add demo gif to README

README.md

@@ -1,60 +1,64 @@
----
-title: DIY Creator
-emoji: 🛠️
-colorFrom: gray
-colorTo: red
-sdk: docker
-app_port: 7860
-pinned: false
----
-
-# DIY Creator 🛠️ — a multi-agent team you can watch work
-
-Name something you want to build. A **team of three agents** hands off to each other to produce a
-vetted, step-by-step build guide — and you watch them do it in real time.
-
-> Project **#17** of the *"30 AI Projects in 15 Days"* challenge. Focus: **multi-agent orchestration.**
-
-## The team
-
-| Agent | Role |
-|-------|------|
-| 🔍 **Researcher** | Gathers a practical brief: materials (with quantities), tools, techniques, safety hazards, common mistakes, and honest difficulty/time/cost. |
-| ✍️ **Writer** | Turns the brief into a clear, start-to-finish guide a beginner could actually follow. |
-| 🧐 **Critic** | An **independent reviewer** — scores the draft, flags issues by severity, and **sends it back**. The writer revises; the critic re-checks. The loop runs until the guide passes (or hits the round cap). |
-
-## The lesson: roles, handoffs, and an honest gate
-
-A multi-agent "team" is three things done well:
-1. **Role-specialized agents** — each one has a single job and a prompt tuned for it.
-2. **Explicit handoffs** — the researcher's brief feeds the writer; the writer's draft feeds the critic.
-3. **A critique → revise loop** — nobody ships their own first draft.
-
-Two design choices worth calling out:
-
-- **The critic is independent (the "diamond").** It reviews the writer's work, ideally as a *different*
-  model, so the review isn't the author grading itself. Set `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` to a second local model
-  for a sharper, more independent review.
-- **The gate is honest-by-construction.** The critic *finds* issues (what LLMs are good at), but the
-  pass/revise decision is made in **code** from issue severity — a guide passes only when no high- or
-  medium-severity issues remain. The model can't rubber-stamp its own work.
-
-## Run it
-
-```bash
-pip install -r requirements.txt
-python app.py            # http://127.0.0.1:7860
-# Local Ollama by default (free/private). For the cloud model instead:
-#   DIY_LLM_BACKEND=claude ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=sk-... python app.py
-```
-
-**Config (env):** `DIY_LLM_BACKEND` (`ollama`|`claude`) · `DIY_OLLAMA_URL` · `DIY_OLLAMA_MODEL`
-(default `qwen2.5:7b`) · `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` (optional independent critic) · `ANTHROPIC_API_KEY` /
-`ANTHROPIC_MODEL` for the Claude backend.
-
-> Note on models: a small local model self-critiquing is genuinely noisy — it will sometimes ship
-> "after review, minor notes remain" rather than a clean pass. That's honest. A stronger model (or a
-> `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` diamond) converges to a clean pass more often.
-
----
-Built by **Robert Lucyk** · [GritAI Solutions](https://gritai.solutions) · part of the 30-in-15 challenge.
+---
+title: DIY Creator
+emoji: 🛠️
+colorFrom: gray
+colorTo: red
+sdk: docker
+app_port: 7860
+pinned: false
+---
+
+# DIY Creator 🛠️ — a multi-agent team you can watch work
+
+Name something you want to build. A **team of three agents** hands off to each other to produce a
+vetted, step-by-step build guide — and you watch them do it in real time.
+
+> Project **#17** of the *"30 AI Projects in 15 Days"* challenge. Focus: **multi-agent orchestration.**
+
+![Demo: the Researcher gathers a brief, the Writer drafts a guide, the Critic scores it and sends it back to revise](demo.gif)
+
+*Above (local model): 🔍 Researcher gathers the brief → ✍️ Writer drafts a guide → 🧐 Critic scores it **5/10 and sends it back** with concrete fixes → Writer revises → the guide ships (honestly noting any minor items that remain). On a stronger backend it converges to a clean pass.*
+
+## The team
+
+| Agent | Role |
+|-------|------|
+| 🔍 **Researcher** | Gathers a practical brief: materials (with quantities), tools, techniques, safety hazards, common mistakes, and honest difficulty/time/cost. |
+| ✍️ **Writer** | Turns the brief into a clear, start-to-finish guide a beginner could actually follow. |
+| 🧐 **Critic** | An **independent reviewer** — scores the draft, flags issues by severity, and **sends it back**. The writer revises; the critic re-checks. The loop runs until the guide passes (or hits the round cap). |
+
+## The lesson: roles, handoffs, and an honest gate
+
+A multi-agent "team" is three things done well:
+1. **Role-specialized agents** — each one has a single job and a prompt tuned for it.
+2. **Explicit handoffs** — the researcher's brief feeds the writer; the writer's draft feeds the critic.
+3. **A critique → revise loop** — nobody ships their own first draft.
+
+Two design choices worth calling out:
+
+- **The critic is independent (the "diamond").** It reviews the writer's work, ideally as a *different*
+  model, so the review isn't the author grading itself. Set `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` to a second local model
+  for a sharper, more independent review.
+- **The gate is honest-by-construction.** The critic *finds* issues (what LLMs are good at), but the
+  pass/revise decision is made in **code** from issue severity — a guide passes only when no high- or
+  medium-severity issues remain. The model can't rubber-stamp its own work.
+
+## Run it
+
+```bash
+pip install -r requirements.txt
+python app.py            # http://127.0.0.1:7860
+# Local Ollama by default (free/private). For the cloud model instead:
+#   DIY_LLM_BACKEND=claude ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=sk-... python app.py
+```
+
+**Config (env):** `DIY_LLM_BACKEND` (`ollama`|`claude`) · `DIY_OLLAMA_URL` · `DIY_OLLAMA_MODEL`
+(default `qwen2.5:7b`) · `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` (optional independent critic) · `ANTHROPIC_API_KEY` /
+`ANTHROPIC_MODEL` for the Claude backend.
+
+> Note on models: a small local model self-critiquing is genuinely noisy — it will sometimes ship
+> "after review, minor notes remain" rather than a clean pass. That's honest. A stronger model (or a
+> `DIY_CRITIC_MODEL` diamond) converges to a clean pass more often.
+
+---
+Built by **Robert Lucyk** · [GritAI Solutions](https://gritai.solutions) · part of the 30-in-15 challenge.