Overview Section Consolidation Plan

Problem: Too much redundancy, too salesy, too long (2,882 lines of comparison content)

Current State (Redundant)

The Decision Tree Appears 3 Times!

1. comparison-cheat-sheet.md (lines 11-29)
2. when-do-you-need-papr.md (lines 11-27)
3. decision-tree.md (lines 1-30)

Proposed Consolidation

Keep 3 Files (Not 5)

1. decision-tree.md (150 lines max)

Purpose: Quick decision - "Should I use Papr?"

Content:

• Decision tree (ONE place only)
• Brief "why this matters" for each decision point
• Link to why-papr.md for details
• Link to quickstart for getting started

Remove:

• Long explanations
• Code examples (those go in why-papr)
• Detailed scenarios

2. why-papr.md (300 lines max)

Purpose: Detailed comparison with code examples

Content:

• What Papr does differently (not "better", just different)
• Code comparison: DIY vs Papr
• Feature comparison table
• When to use what (honest)

Remove:

• Decision tree (it's in decision-tree.md)
• Redundant examples
• Sales language ("99% cost reduction")
• Unsubstantiated claims

3. diy-stack-comparison.md (250 lines max)

Purpose: Component-by-component mapping for technical evaluators

Content:

• Map DIY components → Papr features
• Code examples showing equivalent functionality
• Migration path from DIY

Remove:

• Decision tree
• Sales pitch
• Cost comparisons with specific numbers
• Redundant feature tables

Delete 2 Files

❌ Delete: comparison-cheat-sheet.md

Why: Redundant with why-papr.md and decision-tree.md

Content to preserve:

• Decision tree → Move to decision-tree.md (already there)
• Feature matrix → Move to why-papr.md
• Code examples → Move to why-papr.md

❌ Delete: when-do-you-need-papr.md

Why: Redundant with decision-tree.md

Content to preserve:

• Decision tree → Already in decision-tree.md
• Scenarios → Condense into decision-tree.md or why-papr.md

New Structure (Consolidated)

1. decision-tree.md (~150 lines)

# Should You Use Papr?

## Quick Decision

[Decision tree - ONE place only]

## What Each Choice Means

### SQLite + FTS5
- When: Single session, exact keywords
- Limitation: No semantic search, no relationships
- [Link to quickstart if this is enough]

### Vector DB
- When: Semantic search needed, no relationships
- Limitation: No relationship tracking
- [Link to quickstart if this is enough]

### DIY Full Stack
- When: Extremely unique requirements, dedicated team
- Reality: 2-3 months + 0.5-1 FTE ongoing
- [Link to diy-stack-comparison.md]

### Papr
- When: Need semantic + relationships + consolidation
- Reality: 15 min to prototype, 0 FTE maintenance
- [Link to quickstart]

## Next Steps
- [Quick Start](../quickstart/) - Try it (15 min)
- [Why Papr](./why-papr.md) - Detailed comparison
- [DIY Mapping](./diy-stack-comparison.md) - Component-by-component

2. why-papr.md (~300 lines)

# Why Papr?

## The Problem with DIY Memory

[Brief explanation of common pain points]

## What Papr Does Differently

### 1. Unified Retrieval
**DIY:** Manage vector DB + graph DB + SQL + fusion logic
**Papr:** One API call

[Code comparison]

### 2. Continuous Innovation
**DIY:** Frozen at your implementation
**Papr:** Latest advances deployed automatically

### 3. Zero Maintenance
**DIY:** 0.5-1 FTE keeping it running
**Papr:** 0 FTE, we handle it

## Feature Comparison

[Honest feature table - what you can do, not how fast]

## When to Choose What

### Choose DIY if:
- Extremely unique requirements
- Team dedicated to memory infrastructure
- Comfortable staying current yourself

### Choose Papr if:
- Need semantic + relationships + consolidation
- Want to ship fast
- Prefer 0 FTE maintenance

## Code Comparison

[Side-by-side examples]

## Next Steps
- [Quick Start](../quickstart/)
- [DIY Component Mapping](./diy-stack-comparison.md)

3. diy-stack-comparison.md (~250 lines)

# DIY Stack → Papr Mapping

For teams who've built or are building DIY memory stacks.

## The Typical Production Stack

[List of 8 components teams build]

## Component-by-Component Mapping

### 1. Event Log → Direct Memory API
[Code comparison]

### 2. Vector Search → Built-in
[Code comparison]

### 3. Knowledge Graph → Auto-extraction
[Code comparison]

[Continue for all 8 components]

## Migration Path

[Brief steps for migrating from DIY to Papr]

## Next Steps
- [Quick Start](../quickstart/)
- [Architecture](../concepts/architecture.md)

Content Reduction Summary

Before (Current)

• 5 files
• 1,651 lines of comparison content
• Decision tree appears 3 times
• Heavy sales language
• Lots of redundancy

After (Proposed)

• 3 files
• ~700 lines (57% reduction)
• Decision tree appears once
• Factual, not salesy
• Clear purposes, no overlap

What to Remove (Be Ruthless)

❌ Remove from All Files

1. Decision tree (except decision-tree.md)
2. Specific pricing numbers
3. Specific latency claims
4. "99% cost reduction" type claims
5. Redundant code examples
6. Sales language ("cutting-edge", "lightning-fast", "revolutionary")
7. Long-winded explanations

✅ Keep (Be Concise)

1. Verifiable claims (STaRK benchmark)
2. Honest feature comparisons
3. Clear code examples (one per concept)
4. Practical guidance (when to use what)
5. Links to quickstart and detailed docs

Implementation Steps

Step 1: Consolidate decision-tree.md

• Keep the decision tree
• Add brief "what each choice means"
• Remove long explanations
• Add clear next steps

Step 2: Streamline why-papr.md

• Remove decision tree
• Keep feature comparison
• Keep code examples (concise)
• Remove sales language
• Focus on "what's different" not "what's better"

Step 3: Trim diy-stack-comparison.md

• Keep component mapping
• Remove decision tree
• Remove cost comparisons
• Keep migration path
• Make it technical, not salesy

Step 4: Delete redundant files

• Delete comparison-cheat-sheet.md
• Delete when-do-you-need-papr.md
• Update links in other files

Step 5: Update index.md

• Update links to point to consolidated files
• Remove redundant descriptions

New Overview Section Structure

overview/
├── index.md (main landing)
├── decision-tree.md (~150 lines) - "Should I use Papr?"
├── why-papr.md (~300 lines) - Detailed comparison
├── diy-stack-comparison.md (~250 lines) - Component mapping
├── predictive-memory.md (keep as-is)
├── golden-paths.md (keep as-is)
├── capability-matrix.md (keep as-is)
├── use-cases.md (keep as-is)
├── structured-data.md (keep as-is)
└── unified-graph.md (keep as-is)

Total comparison content: ~700 lines (down from 1,651)

Key Principles

1. One concept, one place - No redundancy
2. Factual, not salesy - Let features speak for themselves
3. Concise - Respect reader's time
4. Honest - Acknowledge when DIY makes sense
5. Helpful - Clear next steps, not just pitch

Bottom Line

Current state: 5 files, 1,651 lines, decision tree appears 3 times, very salesy
Proposed state: 3 files, ~700 lines, decision tree appears once, factual and helpful

Reduction: 57% less content, 100% clearer purpose