Autonomous Depth Decisions: How the skill calculates which topics deserve their own page
The Helpfulness Score (HS) is a value from 1 to 10 that the skill calculates for every potential sub-topic. It answers one central question: Does this topic deserve its own page, or should it remain a paragraph on the parent page?
The score is calculated per topic and per audience. The same topic might get a dedicated detail page for developers while remaining just a brief paragraph for end users.
Maximum score: 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 = 10
Why not give every topic its own page? Because information overload destroys learning effectiveness. A topic with HS 2 as a standalone page would contain barely a paragraph and slow the reader down with unnecessary navigation. The HS ensures depth is created only where it delivers real value.
Each dimension is evaluated independently. Their sum yields the HS. Here are the exact scoring criteria:
| Dimension | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complexity How much explanation does the topic need? |
Trivial, self-explanatory | Simple, one paragraph suffices | Medium, needs examples | High, needs own page with visuals |
| Relevance How important is it for the audience? |
Niche topic | Nice to know | Important for understanding | Core concept, essential |
| Learning Value Does it change understanding? |
Plain facts, look-up-able | Useful knowledge | Fundamentally changes understanding | — |
| Independence Does it stand on its own? |
Repeats parent page | Supplements parent page | Completely standalone topic | — |
The same score has different consequences for different audiences. Developers get their own pages faster because technical depth is expected. Executives rarely get detail pages because they seek overview, not depth.
Thresholds by Audience
| Audience | Own Page at | Deeper Level at | Example: “OAuth Implementation” |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔧 Developers | ≥ 6 | ≥ 8 | HS 9 → Own page + deeper level |
| 👤 Users | ≥ 7 | ≥ 9 | HS 3 → Paragraph on parent page only |
| 📊 Executives | ≥ 8 | ≥ 10 | HS 2 → Not even mentioned |
Why are the thresholds different? Developers expect technical depth — they actively seek details. Users want to accomplish tasks — too many pages create confusion. Executives need overview — every detail page is potentially one too many. The threshold of ≥ 10 for executives at the deeper level means: practically never.
The topic “Token Refresh” has: Complexity=2, Relevance=3, LearningValue=2, Independence=2. What is the HS? Does it get its own page for 👤 Users?
For each topic T, audience A, and level L, the skill walks through the following decision tree. The result is always one of four actions.
function decide(T, A, L): // Step 1: Check level boundary if L >= max_level(A): return STOP hs = calculate_hs(T, A) // Step 2: Below threshold? if hs < threshold(A): return PARAGRAPH // Step 3: Own page, but no deeper if hs < deeper_threshold(A): create_page(T, A, L) return PAGE_NO_DEPTH // Step 4: Own page + next level if L + 1 < max_level(A): create_page(T, A, L) plan_next_level(T, A, L + 1) return PAGE_WITH_DEPTH else: create_page(T, A, L) return PAGE_NO_DEPTH
For each topic T, audience A, level L: 1. Is the current level already the maximum for this audience? → Yes: Stop. No deeper level possible. 2. Calculate the Helpfulness Score for T relative to A. Is the HS below the threshold for A? → Yes: Topic is treated as a paragraph on the parent page. 3. Is the HS high enough for its own page, but below the "deeper" threshold? → Yes: Create own page, but no further depth. 4. Is the HS above the "deeper" threshold AND is the next level still below the maximum? → Yes: Create own page AND plan the next level. → Otherwise: Own page without further depth.
Certain topic types reliably land in specific score ranges. These patterns show how the HS shapes content structure for each audience.
HS Heatmap by Topic Type and Audience
| Topic Type | 🔧 Developers | 👤 Users | 📊 Executives |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implementation Details Code architecture, API internals, algorithms |
7–10 | 1–3 | 1–3 |
| UI Workflows User interface, step-by-step guides |
3–5 | 7–10 | 3–5 |
| Cost / ROI Budget, economics, business case |
1–3 | 2–4 | 8–10 |
| Architecture Decisions Design patterns, trade-offs, tech stack |
7–9 | 1–3 | 6–8 |
Spot the pattern: Implementation details and architecture decisions are almost always relevant for developers (HS 7+), but rarely for users (HS 1–3). Conversely, UI workflows dominate for users. Cost/ROI is the executives' domain. Architecture decisions are the only category that generates deeper pages for both developers and executives — because trade-offs concern both groups.