professional to ✅ Excellent

**Scope Constraint**
- **Single file only**: `pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go`
- No changes to other validation files required
- Can be completed independently

---

## Files Reviewed

### Documentation
- `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx` - Rating: ✅ Professional (could enhance with inline preview)
- `docs/src/content/docs/guides/getting-started-mcp.md` - Rating: ✅ Excellent

### CLI Commands
- Unable to execute CLI due to binary build constraints - analysis deferred

### Workflow Messages
- `.github/workflows/delight.md` - Rating: ✅ Professional
- `.github/workflows/daily-issues-report.md` - Rating: ✅ Professional

### Validation Code
- `pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go` - Rating: ✅ Professional (excellent content, formatting improvement opportunity)

---

## Metrics

- **Files Analyzed**: 5
- **Quality Distribution**:
  - ✅ Professional: 4 files
  - ✅ Excellent: 1 file
  - ⚠️ Needs Minor Work: 0 files
  - ❌ Needs Significant Work: 0 files

---

## 🎯 Actionable Tasks

Here are 2 targeted improvement tasks, each affecting a single file:

### Task 1: Add Workflow Configuration Preview - Improve Quick Start Documentation

**File to Modify**: `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx`

**Current Experience**

The quick start guide (lines 14-23) introduces the Daily Repo Status workflow but doesn't show what the workflow configuration looks like until much later in the document (lines 85-109). First-time enterprise users evaluating the technology must complete prerequisites and installation steps before seeing the actual workflow structure.

**Quality Issue**

**Design Principle**: Efficiency and Productivity

This creates unnecessary cognitive load for enterprise users who want to understand "what am I installing" before committing to installation. Enterprise users typically need to evaluate tools against organizational standards, security requirements, and technical constraints before beginning installation.

**Proposed Improvement**

Add a collapsible preview section immediately after the workflow introduction (after line 23) to show the workflow structure:

**Before:**
```markdown
## Adding an Automated Daily Status Workflow to Your Repo

In this guide you will add an existing, pre-backed workflow...

Alternatively:
- To add a custom workflow of your own design, see [Creating Agentic Workflows](/gh-aw/setup/creating-workflows/).
```

**After:**
```markdown
## Adding an Automated Daily Status Workflow to Your Repo

In this guide you will add an existing, pre-backed workflow...

<details>
<summary><b>Preview: What the workflow looks like</b></summary>

The workflow is defined in a markdown file with YAML frontmatter:

``````markdown
---
on: daily
permissions:
  contents: read
  issues: write
tools:
  github:
    toolsets: [default]
---

# Daily Repo Status Report

Analyze recent repository activity and create a status report issue.

The add-wizard command will help you configure the engine and secrets.

Alternatively:

• To add a custom workflow of your own design, see Creating Agentic Workflows.

**Why This Matters**
- **User Impact**: Enables informed decision-making before time investment; reduces uncertainty; improves first-run experience
- **Quality Factor**: Clarity and Precision - shows concrete structure early
- **Frequency**: Every new user encounters this primary getting-started guide

**Success Criteria**
- [x] Changes made to `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx` only
- [x] Preview section added with collapsible details element
- [x] Quality rating improves from ✅ Professional to ✅ Excellent

**Scope Constraint**
- **Single file only**: `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.mdx`
- No changes to other documentation files required
- Can be completed independently

---

### Task 2: Improve Error Message Visual Hierarchy - Enhance Engine Validation

**File to Modify**: `pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go`

**Current Experience**

The engine validation error messages (lines 82-94) provide excellent content (problem statement, valid options, examples, documentation links, "did you mean" suggestions) but present this information in a paragraph-like format that requires careful reading to extract key information.

**Quality Issue**

**Design Principle**: Clarity and Precision

While the error message content is comprehensive and helpful, the formatting doesn't leverage visual hierarchy to guide the user's attention. Enterprise users debugging workflow issues need to quickly scan error messages to identify the problem and solution path.

**Proposed Improvement**

Restructure error messages with explicit section labels and improved formatting:

**Before (Lines 82-94):**
```go
errMsg := fmt.Sprintf("invalid engine: %s. Valid engines are: %s.\n\nExample:\nengine: copilot\n\nSee: %s",
    engineID,
    enginesStr,
    constants.DocsEnginesURL)

if len(suggestions) > 0 {
    errMsg = fmt.Sprintf("invalid engine: %s. Valid engines are: %s.\n\nDid you mean: %s?\n\nExample:\nengine: copilot\n\nSee: %s",
        engineID,
        enginesStr,
        suggestions[0],
        constants.DocsEnginesURL)
}

After:

errMsg := fmt.Sprintf("Invalid engine: %s\n\nValid engines:\n  %s\n\nExample:\n  engine: copilot\n\nDocumentation: %s",
    engineID,
    strings.Replace(enginesStr, ", ", "\n  ", -1), // Convert comma-separated to bulleted list
    constants.DocsEnginesURL)

if len(suggestions) > 0 {
    errMsg = fmt.Sprintf("Invalid engine: %s\n\nDid you mean: %s?\n\nValid engines:\n  %s\n\nExample:\n  engine: copilot\n\nDocumentation: %s",
        engineID,
        suggestions[0],
        strings.Replace(enginesStr, ", ", "\n  ", -1), // Convert comma-separated to bulleted list
        constants.DocsEnginesURL)
}

Why This Matters

• User Impact: Improves scannability and reduces time-to-resolution for configuration errors
• Quality Factor: Trust and Reliability - clearer error communication builds confidence
• Frequency: Engine validation errors are common during initial workflow setup

Success Criteria

• Changes made to pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go only
• Error messages use consistent section labels ("Valid engines:", "Example:", "Documentation:")
• Valid engines list formatted as indented items for better readability
• Quality rating improves from ✅ Professional to ✅ Excellent

Scope Constraint

• Single file only: pkg/workflow/engine_validation.go
• No changes to other validation files required
• Can be completed independently

---

Analysis Metadata

• Repository: github/gh-aw
• Workflow Run: §21841288792
• Analysis Date: 2026-02-09
• Files Sampled: 5 (2 documentation, 2 workflow configurations, 1 validation file)
• Methodology: Random selection with focus on high-traffic, user-facing files

AI generated by Delight

• expires on Feb 16, 2026, 9:30 PM UTC

[github-actions[bot]]

This discussion was automatically closed because it expired on 2026-02-16T21:30:07.495Z.

Closed by Workflow

[mohamedbouddi7777-dev]

Okay thanks for letting me know في الاثنين، ١٦ فبراير ٢٠٢٦، ٢٢:٥٠ github-actions[bot] < ***@***.***> كتب:

…

Closed #14693 <#14693> as outdated. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#14693>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/B2DFN3W7RGSRY56XGNNKQ2L4MJCTPAVCNFSM6AAAAACUQ6YG4OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABFIRUXGY3VONZWS33OIV3GK3TUHI5E433UNFTGSY3BORUW63R3GI2DCMJYHA3A> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.*** com>