Problem statement
The README index currently includes difficulty indicators (🟢/🟡/🔴), but users cannot estimate how long an example takes to get running.
Under time pressure (e.g., hackathons, demos, workshops), users may avoid examples that require lengthy setup or dependencies because there is no quick signal for setup effort.
For example, users currently cannot distinguish between:
- A quick-start example (~2 minutes)
- A setup-heavy example (~20–30 minutes)
Proposed solution
Add a lightweight “Time to First Run” estimate to the README example index.
Example:
| Example |
Difficulty |
Setup Time |
| Chat Agent |
🟢 |
⏱️ ~2 min |
| Multi-Agent Workflow |
🟡 |
⏱️ ~10 min |
| RAG Pipeline |
🔴 |
⏱️ ~20 min |
Scope and impact
- Add estimated setup/run time to README index entries
- Use approximate labels (e.g.,
~2 min, ~10 min)
- Keep estimates intentionally lightweight and contributor-maintained
Alternatives considered (optional)
- Difficulty rating only — does not communicate setup effort or runtime complexity.
- Detailed setup documentation per example — useful but slower to scan than a simple time estimate.
Additional context (optional)
No response
Problem statement
The README index currently includes difficulty indicators (🟢/🟡/🔴), but users cannot estimate how long an example takes to get running.
Under time pressure (e.g., hackathons, demos, workshops), users may avoid examples that require lengthy setup or dependencies because there is no quick signal for setup effort.
For example, users currently cannot distinguish between:
Proposed solution
Add a lightweight “Time to First Run” estimate to the README example index.
Example:
Scope and impact
~2 min,~10 min)Alternatives considered (optional)
Additional context (optional)
No response