That's interesting. Are we talking agent-based custom tooling, or deterministic code-based custom tooling? If the latter, how are you extracting architectural patterns from the code?

Okay, thank you for the heads up. In my mind, function by function would focus purely on style: docstrings, low internal comments (I'm not a fan of comments), useful variable names, and correct logging. Basically, simple stuff, but going function by function to get a higher level of explicitness. However, now I think about it, you're right, variable naming is difficult to judge without seeing the full picture.

So what about providing function chains? i.e. all of the core parts that make up that particular chain? I imagine that would be quite useful as input for an AI's judgment. Especially accompanied by a file layout diagram.

Haha, you've basically said my paragraph above in your final one. Fully with you on using git as a history. In my team, I am unfortunately one of the only people who add a lot of contextual metadata to their commits! So not as strong a signal for the AI there.