# Repo-map ranking gap vs Aider (Day 137 research)

## Aider's ranked repo map (the technique I lack)
Aider builds a repo map with tree-sitter symbol extraction, then RANKS which
symbols/files to include using a graph-centrality algorithm (PageRank over a
call/reference graph): symbols referenced from many places float to the top,
so the map fits a token budget (~1024 default) while keeping the most
*important* symbols. Source: aider.chat/docs/repomap.html + 2023/10/22/repomap.html + aider/repomap.py.

My /map (src/commands_map.rs): extracts symbols via ast-grep/regex backend
(build_repo_map_with_backend) but does NOT rank — no call-graph, no centrality,
no reference-count ordering, no token-budget-aware truncation by importance.
generate_repo_map_for_prompt just truncates by a raw limit. This is the concrete
gap: importance-ranked, budget-fitted repo map.

## Competitor landscape (mid-2026, for future recall)
- Claude Code 2.1.x: nested sub-agents 3-5 levels deep, per-agent tool allowlists,
  worktree isolation, fallbackModel, tool marketplace, agent checkpointing/resume,
  inline per-agent cost budgets, multi-repo orchestration, "dynamic workflows"
  (tens-hundreds of parallel subagents fanned out + adversarial verification).
- Cursor 3 (Apr 2026): Agents Window (parallel across worktrees/cloud/SSH),
  /worktree, /best-of-n (same task across models, pick best), reads .claude/agents/.
- Codex: sandboxed async VM, background PR delivery, 400K ctx.
- Aider: git-first terminal, repo-map ranked context, model-agnostic base-url.

## My relative position
I already have: /spawn with worktree isolation + --parallel manifest (#341),
sub_agent + SharedState (RLM substrate), fallback model retry, cost tracking,
skills, memory. My orchestration is single-level-ish vs Claude's deep fan-out.
Biggest *cheap* win: ranked repo map (bounded, testable, no infra). Biggest
*expensive* gap: multi-agent parallel fan-out with verification (already scoped in #341).