My original motivation is to compare the task-solving ability of LLMs by visualizing the agent's trajectory. This offers an alternative way to inspect the capabilities of LLMs and agent systems.
I agree with all of this, and gource is an excellent example, but this is still "what" and builds no case for a "why". Not even an anecdote like "I told the agent this and it completely misunderstood and did the other thing so I built this which you can use to undo the work after the fact."
Because it’s fun and not everything has to exist for a reason other than that maybe? I built something in the same vein, and the way is because it’s neat. It serves no real purpose.
> Anyways, besides that, the README does clearly state "The Problem" and "The Idea" which outlines exactly why the author built this particular project.
I asked about the use case _because_ the readme states a problem but does not offer a solution to that problem as far as I could see.
As a once-off, not much because the treemap or graph look arbitrary so it's just eye candy. But a small fast treemap in your IDE would quickly become something you depend on, just like minimaps turned out to be really useful to enough people that they become a default in vscode.