release: v0.0.24 (#358)

.claude/skills/openseo-release-notes/SKILL.md

@@ -15,37 +15,41 @@ Cut a release for this repo end to end. The deliverables are a version bump in `
 ## 2. Collect the changes since the last release
 
 - Find the latest tag: `git tag --sort=-creatordate | head -1`. Verify the branch is up to date with `origin/main` (`git fetch origin main && git log HEAD..origin/main --oneline` should be empty; flag it if not).
-- List commits: `git log <last-tag>..HEAD --oneline`. You can also run `pnpm release:notes` for a generated skeleton.
+- List commits: `git log <last-tag>..HEAD --oneline`. You can also run `pnpm release:notes` for a raw commit inventory — use it only as a checklist of candidate changes, never as the draft's structure (its Improved/Changed/Docs sections must not appear in the notes).
-- For each commit, fetch the PR body and author (`gh pr view <num> --repo every-app/open-seo --json title,body,author`) — squash-commit subjects can be stale. The `(#NN)` in commit subjects references the **public** repo (`every-app/open-seo`), so look authors up there, not on `origin`. Verify claims against the final code when a PR body and commit subject disagree (features get reverted before merge).
+- For each commit, fetch the PR body and author (`gh pr view <num> --repo <repo> --json title,body,author`) — squash-commit subjects can be stale. The `(#NN)` in commit subjects can reference **either** repo: try `bensenescu/open-seo` (origin) first and fall back to `every-app/open-seo` (public) — outside contributors' PRs and their handles live on the public repo. Commits with no `(#NN)` may still be an outside contribution with a public PR (`gh pr list --repo every-app/open-seo --state merged --author <login>`); check `git log --format=%an` for the author. Verify claims against the final code when a PR body and commit subject disagree (features get reverted before merge).
 - Record the PR author's GitHub handle alongside each change so the bullet can credit them.
 
 ## 3. Draft the notes
 
-Write `release-notes/v<version>.md` matching the style of the 2–3 most recent files in `release-notes/`:
+Write `release-notes/v<version>.md`. **`release-notes/v0.0.24.md` is the canonical style exemplar** — match it (v0.0.25 and later follow the same style); v0.0.23 and earlier are the old verbose style, never imitate them. The notes are a scannable digest, not documentation: the whole file fits on one screen (roughly 15 lines including headings), and every line earns its place.
 
-- One-sentence summary line at the top (no heading). Lead with the biggest user-facing win, stated as the outcome.
+Format:
-- `## What's new`, `## Improved`, `## Fixed` — include a section only when it has content.
+
-- Imperative bullets ("Add…", "Improve…", "Cut…"), concise, user-facing.
+- Top line: a fragment naming the release's 2–3 highlights ("GSC UI, improved app layout and beta in app agent."). Not a "This release brings…" sentence.
-- **Credit the contributor.** End each bullet with `— thanks @handle`, using the PR author's GitHub handle, for the feature or fix they contributed. When a bullet has sub-bullets, put the credit at the end of the top-level bullet (the feature), not on the sub-bullet. Skip the credit for the repo maintainer's own PRs (`bensenescu`) — only credit outside contributors. If one bullet folds in work from multiple contributors, thank each (`— thanks @a, @b`).
+- Sections: `## What's new` and `## Fixed` only. There is no "Improved" section — an improvement is either headline-worthy (What's new) or it's cut.
-- **Be punchy — lead with the impact, not the mechanism.** The top-level bullet is the outcome the user gets ("Reduce rank tracking costs by ~3x"); push the how into one brief sub-bullet beneath it. Don't open a bullet with the implementation ("Run scheduled checks through DataForSEO's task queue and…") — that buries the lead.
+- **What's new bullets name the feature; they don't sell it.** One short line each ("Redesigned the app layout", "Get GSC Insights inside the app") — no em-dash feature tours, no "so you can…" benefit copy, no lists of everything the feature touches. If the name alone is ambiguous, one clause of plain-words context is the maximum.
+- At most **one sub-bullet per feature**, one short line: the single most useful detail, a requirement ("Requires `OPENROUTER_API_KEY`"), or an expectation-setter.
+- **Label rough features "(Beta)"** and set expectations honestly, including pointing at the better alternative for now. The expectation-setter rides the top-level line after a dash ("(Beta) In app agent - MCP is still recommended, but we'll be working to improve this during the summer."), keeping the sub-bullet slot free for a requirement or detail.
+- Fixed: 3–5 bullets, one plain sentence each, only bugs a user plausibly hit and would recognize ("Claude answers in AI search work again."). No error codes, status codes, schema/infra vocabulary, or mechanism. If more than four qualify, keep the ones hit in core flows (searches, audits, tracking, MCP answers) and drop fixes for recovering self-inflicted state (re-adding, un-archiving, refreshing) first.
+- **Credit the contributor.** End the bullet with `— thanks @handle` for outside contributors only — never for the maintainer's own PRs (`bensenescu`). Credit goes on the top-level bullet, not sub-bullets. Multiple contributors: `— thanks @a, @b`.
 - End with: `Full Changelog: https://github.com/every-app/open-seo/compare/v<prev>...v<version>`
 
-Content guidelines:
+Curation — this is where the work is. Cut aggressively; the Full Changelog link covers the long tail:
 
-- Only include changes to the **product itself** — the app, the MCP tools, the SEO data/features that someone running OpenSEO actually uses. The litmus test for every bullet: **would a self-hoster running OpenSEO care about this?** If it only affects the hosted commercial offering, the marketing site, or the first-run signup experience, drop it.
+- Only changes to the **product itself** — the app, the MCP tools, the SEO data/features someone running OpenSEO actually uses. Litmus test per bullet: **would a self-hoster notice this while using the product?** Caring in the abstract (a new backend option, a raised cap) is not enough.
 - Do NOT mention:
   - **Marketing-website (`web/`) changes** — landing pages, copy, positioning, blog.
-  - **Pricing / plans / subscription / billing** — price changes, paywalls, free-trial changes, money-back guarantees, grandfathering, Autumn config, billing-status syncs. These are hosted-commercial concerns, irrelevant to self-hosters.
+  - **Pricing / plans / subscription / billing** — paywalls, free-trial/plan changes, Autumn config. Hosted-commercial concerns, irrelevant to self-hosters.
-  - **Onboarding-flow-only changes** — the signup/onboarding chat, profiling steps, upgrade rails, email-verification UX, and other first-run-only flows. A change buried in onboarding is not a product capability the broader user base gains; leave it out even if it's a sizable feature.
+  - **Onboarding-flow-only changes** — signup/onboarding chat, profiling steps, upgrade rails, email-verification UX. Not a product capability, even when sizable.
-  - **Hosted-app internals & meta** — directory/Smithery scores, analytics, specs/ADRs, CI, refactors.
+  - **Hosted-app internals & meta** — analytics, specs/ADRs, CI, refactors, dependency bumps.
-- Include bug fixes and improvements when notable, user-facing, and not part of a larger refactor (fold minor fixes into the related bullet or drop them). A fix only qualifies if it changes behavior a user would notice in the product or MCP tools — not in onboarding or billing.
+  - **Invisible-to-the-user work, even when product-relevant** — security hardening, raised caps/limits, stability/memory/perf fixes, database/backend options and migrations. A user reading the notes should recognize every line from using the product; if they'd only notice it in a config file or an incident that no longer happens, cut it.
-- Never invent features — every claim must trace to a commit. State user-visible limitations that set expectations (e.g. a feature unavailable for some countries).
+- When torn between including and cutting, cut. A 4-bullet What's new that gets read beats a 10-bullet one that doesn't.
-- For headline numbers, quote the **conservative, typical figure**, not the cherry-picked best case. A PR's biggest number is often scoped to an ideal condition (e.g. "~83% cheaper for a page-1-ranking domain at default depth") — round down to a defensible blended claim ("~3x cheaper") so the headline never overstates the everyday result.
+- Never invent features — every claim must trace to a commit.
-- Name specific MCP tools/params when an umbrella phrase would over- or understate which tools support a feature.
+- Numbers in bullets are usually selling — cut them; if one is genuinely load-bearing, quote the conservative, typical figure, never a cherry-picked best case.
 
 ## 4. Review and verify
 
-1. Spawn a reviewer subagent with: the draft, the guidelines above, the per-commit facts you gathered, and repo access. It returns numbered review comments citing which guideline each violates.
+1. Spawn a reviewer subagent with: the draft, the guidelines above, the per-commit facts you gathered, and repo access. It returns numbered review comments citing which guideline each violates. Its charge includes **verbosity**: flag any bullet that sells instead of names, any second sub-bullet, any Fixed bullet with mechanism vocabulary, and anything that pushes the file past one screen.
 2. For each substantive comment, spawn a verification subagent (in parallel) that adversarially checks the comment against the actual commits/code and verdicts APPLY / APPLY-MODIFIED / REJECT.
 3. Apply only verified comments.
 

.dockerignore

@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
 .git
 .github
+.claude
 .logs
-.wrangler
+**/.wrangler
-node_modules
+**/node_modules
-dist
+**/dist
-coverage
+**/coverage
 *.log
 Dockerfile
 .env

package.json

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
   "name": "open-seo",
   "private": true,
   "sideEffects": false,
-  "version": "0.0.23",
+  "version": "0.0.24",
   "type": "module",
   "packageManager": "pnpm@10.30.1",
   "scripts": {

release-notes/v0.0.24.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+GSC UI, improved app layout and beta in app agent. 
+
+## What's new
+- Get GSC Insights inside the app — thanks @mattmacrocket
+    - See queries in "striking distance" of ranking 
+- (Beta) In app agent - MCP is still recommended, but we'll be working to improve this during the summer.
+    - Requires `OPENROUTER_API_KEY`
+- Redesigned the app layout
+
+## Fixed
+
+- A wrong or mis-formatted DataForSEO API key now shows a clear message telling you how to fix it, instead of "an unexpected error occurred". — thanks @mattmacrocket
+- Local business searches with invalid input now show an error instead of quietly returning nothing.
+- Claude answers in AI search work again.
+- Site audits no longer occasionally crash near the end of a run.
+
+Full Changelog: https://github.com/every-app/open-seo/compare/v0.0.23...v0.0.24