Skip to content

[Bug] README and README_CN are outdated and inconsistent with current product positioning #281

@Astro-Han

Description

@Astro-Han

What happened?

README.md and README_CN.md contain multiple outdated or incorrect details that do not reflect the current product state, positioning, and market narrative. This creates confusion for new users and misses opportunities to communicate our differentiation.

Steps to reproduce

  1. Open README.md
  2. Check the slogan: "AI Agent for everyday work, made easy" — does not leverage the "open-source alternative to Codex/Cowork" market narrative
  3. Check the "Ask PawWork to" examples — all 6 are non-coding tasks, missing our coding capabilities
  4. Check "Build from Source" command — cd packages/desktop-electron && bun run dev does not work
  5. Check GitHub repo description — "AI workstation" vs README "AI Agent" — inconsistent

What did you expect to happen?

README should accurately reflect:

  • Current positioning as "Open-source alternative to Codex App and Claude Desktop"
  • Both coding and non-coding capabilities
  • Correct build instructions
  • Accurate model support (Zen free + BYOK with OAuth)
  • Consistent terminology with GitHub description

PawWork version

v0.2.14

OS version

N/A — documentation issue

Can you reproduce it again?

Yes, every time

Screenshots, recordings, or extra context

Specific issues identified:

Issue Current Should be
Build command cd packages/desktop-electron && bun run dev bun run dev:desktop (from root)
Slogan "AI Agent for everyday work, made easy" "Open-source alternative to Codex App and Claude Desktop"
Code examples None (all non-coding) Add "build a web app", "review a PR", "debug an API"
BYOK details "included free models" only List supported: OpenAI, Claude, DeepSeek, Gemini
OAuth support Not mentioned Mention in BYOK section
Show Case cards Not mentioned Briefly describe onboarding experience
Windows status "supported" "Windows x64 (unsigned)"
Upstream link anomalyco/opencode Verify and fix if needed

Market context:

Twitter/X search shows "open-source alternative to Codex/Cowork" is the dominant narrative in 2026:

  • OpenWork: 14k stars, 150k downloads, YC retweeted
  • Rowboat: 9k stars in one week
  • Sudowork, MoRos, OpenClawdex all use this framing

Our current README misses this traffic entirely.

Related:

  • SPEC.md defines product positioning
  • GitHub description needs sync

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    P2Medium priorityappApplication behavior and product flowsdocumentationImprovements or additions to documentation

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions