Gourmet Research

Gourmet Research

Overview

Build and maintain traceable, comparable, auditable, actionable food recommendations (restaurants/cafes/desserts) with multi-source evidence and consistent scoring.

Use references/repo-spec.md for repo-structure rules and references/templates.md for copy/paste templates.

Workflow

0) Identify the locale + constraints

• Confirm the city/region and language context.
• Confirm constraints that affect feasibility: opening days, reservation methods, mobility, budget, group size, dietary needs.

1) Discovery (add candidates fast)

• Add rows to gourmet/CITY/candidates.md with status: inbox.
• Use a maps search link initially if you don’t yet have the exact place link.
• Do not delete table rows except for true duplicates or proven incorrect entries.

2) Evidence collection (per place)

• Add a detailed evidence section to gourmet/CITY/notes.md (template in references/templates.md).
• Prefer 3–5 independent sources that fit the locale (see “Source selection” below).
• Update the candidate row with a 1-line summary and status (researching → shortlisted / top / rejected).

3) Score consistently (50-point rubric)

• Score each researched place out of 50 with the standard breakdown (in notes.md).
• Keep scoring comparable within the same city/region; document uncertainty (use unknown).

4) Publish decisions

• top-places.md: Top Picks (high confidence) + Backups (good alternatives) + a short plan/strategy section + a checklist section (names follow the repo’s conventions).
• excluded.md: record why a place was rejected (auditable).

5) Verify completion criteria

• From within the target gourmet repo, run verify_city.sh CITYDIR to quickly detect “inbox” items, pending decisions, and unchecked research checklist items.
• If you’re running the script from outside the target repo, pass --repo-root /path/to/repo.
• If your repo enforces required section headers, use verify_city.sh --check-headers CITYDIR.

Source selection (choose what fits the region)

Do not hard-code a single review platform globally. Pick sources that match the locale and availability, and state which you used in notes.md.

Choose sources by asking: “What do locals use, and what has the best coverage for this exact city + price tier?”

Recommended source mix (3–5 total):

• Maps + reviews: Google Maps / Apple Maps / local dominant maps app (rating + review count + recurring themes).
• Local review platform(s): whatever is locally dominant (examples: 食べログ/Retty in Japan; OpenRice in HK/SG; in the UK often Google/Apple plus strong local editorial coverage).
• Local-language review synthesis: summarize recurring patterns (don’t fabricate quotes).
• Guide/editorial: reputable guides, local food media, chef interviews, newspapers, Michelin/other guides where relevant.
• Official channel: official site/social for hours, closures, reservation method (facts only).

Anti-patterns:

• Relying on only one platform.
• Using platforms that are irrelevant for the locale if better local alternatives exist.
• Treating a single viral social post as evidence.

Resources

• references/repo-spec.md: structure + auditability rules (generic).
• references/templates.md: doc templates and evidence blocks.
• scripts/verify_city.sh: quick structural/completion checks.