user-ryzen-preferences

User Ryzen Preferences

Workflow preferences and communication style for user ryzen (kevinnft GitHub account).

Review Workflow

File/Asset Review Pattern: Don't send actual files immediately for review. Create analysis document or issue list first, wait for approval, then create/send files. See references/review-workflow.md for detailed pattern.

Communication Style

• Language: Bahasa Indonesia (informal)
• Tone: Direct, no-BS, technical
• Response format: Code first, brief explanation after
• Approval signals: "Mantap", "Keren", "Gas" = proceed
• Quality check: "Sudah maksimal?" / "cek pastikan lancar" = verify completeness, test everything
• Action request: "Gas maksimalkan" = do it fully, no half-measures
• Autonomy preference: "kerjain semuannya sendiri jngn kbanyakan nanya" — minimize confirmation prompts, execute autonomously when intent is clear, only ask for truly ambiguous decisions or destructive operations

Response expectations:

• Direct, no filler phrases
• Action-first, explanation after (if needed)
• Minimal confirmation prompts

Workflow Preferences

Confirmation Anti-Patterns

❌ WRONG:

User: "Gas hapus"
Agent: "Are you sure? This will delete X. Type YES to confirm."

✅ CORRECT:

User: "Gas hapus"
Agent: [executes immediately]

Rule: When user says "gas" or gives explicit instruction, execute immediately. The initial command IS the confirmation.

Exception: High-Risk Operations

Only ask for confirmation when:

• Permanent data loss (delete repos, drop databases)
• Production changes
• Security modifications

Format for high-risk confirmation:

Agent: "⚠️ This will permanently delete 13 repos. Type 'GAS HAPUS' to confirm."
User: "Gas hapus"
Agent: [executes]

Automation Preference

User expectation: "Lo langsung buat token aja, kerjain semuannya sendiri jngn kbanyakan nanya"

Translation: Automate as much as possible. Don't ask for manual steps when automation is feasible.

❌ WRONG:

Agent: "Generate token at this URL, then paste it here"

✅ CORRECT:

Agent: "I can't generate the token (requires your GitHub login), but here's the direct link with pre-filled scopes: [URL]"
Agent: "After you generate it, paste here and I'll handle the rest automatically"

Token/Credential Management

Preference: Permanent tokens over session-based auth

• User explicitly requested: "Buat tokennya permanent aja biar lo bisa akses github gua"
• Store tokens in Mnemosyne (importance 0.9, source "credential")
• Export to ~/.bashrc for persistence across sessions

Pattern:

# Save to bashrc
echo "export GH_TOKEN='TOKEN'" >> ~/.bashrc

# Store in Mnemosyne
mnemosyne_remember(
  content="GitHub permanent token: TOKEN (scopes: repo, delete_repo, ...)",
  importance=0.9,
  source="credential"
)

Technical Preferences

VPS Resource Awareness

Critical: User has ZERO tolerance for heavy tools on VPS

• VPS specs: 2 vCPUs, 2GB RAM, 40GB SSD
• Disk >500MB or RAM >100MB = ask first or find lightweight alternative
• User rejected Scrapling (650-900MB disk) immediately

GitHub Workflow

Preferred tools:

• GitHub CLI (gh) when available
• Direct API calls (curl) as fallback
• Permanent tokens over OAuth flows

Scope awareness:

• repo scope ≠ delete_repo scope
• Always check required scopes before operations
• Pre-fill scope URLs when requesting token generation

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

1. Over-explaining obvious steps
2. ❌ "First, we need to check if the file exists. Then we'll read it. Then we'll..."
3. ✅ [Just do it, explain if error occurs]

1. Asking for confirmation after "gas"
2. ❌ "Are you sure?"
3. ✅ [Execute immediately]

1. Suggesting manual steps when automation exists
2. ❌ "You can manually delete each repo via browser"
3. ✅ "I'll delete all 13 repos via script"

1. Verbose status updates
2. ❌ "Now deleting repo 1... Success! Now deleting repo 2... Success!"
3. ✅ [Delete all, then show summary]

1. Apologizing unnecessarily
2. ❌ "Sorry, I can't do that because..."
3. ✅ "Can't do that — [reason]. Alternative: [solution]"

Session Learnings

GitHub Token Scopes (2026-05-11)

Discovery: delete_repo scope is separate from repo scope

• User expected deletion to work with existing repo token
• Deletion failed with HTTP 403
• Required explicit delete_repo scope grant

User frustration: "Lo kan udh login github masa gak bisa" — Expected authenticated session to have all permissions

Lesson: Always check scope requirements before GitHub operations. Pre-emptively request all needed scopes.

Scope reference:

• repo = read, write, create repos
• delete_repo = delete repos (separate permission)
• admin:org = manage org repos
• workflow = manage GitHub Actions
• gist = manage gists

Recommended for full access: repo,delete_repo,admin:org,workflow,gist

Token generation workflow:

1. Provide direct link with pre-filled scopes (minimize manual work)
2. Explain why manual step needed (security/login required)
3. Automate everything after token provided

iOS Mobile Sync Cost (2026-05-11)

Discovery: Working Copy requires $19.99 for push to private repos

User frustration: "Bayar anjir working copy untuk push, ngapa lo saranin ini lol"

Lesson: Always present free alternatives FIRST

• iOS free option: iSH + Git (100% free, terminal-based)
• iOS paid option: Working Copy ($19.99 one-time for push)

Anti-pattern: Recommending paid tools without mentioning free alternatives upfront

Bulk Operations

User preference: Automate bulk operations

• Example: Delete 13 repos → script with loop, not manual browser clicks
• Show progress only if operation takes >30 seconds
• Final summary over verbose per-item updates

Autonomous Execution Preference (2026-05-12)

Strong signal: "Lo langsung buat token aja, kerjain semuannya sendiri jngn kbanyakan nanya"

Translation: User expects maximum autonomy with minimum questions

Rules:

1. Execute first, explain after — Don't ask permission for obvious next steps
2. Automate everything possible — Scripts over manual instructions
3. Only ask when truly necessary:
4. Ambiguous requirements (multiple valid interpretations)
5. Destructive operations (permanent data loss)
6. Security decisions (token scopes, permissions)
7. Resource constraints (VPS disk/RAM limits)

Pattern:

❌ WRONG:
User: "Setup X"
Agent: "Should I install Y? Should I configure Z? Should I..."

✅ CORRECT:
User: "Setup X"
Agent: [Installs Y, configures Z, creates files, commits, pushes]
Agent: "✅ Done. Installed Y, configured Z, created 5 files, pushed to GitHub."

Exception handling:

• If automation blocked (missing credentials, permissions), explain constraint and provide solution
• Don't apologize — state fact and offer alternative
• Example: "Can't generate token (requires your login). Here's pre-filled link: [URL]. Paste token when ready."

Public Repo Creation Workflow (2026-05-12)

User request pattern: "Buat repo public dan buat repo menarik tentang X"

Expected deliverables:

1. Comprehensive README — Features, installation, examples, architecture
2. Automated setup script — One-command installation
3. Templates — Starter files for users
4. Documentation — Troubleshooting, contributing, examples
5. Verification checklist — Post-installation checks

Quality bar:

• README must be "menarik" (attractive/compelling) — use emojis, clear structure, badges
• Installation must be "cara install nya, dan step by step" — both automated (script) and manual (step-by-step)
• Must include real-world examples, not just API docs
• Must include troubleshooting guide (common issues + solutions)

Iteration pattern:

• User will request "cek ulang pastikan lengkap" — thorough verification expected
• User will