amacgregor / amgr_phx / 85a160c7353e36866423e2b2232111bb26cc39d0-PR-71

31%

main: 33%

Pull #71

github

Define the package names, and name the full-time cost

The two judgment calls Allan took from the copy review.

The ten package names each appeared exactly once, as a chip, explained
nowhere on the site. "Code Health Check" is guessable; "AgentOps" and
"Embedded" are not. The definitions were not invented — they were
recovered from 942542f^, the version before the 13-item catalog was
collapsed into four tracks, and trimmed to a sentence each.

Prices stay off. They exist in the same history, but the June redesign
hid them deliberately and keeping them off preserves the room to set a
number after the fit call.

Each track now carries a disclosure rather than a bare chip row. That
meant restructuring the card: the whole thing was one anchor, and
`<details>` inside `<a>` is invalid — the summary would have navigated
instead of expanding. The link now covers the headline and the
call-to-action with the disclosure between them, so the cell still reads
and hovers as one unit.

The disclosure reuses the pattern the FAQ on this same page already
uses — `details.disclosure`, a rotating marker, `group-open` — rather
than inventing a second one. Its marker is smaller and grey so it does
not compete with the violet CTA arrow directly beneath it, and it aligns
to the first chip row instead of floating centered when chips wrap.

The full-time cost comparison uses Allan's own figure: the pre-June page
said "without the $300K+ all-in cost of a full-time hire". Restored
rather than invented, and placed with the commercial logistics where the
retainer and project terms already sit.

CSS rebuilt by hand; the disclosure needed three new utilities.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

12 of 12 new or added lines in 1 file covered. (100.0%)

479 of 1544 relevant lines covered (31.02%)

344.45 hits per line