# IETF Draft Analyzer — Master Prompt ## Vision A tool to **track, categorize, compare, and rate** the growing flood of IETF Internet-Drafts related to AI and autonomous agents — helping an informed reader stay on top of novel ideas, spot overlaps, and identify gaps worth filling. ## Problem The IETF is seeing a surge of AI/agent-related drafts. Many overlap significantly, some introduce genuinely novel concepts, and it's hard to maintain a mental map of the landscape. Manual tracking doesn't scale. ## Primary Data Sources - **Recent drafts:** https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/recent - **Keyword search (e.g. "agent"):** https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/search?name=agent&sort=&rfcs=on&activedrafts=on&by=group&group= - **Datatracker API:** https://datatracker.ietf.org/api/ (machine-readable metadata) - Additional keyword searches: `ai`, `llm`, `autonomous`, `machine-learning`, `ml`, `intelligent`, `inference`, etc. ## Core Features ### 1. Draft Ingestion & Tracking - Fetch drafts from Datatracker (API + scraping where needed) - Track new drafts, revisions, and status changes over time - Store metadata: title, authors, abstract, WG, dates, status, keywords - Download and parse full draft text for deeper analysis ### 2. Categorization & Tagging - **Auto-categorize** drafts into topic clusters, e.g.: - Agent-to-agent communication protocols - AI safety / guardrails / alignment in networking - ML-based traffic management / optimization - Autonomous network operations (intent-based, closed-loop) - Identity / authentication for AI agents - Data formats / semantics for AI interop - Policy / governance / ethical frameworks - Support user-defined tags and manual overrides - Detect which IETF working groups / areas are involved ### 3. Overlap & Novelty Detection - **Similarity analysis** between drafts (abstract-level and full-text) - Semantic similarity (embeddings-based) - Structural similarity (do they define similar mechanisms?) - Flag clusters of highly overlapping drafts - Highlight **novel contributions** — ideas that don't appear elsewhere - Track how ideas evolve across draft revisions ### 4. Brief Rating / Assessment - Per-draft rating along dimensions like: - **Novelty** — How new/unique is the core idea? - **Maturity** — How complete and well-specified is the draft? - **Overlap** — How much does it duplicate existing work? - **Momentum** — Author track record, WG adoption, revision frequency - **Relevance** — How central is it to the AI/agent topic? - Generate a short (2–4 sentence) AI summary + assessment for each draft - Optional: composite score for quick sorting ### 5. Overview & Visualization - **Dashboard view** — sortable/filterable table of tracked drafts - **Landscape map** — visual clustering of drafts by topic similarity - **Timeline** — when drafts appeared, how the space is evolving - **Diff view** — compare two drafts side-by-side (key claims, mechanisms) - **Overlap matrix** — heatmap showing which drafts cover similar ground ### 6. Staying Informed - **Watch list** — mark drafts of special interest - **Change alerts** — notify on new drafts matching keywords, new revisions, status changes - **Periodic digest** — weekly/on-demand summary of what's new in the space - **Gap analysis** — suggest areas not yet covered by any draft ## Stretch / Nice-to-Have Features - **Idea extraction** — pull out discrete technical ideas/mechanisms from each draft, track them independently - **Cross-reference with RFCs** — link drafts to existing standards they build on or conflict with - **Author network** — who collaborates with whom, which orgs are active - **Meeting tracking** — link to relevant IETF meeting agenda items, minutes, slides - **Export** — generate reports (markdown, PDF) for sharing or personal reference - **Personal notes** — attach annotations and thoughts to any draft ## Design Principles - **Local-first** — runs on the user's machine, data stored locally - **CLI + optional web UI** — start simple (CLI/TUI), add a local web dashboard later - **LLM-assisted but transparent** — use AI for summarization/rating but always show reasoning - **Incremental** — can start with a small set of drafts and scale up - **Open data** — all source data comes from public IETF resources ## LLM Strategy Two viable options — use the best tool for each job: ### Option A: Claude API (via subscription) - **Pro:** Superior reasoning for summarization, rating, novelty detection, and comparative analysis of dense technical text. IETF drafts are complex — quality matters here. - **Pro:** Better at structured output (JSON ratings, consistent categorization) - **Con:** API costs / rate limits (though subscription helps) - **Best for:** Summarization, rating, categorization, overlap analysis, gap detection ### Option B: Local Ollama - **Pro:** Free, private, no rate limits, works offline - **Pro:** Good enough for embeddings (e.g. `nomic-embed-text`, `mxbai-embed-large`) - **Con:** Smaller models struggle with nuanced technical assessment of IETF-grade content - **Best for:** Embeddings for similarity/clustering, bulk preprocessing, quick triage ### Recommended: Hybrid Approach | Task | Model | |------|-------| | **Embeddings** (similarity, clustering) | Ollama local (`nomic-embed-text` or similar) | | **Quick triage** (is this draft AI-related?) | Ollama local (fast, cheap) | | **Summarization & rating** | Claude (better quality on technical text) | | **Overlap/novelty analysis** | Claude (needs strong reasoning) | | **Gap analysis & insights** | Claude (creative + analytical) | This keeps costs down (embeddings are the bulk operation) while using Claude where quality actually matters. The tool should support both backends with a simple config switch, so you can fall back to all-local or all-Claude as needed. ## Decisions Made - **Tech stack:** Python - **Storage:** SQLite (single DB file, FTS5 for full-text search) - **Scope:** AI/agent-focused first, generalizable later - **Interface:** CLI + Markdown report output (v1) - **LLM:** Hybrid — Ollama for embeddings/triage, Claude for analysis/rating