cbrowser 18.62.0 → 18.63.1

package/docs/hunt-bugs-coverage.md

@@ -1,103 +0,0 @@
-# Hunt Bugs Detection Coverage
-
-CBrowser's `hunt_bugs` tool detects accessibility and usability issues across web pages. This document describes the detection categories, their WCAG mappings, and expected results.
-
-## Detection Categories
-
-### Core Accessibility Issues (6 original)
-
-| Issue Type | Description | WCAG Criterion | Severity |
-|------------|-------------|----------------|----------|
-| **broken-image** | Images with failed `src` or missing source | N/A | medium |
-| **missing-alt** | Images lacking `alt` attribute | 1.1.1 Non-text Content | high |
-| **empty-link** | Links with no text content or `aria-label` | 2.4.4 Link Purpose | medium |
-| **no-button-text** | Buttons without accessible text | 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value | high |
-| **missing-label** | Form inputs without associated `<label>` | 1.3.1 Info and Relationships | high |
-| **no-keyboard-access** | Elements with `onclick` but not keyboard-accessible | 2.1.1 Keyboard | high |
-
-### Expanded Detection Categories (8 new in v18.14.0)
-
-| Issue Type | Description | WCAG Criterion | Severity |
-|------------|-------------|----------------|----------|
-| **contrast-violation** | Text with insufficient color contrast | 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) | high |
-| **missing-aria** | Elements with ARIA role missing required attributes | 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value | medium |
-| **duplicate-id** | Multiple elements sharing the same `id` attribute | 4.1.1 Parsing | medium |
-| **missing-page-title** | Document with empty or missing `<title>` | 2.4.2 Page Titled | low |
-| **missing-lang** | HTML element without `lang` attribute | 3.1.1 Language of Page | low |
-| **keyboard-trap** | Elements that trap keyboard focus | 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap | critical |
-| **autoplay-media** | Video/audio elements with `autoplay` | 1.4.2 Audio Control | medium |
-| **missing-skip-link** | Pages without skip-to-content navigation | 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks | low |
-
-## Severity Mapping
-
-| Severity | Impact | Action Required |
-|----------|--------|-----------------|
-| **critical** | Blocks users entirely | Fix immediately |
-| **high** | Significantly impairs accessibility | Fix before release |
-| **medium** | Creates friction for assistive tech users | Fix in next sprint |
-| **low** | Minor issue or best practice | Fix when convenient |
-
-## Example Output
-
-```json
-{
-  "url": "https://example.com",
-  "pagesScanned": 5,
-  "issuesFound": 23,
-  "categories": {
-    "missing-alt": 8,
-    "missing-label": 6,
-    "contrast-violation": 4,
-    "empty-link": 3,
-    "missing-skip-link": 2
-  },
-  "bySeverity": {
-    "high": 14,
-    "medium": 7,
-    "low": 2
-  },
-  "recommendations": [
-    "Add alt text to all 8 images",
-    "Associate labels with all form inputs",
-    "Improve contrast ratio on 4 text elements",
-    "Add skip-to-content link"
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-## Usage
-
-```bash
-# Scan homepage only
-npx cbrowser hunt-bugs https://example.com
-
-# Scan multiple pages
-npx cbrowser hunt-bugs https://example.com --max-pages 10
-
-# Output as JSON
-npx cbrowser hunt-bugs https://example.com --output report.json
-
-# Output as HTML
-npx cbrowser hunt-bugs https://example.com --html
-```
-
-## Known Test Sites
-
-For validating detection coverage, these sites have intentional accessibility issues:
-
-| Site | Purpose | Expected Issues |
-|------|---------|-----------------|
-| [a11y-challenges.com](https://a11y-challenges.com) | Intentionally broken for testing | Multiple categories |
-| [dequeuniversity.com/demo/mars](https://dequeuniversity.com/demo/mars) | Accessible example | Few/no issues |
-| [webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist](https://webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist) | WCAG reference | Minimal issues |
-
-## Comparison to Other Tools
-
-| Tool | Categories | Cognitive Persona Testing | Self-Healing |
-|------|------------|---------------------------|--------------|
-| **CBrowser hunt_bugs** | 14 | ✅ (via empathy_audit) | ✅ |
-| axe-core | 100+ | ❌ | ❌ |
-| Lighthouse A11y | ~40 | ❌ | ❌ |
-| WAVE | ~50 | ❌ | ❌ |
-
-CBrowser focuses on the most impactful issues while providing unique persona-based testing through `empathy_audit`. For comprehensive WCAG compliance, combine with axe-core.

package/docs/personas/Persona-ADHD.md

@@ -1,141 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[Cognitive ADHD User](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-ADHD)**
-
----
-
-# Cognitive ADHD User
-
-**Category**: Accessibility Personas
-**Description**: Users with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder experiencing challenges with sustained attention, working memory, and impulse control
-
-## Overview
-
-ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) is a neurodevelopmental condition affecting executive function, attention regulation, and impulse control. Users with ADHD experience the digital world differently - they may hyperfocus on engaging content while struggling to complete routine tasks, get distracted by notifications and visual clutter, and have difficulty with multi-step processes that tax working memory.
-
-ADHD users often possess significant strengths alongside their challenges. High curiosity and creativity can lead to innovative problem-solving. The ability to hyperfocus on interesting tasks can result in deep engagement. However, interfaces that don't account for ADHD patterns can create significant barriers through distraction, cognitive overload, and friction in task completion.
-
-Designing for ADHD benefits many users by reducing cognitive load, minimizing distractions, and creating clearer paths to task completion. The strategies that help ADHD users - clear structure, reduced clutter, engaging feedback, and forgiveness for errors - improve the experience for everyone.
-
-## Trait Profile
-
-All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
-
-### Core Traits (Tier 1)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| patience | 0.2 | Difficulty sustaining attention during delays; fidgeting and frustration with waiting |
-| riskTolerance | 0.7 | Impulsivity leads to action before full consideration of consequences |
-| comprehension | 0.6 | Capable when engaged; inconsistent when attention wanders |
-| persistence | 0.3 | Low for unengaging tasks; can hyperfocus on interesting challenges |
-| curiosity | 0.9 | High novelty-seeking; drawn to new and interesting content |
-| workingMemory | 0.3 | Significant challenge; difficulty holding multiple items in mind |
-| readingTendency | 0.2 | Skim or skip text; prefer visual and interactive content |
-
-### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| resilience | 0.4 | Emotional dysregulation common; frustration and discouragement |
-| selfEfficacy | 0.4 | May have experienced repeated failures; internalized self-doubt |
-| trustCalibration | 0.5 | Moderate; may act impulsively before evaluating trustworthiness |
-| interruptRecovery | 0.3 | Extremely difficult to resume after distraction; may abandon |
-
-### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| satisficing | 0.7 | Accept good-enough options to reduce decision fatigue |
-| informationForaging | 0.4 | Distractible; may go down tangential paths |
-| anchoringBias | 0.6 | First option favored due to decision fatigue avoidance |
-| timeHorizon | 0.3 | Strong preference for immediate rewards; difficulty with delayed gratification |
-| attributionStyle | 0.3 | May blame self; history of perceived failures |
-
-### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| metacognitivePlanning | 0.3 | Difficulty with planning and organization; reactive approach |
-| proceduralFluency | 0.4 | Inconsistent; routines help but are difficult to establish |
-| transferLearning | 0.5 | Variable; depends on engagement level |
-
-### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| changeBlindness | 0.6 | May miss changes when attention elsewhere; hyperfocus can cause tunnel vision |
-| mentalModelRigidity | 0.4 | Flexible thinking; sometimes too flexible (difficulty maintaining mental model) |
-
-### Social Traits (Tier 6)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| authoritySensitivity | 0.4 | May question or ignore authority recommendations impulsively |
-| emotionalContagion | 0.6 | Heightened emotional sensitivity |
-| fomo | 0.7 | Fear of missing out drives engagement with notifications, new features |
-| socialProofSensitivity | 0.5 | Moderate influence; depends on current focus |
-
-## Behavioral Patterns
-
-### Navigation
-ADHD users navigate impulsively, clicking interesting links before completing current tasks. They benefit from clear visual hierarchy that guides attention. They may open multiple tabs and lose track of original goal. Progress indicators and clear next steps help maintain task focus.
-
-### Decision Making
-Decisions are often quick and impulsive. Choice overload causes decision paralysis or random selection. Reducing options and highlighting recommended choices helps. Immediate feedback on decisions maintains engagement.
-
-### Error Recovery
-Errors are particularly frustrating and may cause abandonment. Clear, non-judgmental error messages are essential. Easy undo capabilities reduce consequences of impulsive actions. Autosave prevents loss of work during distraction.
-
-### Abandonment Triggers
-- Lengthy forms without progress saving
-- Walls of text
-- Visual clutter and competing attention demands
-- Slow loading without engaging feedback
-- Multi-step processes requiring memory of previous steps
-- Punitive error handling
-- Boring or unstimulating interfaces
-- Too many choices
-
-## UX Recommendations
-
-| Challenge | Recommendation |
-|-----------|----------------|
-| Low working memory | Progress indicators; save state frequently; reduce memory requirements |
-| Distractibility | Minimize visual clutter; clear focal points; hide non-essential elements |
-| Impulsivity | Gentle confirmation for important actions; easy undo; forgiving design |
-| Low persistence | Quick wins early; gamification elements; break tasks into small steps |
-| Reading difficulty | Scannable content; bullet points; visual communication |
-| Time blindness | Clear time estimates; progress indicators; gentle reminders |
-| Decision fatigue | Reduce choices; smart defaults; recommended options |
-
-## Research Basis
-
-- Barkley, R.A. (2015). Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Handbook - Executive function deficits
-- Hallowell, E.M. & Ratey, J.J. (2011). Driven to Distraction - ADHD experience and coping
-- Ramsay, J.R. (2017). Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adult ADHD - Working memory and attention
-- Understood.org research on ADHD and technology use
-- Brown, T.E. (2013). A New Understanding of ADHD - Executive function model
-
-## Usage
-
-```typescript
-await cognitive_journey_init({
-  persona: "cognitive-adhd",
-  goal: "complete checkout",
-  startUrl: "https://example.com"
-});
-```
-
-```bash
-npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona cognitive-adhd --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
-```
-
-## See Also
-
-- [Persona Index](./Persona-Index.md)
-- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index.md)
-- [Working Memory](../traits/Trait-WorkingMemory.md)
-- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
-- [Curiosity](../traits/Trait-Curiosity.md)
-- [FOMO](../traits/Trait-FOMO.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-ElderlyUser.md

@@ -1,137 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[Elderly User](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-ElderlyUser)**
-
----
-
-# Elderly User
-
-**Category**: General Users
-**Description**: Users aged 65+ who may have age-related cognitive and perceptual changes affecting their digital interactions
-
-## Overview
-
-Elderly users represent a growing and often underserved segment of the digital population. As digital literacy spreads across generations, more seniors are engaging with technology for essential tasks like healthcare management, financial services, and social connection. This persona captures the common challenges and strengths of older users.
-
-Age-related changes can affect multiple cognitive domains relevant to interface use. Working memory capacity typically decreases, making complex multi-step procedures more challenging. Processing speed slows, requiring more time for decision-making. However, crystallized intelligence and accumulated wisdom often compensate, allowing older users to make thoughtful decisions and persist through challenges that would frustrate younger users.
-
-Elderly users often bring patience and careful attention that younger users lack. They read content more thoroughly, consider options more carefully, and are less likely to make impulsive errors. Designing for this persona benefits all users through clearer interfaces, better error handling, and reduced cognitive load.
-
-## Trait Profile
-
-All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
-
-### Core Traits (Tier 1)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| patience | 0.8 | Research shows older adults allocate more time to tasks and are less frustrated by reasonable delays |
-| riskTolerance | 0.2 | Strong preference for caution; fear of making irreversible mistakes or being scammed |
-| comprehension | 0.5 | Crystallized intelligence intact; processing of novel interfaces may be slower |
-| persistence | 0.6 | Will continue trying but may seek help earlier than younger users |
-| curiosity | 0.4 | More goal-focused than exploration-oriented; prefer familiar patterns |
-| workingMemory | 0.4 | Age-related decline in working memory capacity is well-documented |
-| readingTendency | 0.8 | Read thoroughly; prefer complete understanding before acting |
-
-### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| resilience | 0.5 | May become discouraged by repeated failures but have life experience with overcoming challenges |
-| selfEfficacy | 0.4 | Often underestimate their abilities with technology due to stereotype threat |
-| trustCalibration | 0.5 | Mix of appropriate caution and sometimes excessive trust in official-looking content |
-| interruptRecovery | 0.4 | Reduced working memory makes context recovery after interruptions more difficult |
-
-### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| satisficing | 0.6 | Accept good-enough solutions; not driven to find optimal choices |
-| informationForaging | 0.5 | Thorough but may be slower to recognize information scent |
-| anchoringBias | 0.7 | Preferences shaped by earlier technology experiences; may expect older patterns |
-| timeHorizon | 0.5 | Balanced perspective; neither overly focused on immediate nor distant outcomes |
-| attributionStyle | 0.5 | Balanced attribution; experience provides perspective on system vs user responsibility |
-
-### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| metacognitivePlanning | 0.5 | Good planning abilities but may not apply them to unfamiliar technology contexts |
-| proceduralFluency | 0.4 | Slower development of procedural skills with new interfaces |
-| transferLearning | 0.5 | Can transfer knowledge but may be slower to recognize applicable patterns |
-
-### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| changeBlindness | 0.6 | May miss subtle interface changes; attention resources more limited |
-| mentalModelRigidity | 0.7 | Expect interfaces to work like familiar systems; resistant to paradigm shifts |
-
-### Social Traits (Tier 6)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| authoritySensitivity | 0.7 | Respect institutional authority; may trust official-looking interfaces too readily |
-| emotionalContagion | 0.5 | Moderate influence from emotional tone of content |
-| fomo | 0.3 | Less driven by fear of missing out; focused on personal needs |
-| socialProofSensitivity | 0.5 | Influenced by trusted sources but less by general popularity |
-
-## Behavioral Patterns
-
-### Navigation
-Elderly users prefer clear, consistent navigation with obvious labels. They favor linear flows over complex hierarchies. Scrolling may be preferred over clicking through multiple pages. Font size and contrast significantly impact navigation success. Hover states should persist longer and touch targets should be generous.
-
-### Decision Making
-Decisions are careful and deliberate. Elderly users read all options before choosing and prefer fewer, clearer choices over extensive options. They value explanations of consequences and appreciate time to consider without pressure.
-
-### Error Recovery
-Errors can be particularly distressing, especially if they fear making the situation worse. Clear, calm error messages are essential. Explicit recovery steps with no assumptions about user knowledge work best. Phone support or chat may be preferred for complex issues.
-
-### Abandonment Triggers
-- Small text or low contrast
-- Time-limited interactions
-- Unclear or jargon-heavy instructions
-- Fear of making irreversible mistakes
-- No obvious way to get help
-- Security warnings that seem threatening
-
-## UX Recommendations
-
-| Challenge | Recommendation |
-|-----------|----------------|
-| Reduced working memory | Minimize steps; show progress; provide external memory aids |
-| Processing speed | Allow ample time; avoid timeouts; show loading states |
-| Cautious behavior | Explicit undo; preview actions; confirmation without being patronizing |
-| Vision changes | Large text options; high contrast; avoid reliance on color alone |
-| Motor control changes | Large click targets; forgive imprecise clicks; avoid hover-dependent interactions |
-| Technology self-efficacy | Encouraging feedback; celebrate successes; normalize difficulty |
-
-## Research Basis
-
-- Czaja, S.J. & Lee, C.C. (2007). Information Technology and Older Adults - Comprehensive review of age-related changes
-- Hawthorn, D. (2000). Possible implications of aging for interface designers - Specific design recommendations
-- Pak, R. & McLaughlin, A. (2010). Designing Displays for Older Adults - Evidence-based guidelines
-- Fisk, A.D. et al. (2009). Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches
-- AARP/MIT AgeLab research on digital experiences for older adults
-
-## Usage
-
-```typescript
-await cognitive_journey_init({
-  persona: "elderly-user",
-  goal: "complete checkout",
-  startUrl: "https://example.com"
-});
-```
-
-```bash
-npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona elderly-user --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
-```
-
-## See Also
-
-- [Persona Index](./Persona-Index.md)
-- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index.md)
-- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
-- [Working Memory](../traits/Trait-WorkingMemory.md)
-- [Reading Tendency](../traits/Trait-ReadingTendency.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-FirstTimer.md

@@ -1,137 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[First-Timer](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-FirstTimer)**
-
----
-
-# First-Timer
-
-**Category**: General Users
-**Description**: Users encountering an application or interface type for the first time, characterized by high curiosity but limited domain knowledge
-
-## Overview
-
-First-timers represent users who have no prior experience with a specific application, service, or interface paradigm. They approach new experiences with fresh eyes and open minds, but lack the contextual knowledge that experienced users take for granted. This persona is crucial for testing onboarding flows and initial user experiences.
-
-First-timers typically exhibit high curiosity and motivation to learn, combined with uncertainty about conventions and expectations. They read more carefully than experienced users, seeking to understand the rules of the new environment. Their mental models are still forming, making them particularly sensitive to confusing information architecture or inconsistent design patterns.
-
-The first-timer experience is decisive for long-term retention. Research shows that frustration during initial interactions is a primary driver of early abandonment. However, first-timers who successfully navigate onboarding often become loyal users. Designing for this persona requires balancing guidance with respect for user intelligence.
-
-## Trait Profile
-
-All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
-
-### Core Traits (Tier 1)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| patience | 0.7 | Willing to invest time learning new systems; expect some initial friction |
-| riskTolerance | 0.3 | Hesitant to click unfamiliar buttons or commit to actions with unclear consequences |
-| comprehension | 0.3 | Limited domain knowledge means slower processing of jargon and conventions |
-| persistence | 0.5 | Will try multiple times but have lower frustration threshold than experienced users |
-| curiosity | 0.9 | High intrinsic motivation to explore and understand the new environment |
-| workingMemory | 0.5 | Average capacity, but heavily taxed by unfamiliar terminology and concepts |
-| readingTendency | 0.6 | Read more carefully than average; actively seek understanding |
-
-### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| resilience | 0.4 | Vulnerable to discouragement; initial failures feel more significant |
-| selfEfficacy | 0.4 | Uncertainty about ability to succeed in unfamiliar environment |
-| trustCalibration | 0.5 | Neither overly trusting nor skeptical; forming initial impressions |
-| interruptRecovery | 0.4 | Struggle to recover context after interruptions; mental models still forming |
-
-### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| satisficing | 0.6 | Accept reasonable options rather than optimizing; unsure what "best" means here |
-| informationForaging | 0.4 | Inefficient information seeking; don't know where to look |
-| anchoringBias | 0.7 | First impressions heavily influence subsequent expectations and interpretations |
-| timeHorizon | 0.4 | Focus on immediate task completion; not yet thinking about long-term usage |
-| attributionStyle | 0.4 | Tend to blame self for difficulties rather than recognizing system issues |
-
-### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| metacognitivePlanning | 0.3 | Limited ability to strategize in unfamiliar domain; reactive approach |
-| proceduralFluency | 0.2 | No automated procedures; every action requires conscious effort |
-| transferLearning | 0.5 | Can apply general web conventions but may miss domain-specific patterns |
-
-### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| changeBlindness | 0.6 | May miss important updates; still learning where to look |
-| mentalModelRigidity | 0.3 | Mental models are flexible because they're still forming |
-
-### Social Traits (Tier 6)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| authoritySensitivity | 0.7 | Look to interface guidance and authority signals for direction |
-| emotionalContagion | 0.6 | Influenced by perceived emotional tone of interface and help content |
-| fomo | 0.5 | Moderate concern about missing features; still discovering what's possible |
-| socialProofSensitivity | 0.7 | Look for evidence that others use and value the service |
-
-## Behavioral Patterns
-
-### Navigation
-First-timers rely heavily on obvious navigation elements and follow the happy path. They avoid shortcuts and advanced features, preferring clearly labeled buttons. Back button usage is common as they explore and backtrack. They appreciate breadcrumbs and clear indication of current location.
-
-### Decision Making
-Decisions are cautious and deliberate. First-timers seek confirmation before committing to actions and carefully read button labels and warnings. They prefer explicit choices over implicit defaults and appreciate explanations of why options matter.
-
-### Error Recovery
-Errors are distressing and may prompt abandonment. First-timers need clear, non-blaming error messages with specific remediation steps. They often need help distinguishing between recoverable and serious errors.
-
-### Abandonment Triggers
-- Jargon-heavy content without explanations
-- Required account creation before value is demonstrated
-- Unclear next steps or missing call-to-action
-- Errors without clear recovery path
-- Overwhelming options without guidance
-- Feeling judged or embarrassed
-
-## UX Recommendations
-
-| Challenge | Recommendation |
-|-----------|----------------|
-| Limited domain knowledge | Provide contextual help and tooltips; explain jargon on first use |
-| Hesitation about commitments | Clear undo capabilities; preview of action consequences |
-| Forming initial impressions | Invest heavily in first-time UX; quick wins build confidence |
-| Self-blame for failures | Non-judgmental error messages; emphasize system responsibility |
-| Seeking validation | Show social proof; testimonials; user counts; success stories |
-| Navigation uncertainty | Strong wayfinding; breadcrumbs; clear current-location indicators |
-
-## Research Basis
-
-- Carroll, J.M. & Rosson, M.B. (1987). Paradox of the Active User - Why users don't read
-- Krug, S. (2014). Don't Make Me Think - First-time user navigation patterns
-- Kim, J. et al. (2016). First-time user retention research at Dropbox
-- Saffer, D. (2010). Designing for Interaction - Onboarding principles
-- Garrett, J.J. (2011). Elements of User Experience - User learning curves
-
-## Usage
-
-```typescript
-await cognitive_journey_init({
-  persona: "first-timer",
-  goal: "complete checkout",
-  startUrl: "https://example.com"
-});
-```
-
-```bash
-npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona first-timer --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
-```
-
-## See Also
-
-- [Persona Index](./Persona-Index.md)
-- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index.md)
-- [Curiosity](../traits/Trait-Curiosity.md)
-- [Comprehension](../traits/Trait-Comprehension.md)
-- [Risk Tolerance](../traits/Trait-RiskTolerance.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-ImpatientUser.md

@@ -1,138 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[Impatient User](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-ImpatientUser)**
-
----
-
-# Impatient User
-
-**Category**: General Users
-**Description**: Users characterized by extremely low tolerance for delays, friction, or obstacles in completing their goals
-
-## Overview
-
-Impatient users represent an extreme end of the user behavior spectrum where time sensitivity dominates all other considerations. While all users value their time, impatient users have an outsized reaction to perceived delays or obstacles. This persona is valuable for identifying friction points that may cause abandonment across your entire user base.
-
-Impatient users may be experiencing situational time pressure (rushing to complete a task) or may have personality traits that predispose them to low frustration tolerance. Regardless of cause, their behavior is characterized by rapid scanning, minimal reading, quick abandonment of unclear paths, and strong preference for the most direct route to goal completion.
-
-This persona serves as a "canary in the coal mine" for UX issues. Problems that cause impatient users to abandon will also create friction for other users, even if they persist. Optimizing for this persona often improves conversion and satisfaction across the board.
-
-## Trait Profile
-
-All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
-
-### Core Traits (Tier 1)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| patience | 0.1 | Defining characteristic; extremely low tolerance for any perceived delay |
-| riskTolerance | 0.6 | Willing to take shortcuts and skip safety measures to save time |
-| comprehension | 0.6 | Capable of understanding but unwilling to invest time in reading |
-| persistence | 0.2 | Extremely quick to abandon; try alternatives rather than persist |
-| curiosity | 0.3 | No interest in exploration; purely goal-focused |
-| workingMemory | 0.6 | Adequate capacity but impatience prevents full utilization |
-| readingTendency | 0.1 | Minimal reading; scan for actionable elements only |
-
-### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| resilience | 0.3 | Low tolerance for setbacks; frustration escalates quickly |
-| selfEfficacy | 0.6 | Confident but attributes delays to system rather than self |
-| trustCalibration | 0.4 | May proceed despite warnings to save time |
-| interruptRecovery | 0.5 | Moderate; interruptions are frustrating but may welcome escape from slow process |
-
-### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| satisficing | 0.9 | Accept first available option; no comparison shopping |
-| informationForaging | 0.4 | Brief scans; abandon quickly if information not obvious |
-| anchoringBias | 0.6 | First option heavily favored due to reluctance to explore |
-| timeHorizon | 0.2 | Extreme focus on immediate completion; future consequences ignored |
-| attributionStyle | 0.3 | Blame system for any delays; low self-attribution |
-
-### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| metacognitivePlanning | 0.3 | Action-oriented; minimal planning |
-| proceduralFluency | 0.6 | Expect common patterns; frustrated by novel interactions |
-| transferLearning | 0.5 | Apply familiar patterns but won't invest in learning new ones |
-
-### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| changeBlindness | 0.7 | Miss changes while focused on finding CTAs |
-| mentalModelRigidity | 0.6 | Expect things to work in familiar ways |
-
-### Social Traits (Tier 6)
-
-| Trait | Value | Rationale |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| authoritySensitivity | 0.4 | Ignore recommendations that slow progress |
-| emotionalContagion | 0.4 | Moderate; frustration internally driven |
-| fomo | 0.8 | High urgency; feel they're wasting time on current task |
-| socialProofSensitivity | 0.4 | Ignore reviews if they require reading |
-
-## Behavioral Patterns
-
-### Navigation
-Impatient users click rapidly, often before pages fully load. They favor search over navigation when available. Multi-step processes are abandoned if not clearly necessary. They use browser back button aggressively and may open multiple tabs to hedge bets.
-
-### Decision Making
-First visible option is selected unless obviously wrong. No comparison of alternatives. Defaults are accepted without consideration. Any friction at decision point causes abandonment.
-
-### Error Recovery
-Errors cause immediate frustration and often abandonment. Retry only if instant; otherwise seek alternatives (competitors, phone support, abandon entirely). Error messages are barely read.
-
-### Abandonment Triggers
-- Any delay over 2 seconds
-- Required reading of more than 2 sentences
-- Multi-step processes without clear progress
-- Required account creation
-- Captchas or verification steps
-- Unclear next action
-- Any modal or interstitial
-
-## UX Recommendations
-
-| Challenge | Recommendation |
-|-----------|----------------|
-| Extreme impatience | Sub-second interactions; skeleton loading; optimistic updates |
-| No reading | Single-word CTAs; icon-based communication; visual hierarchy |
-| Quick abandonment | One-click paths; guest checkout; express options |
-| Shortcut-seeking | Provide the shortcuts; don't force thoroughness |
-| Error intolerance | Prevent errors through smart defaults; instant inline validation |
-| First-option bias | Ensure first option is genuinely good; don't bury best options |
-
-## Research Basis
-
-- Nielsen, J. (1993). Response Times: 3 Important Limits - Sub-second expectations
-- Galletta, D. et al. (2006). Impact of delay on web user interaction and abandonment
-- Akamai (2017). Page load time impact on conversion rates
-- Perfetti, C. & Landesman, L. (2001). Eight principles of user frustration - UIE research
-- Kohavi, R. et al. (2014). Online experimentation at Microsoft - Latency impact studies
-
-## Usage
-
-```typescript
-await cognitive_journey_init({
-  persona: "impatient-user",
-  goal: "complete checkout",
-  startUrl: "https://example.com"
-});
-```
-
-```bash
-npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona impatient-user --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
-```
-
-## See Also
-
-- [Persona Index](./Persona-Index.md)
-- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index.md)
-- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
-- [FOMO](../traits/Trait-FOMO.md)
-- [Persistence](../traits/Trait-Persistence.md)