Project detail page design board

FilingLens design candidates

Twenty static directions for presenting an evidence-grounded financial RAG agent. Each candidate is a mini case-study preview with its own first-screen idea, middle modules, demo treatment, metrics, tags, and tradeoffs.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
01

Financial intelligence console

Financial Intelligence Console

Best for: presenting FilingLens as a serious financial research cockpit.

Structure
Console hero, KPI strip, evidence table, answer contract, technical stack.
First screen
Dark console with sample query, metric cards, API/mock status, and cited answer preview.
Middle
Financial facts, SEC text evidence, risk themes, valuation boundary modules.
Demo
Static NVIDIA query with mocked tool calls and final cited answer.
DuckDBSEC filingscompute_metricsTrace Audit
Pros

Immediately communicates engineering depth and finance domain.

Cons

Dense first impression for non-technical viewers.

02

Evidence trace dashboard

Evidence Trace Dashboard

Best for: emphasizing auditability, evidence lineage, and runtime checks.

Structure
Trace hero, stage timeline, evidence matrix, contract outcome, limitations.
First screen
Trace dashboard with run state, required answer parts, and contract status.
Middle
Tabs for ResearchPlan, EvidencePacket, Dimensions, Citations, Contract.
Demo
Mock trace inspector showing how each sentence maps to [N] and [T] evidence.
AnswerContractDimensionStatusMapCitation ValidationTrace UI
Pros

Strongly differentiates from ordinary RAG demos.

Cons

Less focused on business value at first glance.

03

Analyst query workspace

Analyst Query Workspace

Best for: showing the product as a practical research workspace.

Structure
Query panel, parsed intent, evidence needs, answer preview, trace drawer.
First screen
Split workspace where a natural-language question becomes structured analysis state.
Middle
Saved query examples for cash flow, revenue growth, risk, and comparison.
Demo
Static query editor with mocked intent chips and answer outline.
QueryUnderstandingCanonicalIntentEvidencePlanAnalyst UX
Pros

Clear user workflow and easy to understand.

Cons

Feels more like an app screen than a portfolio case study.

04

RAG pipeline walkthrough

RAG Pipeline Walkthrough

Best for: explaining the full agent workflow without overwhelming the reader.

Structure
Hero pipeline, stage-by-stage walkthrough, architecture, eval section, demo.
First screen
Large horizontal flow from query to validated cited answer.
Middle
Seven stage cards: classify, plan, execute, evaluate, generate, check, finalize.
Demo
One sample query advances through static checkpoint panels.
LangGraphResearchPlanTool CallingContract Check
Pros

Balanced for recruiters and engineers.

Cons

Less visually surprising than the console directions.

05

Citation-first case study

Citation-First Case Study

Best for: making source grounding the main visual identity.

Structure
Citation hero, evidence library, answer assembly, contract checks, limitations.
First screen
Citations appear before the answer, showing evidence as the product foundation.
Middle
Numeric evidence, text evidence, inference, and missing-evidence lanes.
Demo
Mock answer with highlighted [N] and [T] citations connected to source cards.
Numeric CitationsText CitationsSEC EDGAREvidencePacket
Pros

Very distinctive and aligned with the project name.

Cons

Architecture is secondary unless the reader scrolls.

06

Tool-calling system map

Tool-Calling System Map

Best for: showing tool orchestration and system design to engineers.

Structure
System-map hero, tool protocol, data stores, state machine, demo trace.
First screen
Central LangGraph hub connected to tools, stores, and validation layers.
Middle
ToolResult schema mock, provenance, latency, errors, and deterministic calculations.
Demo
Tool-call transcript for a revenue growth question with mocked latencies.
Tool RegistryToolResultProvenanceFastAPI
Pros

Best technical credibility for agent architecture.

Cons

Less approachable for a quick portfolio skim.

07

Metrics and reliability board

Metrics & Reliability Board

Best for: foregrounding reliability, testing, and measurable evaluation.

Structure
Reliability hero, eval caveats, test coverage, probe board, architecture appendix.
First screen
Quality dashboard with checks, counts, and small-sample caveat.
Middle
6-case release signal, 300-case demo probe, 78 test files, failure categories.
Demo
Mock contract runner showing pass, repair, and blocked outcomes.
PytestEval ProbesRuntime GuardsRelease Signal
Pros

Strong proof of rigor and evaluation thinking.

Cons

Needs careful caveats so metrics are not overstated.

08

SEC filings research terminal

SEC Filings Research Terminal

Best for: making the SEC research angle concrete and memorable.

Structure
Terminal hero, corpus stats, filing sections, retrieval examples, cited answer.
First screen
Command-like research terminal querying filings and structured facts.
Middle
10-K/10-Q corpus, section-aware chunks, financial facts, price history.
Demo
Static terminal transcript for a revenue-driver question.
SEC EDGAR10-K10-QSection-Aware Chunks
Pros

Distinctive and technically credible.

Cons

Dark terminal style may feel narrower than the portfolio tone.

09

Before and after comparison

Before/After Answer Quality

Best for: explaining why this is not a generic RAG demo.

Structure
Problem hero, before/after answer, contract repair, evidence trace, metrics.
First screen
Side-by-side weak answer vs grounded answer with visual quality checks.
Middle
Missing evidence, unsupported conclusion, repaired answer, final contract status.
Demo
Mock comparison for advice-like AMZN query and safe rewrite.
GroundingRepair LoopForbidden AdviceAnswer Quality
Pros

Persuasive and easy to grasp quickly.

Cons

More explanatory than immersive.

10

Architecture-centered page

Architecture-Centered Project Page

Best for: making the stack and component boundaries the story.

Structure
Architecture hero, data flow, subsystem sections, demo inset, reliability.
First screen
Layered system diagram from UI to API to agent to data stores.
Middle
FastAPI endpoints, LangGraph nodes, DuckDB tables, Chroma retrieval.
Demo
Small query console embedded beside architecture callouts.
FastAPILangGraphDuckDBChromaDB
Pros

Cleanest technical overview for engineering readers.

Cons

Less story-driven for recruiters.

11

Recruiter-friendly concise portfolio

Recruiter-Friendly Portfolio Page

Best for: fast scanning by recruiters and interviewers.

Structure
Short hero, three contribution cards, demo preview, stack, outcomes.
First screen
Plain-language value statement plus three concrete engineering highlights.
Middle
What I built, why it matters, how it was evaluated.
Demo
One polished mock answer, minimal controls, clear citations.
LLM AgentRAGFinancial AnalysisPortfolio
Pros

Most readable and job-search friendly.

Cons

Does not show all technical depth up front.

12

Engineer deep dive

Engineer Deep-Dive Technical Page

Best for: readers who want implementation details and system contracts.

Structure
Technical hero, state schema, graph nodes, tool protocol, validation.
First screen
Documentation-like layout with core abstractions and contract output.
Middle
AgentState, ToolResult, EvidencePacket, DimensionStatusMap, repair logic.
Demo
Trace tabs plus compact pseudo-code snippets and mock JSON outputs.
AgentStateEvidencePacketTool ProtocolTesting
Pros

Best for engineering credibility and interview depth.

Cons

Heavier reading burden.

13

Split screen: query / evidence / answer

Query / Evidence / Answer Split

Best for: showing the full reasoning loop in one first-screen composition.

Structure
Three-pane hero, expanded pane sections, demo query bank, tech notes.
First screen
Query, evidence, and answer are visible at the same time.
Middle
Each pane becomes its own section: parser, evidence matrix, synthesis.
Demo
Static three-pane mock app for comparison queries.
Comparison BalanceEvidence MatrixCited AnswerUX
Pros

Very clear information architecture.

Cons

Requires careful responsive treatment on mobile.

14

Dark console style

Dark Console Style

Best for: a compact, technical, high-contrast project identity.

Structure
Dark hero, live-run monitor, evidence cards, trace audit, project notes.
First screen
Run monitor with mocked node timings and contract outcome.
Middle
Console logs, tool payloads, citation checks, final answer block.
Demo
Mock terminal output for an end-to-end run.
Run MonitorvLLMQwenTool Latency
Pros

Most visually distinct and engineering-heavy.

Cons

Less aligned with the current light portfolio base.

15

Light editorial case study

Light Editorial Case Study

Best for: a polished portfolio page that reads like a concise case study.

Structure
Editorial hero, problem, approach, demo figure, results, technical appendix.
First screen
Typography-led opening with a quiet system figure beside the summary.
Middle
Problem framing, design decisions, evidence contract, evaluation caveats.
Demo
Embedded static figure showing query, evidence, answer, and limitations.
Case StudyPortfolio WritingArchitecture FigureLimitations
Pros

Closest to current personal-site tone.

Cons

Less interactive and less console-like.

16

Local LLM system showcase

Local LLM System Showcase

Best for: emphasizing local-first architecture and model-provider flexibility.

Structure
Local stack hero, serving boundary, data stores, agent graph, demo.
First screen
Topology showing local UI, API, compatible LLM endpoint, and local stores.
Middle
Why deterministic tools own calculations while the LLM handles bounded language tasks.
Demo
Mock run that labels model, tools, and validation as separate responsibilities.
Local LLMvLLM CompatibleLangChainDeterministic Tools
Pros

Good systems story for agent infrastructure roles.

Cons

Model details must stay tentative unless finalized.

17

Validation and grounding focused

Validation & Grounding Focus

Best for: highlighting safety, grounding, and non-advisory financial boundaries.

Structure
Contract hero, advice-like query rewrite, citation checks, limitation states.
First screen
AnswerContract checklist next to a risky query transformed into a safe analysis task.
Middle
Numeric grounding, citation validation, DimensionStatusMap, forbidden claims.
Demo
Mock blocked or repaired answer with visible rule outcomes.
AnswerContractGroundingSafety BoundaryRepair
Pros

Very differentiated and credible for financial AI.

Cons

Narrower than a general project overview.

18

Financial analysis workflow

Financial Analysis Workflow

Best for: foregrounding the financial-analysis framework instead of the software stack.

Structure
Analysis framework hero, dimension sections, evidence examples, demo answer.
First screen
Seven financial-analysis dimensions with a sample query mapped to required evidence.
Middle
Revenue quality, cash-flow quality, profitability, balance sheet, moat risk, valuation boundary.
Demo
NVIDIA or AMZN workflow with metric table and risk citations.
Financial FrameworkValuation BoundaryRisk DisclosureMetrics
Pros

Best for showing domain understanding.

Cons

Agent architecture appears later.

19

Minimal academic project style

Minimal Academic Project Style

Best for: a sober, research-oriented project presentation.

Structure
Abstract, contributions, method, system, results, limitations, demo figure.
First screen
Paper-like abstract and contribution table, with restrained typography.
Middle
Method and evaluation sections with clear caveats for sample size and demo probes.
Demo
Figure-style mock of query, evidence, answer, and validation.
Research StyleMethodEvaluationLimitations
Pros

Professional, compact, and trustworthy.

Cons

Less visually dynamic than product-like options.

20

Interactive mock console

Interactive Mock Console Style

Analyze NVIDIA cash-flow quality.Intent: cash_flow + valuation_boundary
Mock answer: cited metrics, risk evidence, limitations, and contract status are shown without calling any API.

Best for: making the preview feel alive while staying fully static.

Structure
Interactive mock hero, query tabs, response panel, evidence drawer, architecture below.
First screen
Clickable local query tabs that update mock intent and answer text only in the browser.
Middle
Selected query expands into evidence needs, tool calls, citations, and contract checks.
Demo
Static JavaScript switches between NVIDIA, Amazon, and Apple mock cases.
Mock DemoQuery BankStatic JSCited Answer
Pros

Most engaging preview without backend risk.

Cons

Slightly more moving parts than pure static cards.