idle-draft: idle-subscription dispatcher for the writing pipeline
Elapsed-paced gates, bounded-parallel event-driven dispatch, filesystem- derived stages with thin human-gate state, citation validation with quarantine, credential parity check, prompt templates as data. Per IDLE-DRAFT-PLAN.md in writing/oreillyconsulting. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YQDoWNM7XPPii28khFWoMc
This commit is contained in:
62
data/idle-draft/prompts/review-suggest.md
Normal file
62
data/idle-draft/prompts/review-suggest.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
|
||||
You are producing the **review file** for one human-edited draft in an O'Reilly
|
||||
Consulting writing dossier. The draft has already been scored per-paragraph on the
|
||||
5-dimension `/15` rubric (Evidence, Judgment, Voice, Rhythm, Register — see
|
||||
`score-paragraphs`); your job is the **second pass**: concrete, actionable improvement
|
||||
suggestions for every paragraph that scored below the threshold.
|
||||
|
||||
## Item
|
||||
|
||||
- Dossier: `$dossier`
|
||||
- Topic: `$slug`
|
||||
- Human-edited draft (already scored, score blocks inline): $draft_path
|
||||
- Grading template — apply the same rubric and voice bar when suggesting fixes:
|
||||
$review_prompt_path
|
||||
- Voice reference: $style_dir/goes-target-voice.md
|
||||
- Score threshold on the `/15` scale: **$review_score_threshold** — any paragraph
|
||||
scoring below this needs a suggestion; paragraphs at or above it need none.
|
||||
|
||||
## What to produce
|
||||
|
||||
For every paragraph in the draft whose inline score block shows a total below
|
||||
`$review_score_threshold`:
|
||||
|
||||
- Quote the paragraph's opening few words so a human can locate it.
|
||||
- Name which of the five dimensions is weakest and why, in one sentence.
|
||||
- Give a **concrete rewrite direction** — not "improve the evidence," but what
|
||||
specific evidence, source, or file/line citation would raise the score, or what
|
||||
specific sentence-level change (cut a hedge word, vary sentence length, cut a
|
||||
vendor name, cite the file instead of the concept) would fix it.
|
||||
|
||||
Do not rewrite the paragraph yourself — suggest, don't replace. The human author makes
|
||||
the edit.
|
||||
|
||||
## Required structure
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Review: <topic title, sentence case>
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
<one paragraph: how many paragraphs scored below threshold, out of how many total,
|
||||
and the single most common weak dimension>
|
||||
|
||||
## Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
### Paragraph opening: "<first few words...>"
|
||||
|
||||
- Score: <total>/15 (weakest dimension: <name>)
|
||||
- Suggestion: <concrete, specific>
|
||||
|
||||
<repeat per below-threshold paragraph, in document order>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
All headings are **sentence case**.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output
|
||||
|
||||
Write the complete Markdown file to exactly this path, and nothing else:
|
||||
|
||||
$output_path
|
||||
|
||||
The dispatcher validates this file (non-empty, starts with a top-level heading) and
|
||||
promotes it to its canonical location itself.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user