| name | gourmet-research |
| description | Maintain evidence-based gourmet shortlists in a repo (gourmet/CITY/{overview,candidates,notes,top-places,excluded}.md): discover and triage candidates, gather multi-source evidence with URLs, score consistently, publish Top Picks/Backups, record exclusions for auditability, and choose appropriate review/guide sources based on the region (don’t hard-code country-specific platforms). |
Gourmet Research
Overview
Build and maintain traceable, comparable, auditable, actionable food recommendations (restaurants/cafes/desserts) with multi-source evidence and consistent scoring.
Use references/repo-spec.md for repo-structure rules and references/templates.md for copy/paste templates.
Workflow
0) Identify the locale + constraints
- Confirm the city/region and language context.
- Confirm constraints that affect feasibility: opening days, reservation methods, mobility, budget, group size, dietary needs.
1) Discovery (add candidates fast)
- Add rows to
gourmet/CITY/candidates.md with status: inbox.
- Use a maps search link initially if you don’t yet have the exact place link.
- Do not delete table rows except for true duplicates or proven incorrect entries.
2) Evidence collection (per place)
- Add a detailed evidence section to
gourmet/CITY/notes.md (template in references/templates.md).
- Prefer 3–5 independent sources that fit the locale (see “Source selection” below).
- Update the candidate row with a 1-line summary and status (
researching → shortlisted / top / rejected).
3) Score consistently (50-point rubric)
- Score each researched place out of 50 with the standard breakdown (in
notes.md).
- Keep scoring comparable within the same city/region; document uncertainty (use
unknown).
4) Publish decisions
top-places.md: Top Picks (high confidence) + Backups (good alternatives) + a short plan/strategy section + a checklist section (names follow the repo’s conventions).excluded.md: record why a place was rejected (auditable).
5) Verify completion criteria
- From within the target gourmet repo, run
verify_city.sh CITYDIR to quickly detect “inbox” items, pending decisions, and unchecked research checklist items.
- If you’re running the script from outside the target repo, pass
--repo-root /path/to/repo.
- If your repo enforces required section headers, use
verify_city.sh --check-headers CITYDIR.
Source selection (choose what fits the region)
Do not hard-code a single review platform globally. Pick sources that match the locale and availability, and state which you used in notes.md.
Choose sources by asking: “What do locals use, and what has the best coverage for this exact city + price tier?”
Recommended source mix (3–5 total):
- Maps + reviews: Google Maps / Apple Maps / local dominant maps app (rating + review count + recurring themes).
- Local review platform(s): whatever is locally dominant (examples: 食べログ/Retty in Japan; OpenRice in HK/SG; in the UK often Google/Apple plus strong local editorial coverage).
- Local-language review synthesis: summarize recurring patterns (don’t fabricate quotes).
- Guide/editorial: reputable guides, local food media, chef interviews, newspapers, Michelin/other guides where relevant.
- Official channel: official site/social for hours, closures, reservation method (facts only).
Anti-patterns:
- Relying on only one platform.
- Using platforms that are irrelevant for the locale if better local alternatives exist.
- Treating a single viral social post as evidence.
Resources
references/repo-spec.md: structure + auditability rules (generic).references/templates.md: doc templates and evidence blocks.scripts/verify_city.sh: quick structural/completion checks.
