cbrowser 18.62.0 → 18.63.1

package/docs/METHODOLOGY.md

@@ -1,276 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[CBrowser Scoring Methodology & Research Sources](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/METHODOLOGY)**
-
----
-
-# CBrowser Scoring Methodology & Research Sources
-
-CBrowser's analysis features use **heuristic estimates** calibrated against published UX and accessibility research. This document explains our methodology, sources, and limitations.
-
----
-
-## Important Disclaimers
-
-> **Letter grades, not percentages.** We use letter grades (A-F) instead of percentage scores to avoid implying false precision. These are directional indicators, not measurements.
-
-> **Heuristic estimates, not predictions.** Scores indicate relative comparison value, not actual user behavior predictions.
-
-> **Not a substitute for real testing.** For accessibility, combine with automated WCAG checkers and user testing with people who have disabilities.
-
----
-
-## Research Sources & Bibliography
-
-### Page Load & Abandonment
-
-| Metric | Threshold | Source |
-|--------|-----------|--------|
-| Mobile abandonment at 3s load | 53% | Google/SOASTA "The State of Online Retail Performance" (2017)¹ |
-| Abandonment increase per second | +7% | Akamai "State of Online Retail Performance" (2017)² |
-
-¹ *Google/SOASTA. "The State of Online Retail Performance." 2017. https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/marketing-resources/data-measurement/mobile-page-speed-new-industry-benchmarks/*
-
-² *Akamai. "Akamai Online Retail Performance Report: Milliseconds Are Critical." 2017.*
-
-### Form Complexity & Cognitive Load
-
-| Metric | Threshold | Source |
-|--------|-----------|--------|
-| Optimal form field count | 7-8 fields | Baymard Institute "Checkout Usability" (2024)³ |
-| Average e-commerce checkout fields | 23 fields | Baymard Institute (2024)³ |
-| Abandonment with too many steps | 67% | Baymard Institute Cart Abandonment Research⁴ |
-
-³ *Baymard Institute. "The Current State of Checkout UX." 2024. https://baymard.com/checkout-usability*
-
-⁴ *Baymard Institute. "49 Cart Abandonment Rate Statistics." https://baymard.com/lists/cart-abandonment-rate*
-
-### Frustration Detection
-
-| Metric | Definition | Source |
-|--------|------------|--------|
-| Rage click | 3+ clicks in 1-2 seconds | FullStory Rage Click definition⁵ |
-| Average rage gesture rate | 6.5% of sessions | FullStory research (2023)⁵ |
-| Dead click rate average | 8.1% of sessions | FullStory Digital Experience Benchmark (2023)⁵ |
-
-⁵ *FullStory. "The Complete Guide to Rage Clicks." 2023. https://www.fullstory.com/blog/rage-clicks/*
-
-### Usability Severity Scale
-
-We calibrate severity levels to Nielsen's usability severity scale:
-
-| Level | Nielsen Definition | CBrowser Mapping |
-|-------|-------------------|------------------|
-| 0 | Not a usability problem | (not flagged) |
-| 1 | Cosmetic problem | Low severity |
-| 2 | Minor usability problem | Medium severity |
-| 3 | Major usability problem | High severity |
-| 4 | Usability catastrophe | Critical severity |
-
-⁶ *Nielsen, Jakob. "Severity Ratings for Usability Problems." Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-to-rate-the-severity-of-usability-problems/*
-
-### Accessibility (WCAG)
-
-| Metric | Threshold | Source |
-|--------|-----------|--------|
-| Sites with WCAG failures | 94.8% | WebAIM Million (2024)⁷ |
-| Screen reader task completion | 55.6% | WebAIM Screen Reader User Survey (2024)⁸ |
-| Touch target minimum | 44x44px | WCAG 2.5.5 (AAA) / 2.5.8 (AA)⁹ |
-| Contrast ratio (normal text) | 4.5:1 | WCAG 1.4.3 (AA)⁹ |
-| Contrast ratio (large text) | 3:1 | WCAG 1.4.3 (AA)⁹ |
-
-⁷ *WebAIM. "The WebAIM Million." 2024. https://webaim.org/projects/million/*
-
-⁸ *WebAIM. "Screen Reader User Survey #10." 2024. https://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey10/*
-
-⁹ *W3C. "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1." https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/*
-
-### Focus Hierarchies & Attention Patterns (v9.0.0)
-
-| Pattern | Description | Source |
-|---------|-------------|--------|
-| F-pattern scanning | Users scan top horizontally, then left side vertically | Nielsen Norman Group¹⁰ |
-| Banner blindness | Users ignore banner-like elements (~90% ignore rate) | Nielsen Norman Group¹¹ |
-| Search usage | ~30% of users prefer search as first action | Nielsen Norman Group¹² |
-| Miller's Law | Users can hold 7±2 items in working memory | Miller (1956)¹³ |
-
-**Distraction Ignore Rates (Heuristic Estimates)**
-
-| Element Type | Ignore Rate | Rationale |
-|--------------|-------------|-----------|
-| Cookie banners | 85% | Cookie consent fatigue |
-| Newsletter popups | 90% | Subscription blindness |
-| Chat widgets | 80% | Help widget blindness (unless stuck) |
-| Social share buttons | 80% | Social widget blindness |
-| Promotional banners | 85% | Ad blindness generalization |
-
-*These ignore rates are heuristic estimates based on banner blindness research patterns, not precise measurements.*
-
-**Focus Area Priorities (by Task Type)**
-
-| Task Type | Primary Focus Areas | Secondary Focus Areas |
-|-----------|---------------------|----------------------|
-| find_information | Headings (95%), Navigation (85%), Search (75%) | Content (70%), CTAs (50%) |
-| complete_action | CTAs (95%), Forms (90%), Navigation (80%) | Headings (60%), Content (50%) |
-| explore | Hero (85%), Headings (80%), Navigation (75%) | Content (70%), Images (60%) |
-| compare | Content (90%), Headings (85%), Navigation (70%) | CTAs (60%), Images (50%) |
-| troubleshoot | Search (90%), Navigation (85%), Content (80%) | Headings (75%), Forms (60%) |
-
-*Priority percentages are heuristic weights for simulation, derived from eye-tracking research patterns.*
-
-¹⁰ *Nielsen, Jakob. "F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content." Nielsen Norman Group. 2006. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/*
-
-¹¹ *Nielsen, Jakob. "Banner Blindness: Old and New Findings." Nielsen Norman Group. 2007. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/banner-blindness-old-and-new-findings/*
-
-¹² *Nielsen, Jakob. "Search: Visible and Simple." Nielsen Norman Group. 2001. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/search-visible-and-simple/*
-
-¹³ *Miller, George A. "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two." Psychological Review. 1956.*
-
----
-
-## Scoring Algorithms
-
-### Competitive UX Benchmark
-
-**Abandonment Risk Grade**
-
-Grades based on accumulated friction, mapped to research thresholds:
-
-| Grade | Risk Level | Interpretation |
-|-------|------------|----------------|
-| A | ≤15% | Very low abandonment risk |
-| B | ≤30% | Low risk |
-| C | ≤50% | Moderate risk (typical) |
-| D | ≤70% | High risk |
-| F | >70% | Very high risk |
-
-*Formula:*
-```
-Risk = (100 - patience) × 0.4 + frustration × 0.3 + confusion × 0.3
-```
-
-Weights are heuristic, not derived from specific studies. The formula is designed to weight patience depletion most heavily, as research shows patience exhaustion correlates strongly with abandonment.
-
-### Agent-Ready Audit
-
-**Severity Penalties**
-
-| Severity | Points Deducted | Rationale |
-|----------|-----------------|-----------|
-| Critical | 25 | ~Nielsen Level 4: blocks task completion |
-| High | 15 | ~Nielsen Level 3: major obstacle |
-| Medium | 8 | ~Nielsen Level 2: minor problem |
-| Low | 3 | ~Nielsen Level 1: cosmetic issue |
-
-**Category Weights**
-
-| Category | Weight | Rationale |
-|----------|--------|-----------|
-| Findability | 35% | Most critical for AI agents |
-| Stability | 30% | Selector reliability |
-| Accessibility | 20% | ARIA provides semantic context |
-| Semantics | 15% | HTML structure aids parsing |
-
-*These weights are heuristic estimates based on typical AI agent interaction patterns, not derived from specific studies.*
-
-### Accessibility Empathy Audit
-
-**Barrier Severity Deductions**
-
-| Severity | Points | Rationale |
-|----------|--------|-----------|
-| Critical | 20 | Blocks task for affected users |
-| Major | 10 | Significant difficulty |
-| Minor | 3 | Noticeable but manageable |
-
-**Empathy Grade Thresholds**
-
-| Grade | Score Range |
-|-------|-------------|
-| A | ≥80 |
-| B | ≥65 |
-| C | ≥50 |
-| D | ≥35 |
-| F | <35 |
-
----
-
-## Limitations
-
-### What These Scores Are
-
-- **Directional indicators** for comparing options
-- **Heuristic flags** for potential issues
-- **Starting points** for investigation
-
-### What These Scores Are NOT
-
-- **Predictions** of actual user behavior
-- **Guarantees** of accessibility compliance
-- **Substitutes** for real user testing
-- **Precise measurements** (hence letter grades)
-
-### Recommended Complementary Testing
-
-For comprehensive validation, combine CBrowser analysis with:
-
-1. **Automated WCAG testing:** axe-core, WAVE, Lighthouse
-2. **Manual accessibility review:** Keyboard navigation, screen reader testing
-3. **User testing:** With actual users who have disabilities
-4. **Analytics:** Real user monitoring, session replay analysis
-5. **A/B testing:** For conversion-critical flows
-
----
-
-## Cognitive Trait Research (v11.5.0)
-
-Four research-backed cognitive traits for realistic user simulation:
-
-| Trait | Research Basis | Key Finding |
-|-------|---------------|-------------|
-| **selfEfficacy** | Bandura (1977) | Low efficacy users abandon 40% faster on first error |
-| **satisficing** | Simon (1956) | Satisficers decide 50% faster with similar outcomes |
-| **trustCalibration** | Fogg (2003) | Trust affects CTA click-through by up to 40% |
-| **interruptRecovery** | Mark et al. (2005) | Average recovery time is 23 minutes |
-
-### Research Citations
-
-¹⁴ *Bandura, A. "Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change." Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. 1977.*
-
-¹⁵ *Simon, H. A. "Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment." Psychological Review, 63(2), 129-138. 1956.*
-
-¹⁶ *Fogg, B. J. "Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do." Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. 2003.*
-
-¹⁷ *Mark, G., Gonzalez, V. M., & Harris, J. "No Task Left Behind? Examining the Nature of Fragmented Work." CHI 2005.*
-
----
-
-## Changelog
-
-| Version | Date | Changes |
-|---------|------|---------|
-| 11.5.0 | 2026-02-07 | Added 4 cognitive trait research citations |
-| | | Added selfEfficacy, satisficing, trustCalibration, interruptRecovery |
-| 9.0.0 | 2026-02-06 | Added Focus Hierarchies research section |
-| | | Added distraction ignore rate heuristics |
-| | | Added focus area priorities by task type |
-| | | Added Miller's Law and attention pattern citations |
-| 8.0.0 | 2026-02-06 | Initial methodology documentation |
-| | | Added letter grades to avoid false precision |
-| | | Added research bibliography with citations |
-| | | Added disclaimers to all report outputs |
-
----
-
-## Contributing
-
-If you find additional research that could improve our calibration, please open an issue or PR with:
-
-1. The metric being updated
-2. The new threshold/value
-3. Citation to peer-reviewed or industry-recognized research
-4. Explanation of methodology
-
----
-
-*Generated by CBrowser v9.0.0*

package/docs/PERSONA-QUESTIONNAIRE.md

@@ -1,328 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[Persona Questionnaire System](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/PERSONA-QUESTIONNAIRE)**
-
----
-
-# Persona Questionnaire System
-
-**Introduced in v16.6.0**
-
-The Persona Questionnaire system provides research-backed trait mapping for creating custom cognitive personas. Instead of defaulting traits to 0.5 (neutral baseline), this system uses behavioral questions to derive differentiated trait profiles.
-
-## The Problem
-
-When creating custom personas, AI-generated profiles often defaulted many traits to 0.5. This creates "average" personas that don't accurately represent real user diversity.
-
-## The Solution
-
-The questionnaire system:
-1. Maps behavioral answers to trait values (0-1 scale)
-2. Uses 5 distinct behavioral levels per trait (0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0)
-3. Applies research-backed correlations between traits
-4. Provides behavioral descriptions based on academic research
-
-## Quick Start
-
-### CLI Usage
-
-```bash
-# Interactive 8-question questionnaire
-npx cbrowser persona-questionnaire start
-
-# Comprehensive 25-trait questionnaire
-npx cbrowser persona-questionnaire start --comprehensive --name "my-persona"
-
-# Look up trait behavior at specific value
-npx cbrowser persona-questionnaire lookup --trait patience --value 0.25
-
-# List all available traits
-npx cbrowser persona-questionnaire list-traits
-```
-
-### Programmatic Usage
-
-```typescript
-import {
-  generatePersonaQuestionnaire,
-  buildTraitsFromAnswers,
-  getTraitBehaviors,
-  getTraitLabel,
-} from 'cbrowser';
-
-// Generate questionnaire
-const questionnaire = generatePersonaQuestionnaire({ comprehensive: false });
-
-// Build traits from answers
-const traits = buildTraitsFromAnswers({
-  patience: 0.25,
-  riskTolerance: 0.75,
-  curiosity: 1.0,
-});
-
-// Look up specific trait behavior
-const behaviors = getTraitBehaviors('patience', 0.25);
-console.log(behaviors.label);       // "Low"
-console.log(behaviors.behaviors);   // ["Gets frustrated quickly", ...]
-```
-
-### MCP Tools
-
-Three MCP tools are available:
-
-| Tool | Description |
-|------|-------------|
-| `persona_questionnaire_get` | Generate questionnaire questions |
-| `persona_questionnaire_build` | Build trait profile from answers |
-| `persona_trait_lookup` | Look up behaviors for trait value |
-
-## The 25 Cognitive Traits
-
-| Trait | Research Basis | What It Models |
-|-------|---------------|----------------|
-| **patience** | UX research | Time before abandoning on friction |
-| **riskTolerance** | Prospect theory | Willingness to try unfamiliar actions |
-| **comprehension** | Cognitive load theory | UI pattern understanding |
-| **persistence** | Motivation research | Retry behavior after failures |
-| **curiosity** | Exploration theory | Feature discovery tendency |
-| **workingMemory** | Cognitive psychology | Multi-step task handling |
-| **readingTendency** | Eye-tracking studies | Text consumption behavior |
-| **resilience** | Positive psychology | Bounce-back from errors |
-| **selfEfficacy** | Bandura (1977) | Belief in problem-solving ability |
-| **satisficing** | Simon (1956) | Accept "good enough" vs optimize |
-| **trustCalibration** | Fogg (2003) | Trust in unfamiliar interfaces |
-| **interruptRecovery** | Mark et al. (2005) | Resume after distractions |
-| **decisionFatigue** | Baumeister | Decision quality over time |
-| **internalAttribution** | Attribution theory | Self-blame for failures |
-| **externalAttribution** | Attribution theory | System-blame for failures |
-| **techSavviness** | Digital literacy | Familiarity with UI patterns |
-| **attentionSpan** | Attention research | Focus duration |
-| **impulsivity** | Behavioral psychology | Quick vs deliberate actions |
-| **errorRecovery** | Human factors | Speed of correcting mistakes |
-| **visualProcessing** | Cognitive science | Image vs text preference |
-| **spatialMemory** | Navigation research | UI layout recall |
-| **patternRecognition** | Expertise research | UI element identification |
-| **riskPerception** | Risk psychology | Danger assessment |
-| **socialProof** | Cialdini (1984) | Influence of others' actions |
-| **authorityTrust** | Trust research | Trust in official sources |
-
-## Trait Reference Matrix
-
-Each trait has 5 behavioral levels with specific descriptions:
-
-### Example: Patience Trait
-
-| Value | Label | Behaviors |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| 0 | Very Low | Abandons at first sign of friction, expects instant results |
-| 0.25 | Low | Gets frustrated quickly, skips slow-loading content |
-| 0.5 | Moderate | Waits reasonable time, tolerates some friction |
-| 0.75 | High | Patient with delays, reads loading messages |
-| 1.0 | Very High | Extremely patient, waits through any delay |
-
-### Example: Self-Efficacy Trait
-
-| Value | Label | Behaviors |
-|-------|-------|-----------|
-| 0 | Very Low | "I can't do this", gives up immediately on challenge |
-| 0.25 | Low | Doubts ability, abandons 40% faster than average |
-| 0.5 | Moderate | Normal confidence, persists through minor challenges |
-| 0.75 | High | Confident problem-solver, sees obstacles as puzzles |
-| 1.0 | Very High | "I'll figure this out", never attributes failure to self |
-
-## Trait Correlations
-
-The system automatically applies research-backed correlations:
-
-| Primary Trait | Correlated Trait | Relationship |
-|---------------|------------------|--------------|
-| Low selfEfficacy | High internalAttribution | Self-blame for failures |
-| Low selfEfficacy | Low resilience | Slower bounce-back |
-| Low patience | Low resilience | Less tolerance for errors |
-| High curiosity | Higher exploration | More feature discovery |
-| Low trustCalibration | Longer evaluation time | Scrutinizes CTAs |
-
-## Questionnaire Formats
-
-### Quick Questionnaire (8 traits)
-
-Core traits for basic persona differentiation:
-- patience, riskTolerance, comprehension, persistence
-- curiosity, workingMemory, readingTendency, resilience
-
-### Comprehensive Questionnaire (25 traits)
-
-All cognitive traits for detailed behavioral modeling.
-
-### Custom Selection
-
-Request specific traits:
-
-```typescript
-const questionnaire = generatePersonaQuestionnaire({
-  traits: ['patience', 'selfEfficacy', 'trustCalibration'],
-});
-```
-
-## AskUserQuestion Integration
-
-For Claude sessions, use the `formatForAskUserQuestion` function:
-
-```typescript
-import { formatForAskUserQuestion, generatePersonaQuestionnaire } from 'cbrowser';
-
-const questionnaire = generatePersonaQuestionnaire({ comprehensive: false });
-const askUserFormat = formatForAskUserQuestion(questionnaire.questions);
-
-// Returns format compatible with Claude's AskUserQuestion tool:
-// {
-//   questions: [
-//     {
-//       question: "How does this user handle waiting?",
-//       header: "patience",
-//       options: [
-//         { label: "Very impatient", description: "Abandons at first delay" },
-//         ...
-//       ],
-//       multiSelect: false
-//     },
-//     ...
-//   ]
-// }
-```
-
-## CLI Interactive Mode
-
-The CLI provides an interactive questionnaire experience:
-
-```bash
-$ npx cbrowser persona-questionnaire start --name "anxious-newbie"
-
-=== CBrowser Persona Questionnaire ===
-Creating persona: anxious-newbie (8 core traits)
-
-[1/8] Patience
-How does this user handle waiting for pages or actions?
-  1. Very impatient - abandons at first delay
-  2. Somewhat impatient - frustrated by normal load times
-  3. Average - tolerates reasonable waits
-  4. Patient - waits through delays calmly
-  5. Very patient - unlimited patience
-> 2
-
-[2/8] Risk Tolerance
-How willing is this user to try unfamiliar features?
-...
-
-=== Persona Created ===
-Saved to: ~/.cbrowser/personas/anxious-newbie.json
-```
-
-## Using Custom Personas
-
-After creating a persona via questionnaire:
-
-```typescript
-import { runCognitiveJourney } from 'cbrowser';
-
-const result = await runCognitiveJourney({
-  persona: 'anxious-newbie',  // Uses saved persona
-  startUrl: 'https://example.com',
-  goal: 'complete signup',
-});
-```
-
-Or with inline traits:
-
-```typescript
-const customTraits = buildTraitsFromAnswers({
-  patience: 0.25,
-  selfEfficacy: 0.25,
-  trustCalibration: 0.25,
-});
-
-const result = await runCognitiveJourney({
-  persona: 'custom',
-  customTraits,
-  startUrl: 'https://example.com',
-  goal: 'complete signup',
-});
-```
-
-## Research Citations
-
-The trait system is grounded in academic research:
-
-- **Bandura, A. (1977)** - Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change
-- **Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A.** - Prospect Theory and Decision Making
-- **Simon, H. (1956)** - Satisficing and Administrative Behavior
-- **Fogg, B.J. (2003)** - Persuasive Technology and Trust
-- **Mark, G. et al. (2005)** - No Task Left Behind: Interrupt Recovery
-- **Baumeister, R.** - Ego Depletion and Decision Fatigue
-- **Nielsen, J.** - Usability Engineering and User Behavior
-- **Cialdini, R. (1984)** - Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
-
-## API Reference
-
-### generatePersonaQuestionnaire(options)
-
-Generate questionnaire questions.
-
-```typescript
-interface QuestionnaireOptions {
-  comprehensive?: boolean;     // All 25 traits (default: false = 8 traits)
-  traits?: string[];           // Specific traits to include
-  includeResearch?: boolean;   // Include research citations
-}
-
-const questionnaire = generatePersonaQuestionnaire(options);
-// Returns: { questions: Question[], estimatedMinutes: number }
-```
-
-### buildTraitsFromAnswers(answers)
-
-Build complete trait profile from questionnaire answers.
-
-```typescript
-const traits = buildTraitsFromAnswers({
-  patience: 0.25,
-  curiosity: 0.75,
-});
-// Returns: CognitiveTraits with correlations applied
-```
-
-### getTraitBehaviors(trait, value)
-
-Get behavioral description for a trait value.
-
-```typescript
-const behaviors = getTraitBehaviors('patience', 0.25);
-// Returns: { label: string, description: string, behaviors: string[] }
-```
-
-### getTraitLabel(trait, value)
-
-Get short label for trait value.
-
-```typescript
-const label = getTraitLabel('patience', 0.25);
-// Returns: "Low"
-```
-
-### getTraitReference(trait)
-
-Get full research reference for a trait.
-
-```typescript
-const ref = getTraitReference('selfEfficacy');
-// Returns: { researchBasis: string, citations: string[], levels: Level[] }
-```
-
-### formatForAskUserQuestion(questions)
-
-Format questions for Claude's AskUserQuestion tool.
-
-```typescript
-const formatted = formatForAskUserQuestion(questions);
-// Returns: { questions: AskUserQuestion[] }
-```

package/docs/README.md

@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
-> **This documentation is no longer maintained here.**
->
-> For the latest version, please visit: **[CBrowser Documentation](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/README)**
-
----
-
-# CBrowser Documentation
-
-**Full documentation has moved to: [https://cbrowser.ai/docs](https://cbrowser.ai/docs)**
-
----
-
-## Quick Links
-
-| Resource | URL |
-|----------|-----|
-| **Documentation Home** | [cbrowser.ai/docs](https://cbrowser.ai/docs) |
-| **Getting Started** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/Getting-Started](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Getting-Started) |
-| **CLI Reference** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/CLI-Reference](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/CLI-Reference) |
-| **API Reference** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/API-Reference](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/API-Reference) |
-| **MCP Server Setup** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/MCP-Server](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/MCP-Server) |
-| **Persona Index** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-Index](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Persona-Index) |
-| **Trait Index** | [cbrowser.ai/docs/Trait-Index](https://cbrowser.ai/docs/Trait-Index) |
-
-## Why the Move?
-
-The documentation is now hosted on [cbrowser.ai](https://cbrowser.ai) for:
-
-- **Better search** — Full-text search across all docs
-- **Always current** — Auto-updated with each release
-- **Better navigation** — Sidebar, breadcrumbs, related pages
-- **Mobile-friendly** — Responsive design for reading on any device
-
-## Local Files
-
-This directory contains a few files for reference:
-
-- `STRESS-TEST-v16.14.4.md` — Grade A+ stress test results
-- `AUTH0-SETUP.md` — Auth0 OAuth configuration for remote MCP
-
-For all other documentation, please visit **[cbrowser.ai/docs](https://cbrowser.ai/docs)**.
-
----
-
-© 2026 Alexandria Eden | [cbrowser.ai](https://cbrowser.ai)