article-workflow-style-bible

Article Workflow Style Bible

这是流程类 Skill，默认仅在用户显式调用 $article-workflow-style-bible 时运行。

This is Phase 5.0 of the article-workflow-* skill series.

Goal: Before entering multi-round polishing, distill a style bible from the main draft and Brief that describes the writing fingerprint the author wants to preserve. The AI does the distillation and organization; the author confirms and corrects. Every subsequent Phase 5 polish round must read it as a constraint baseline.

Trigger Scenarios

Use this skill when the user requests:

• Execute the preliminary step of Phase 5 of the article optimization workflow
• Generate a style bible / style fingerprint
• Prepare a constraint document for multi-round polishing
• Extract writing style from the main draft and organize it into citable rules
• Generate .article-workflow/style-bible.md

Input and Output

Default input:

• .article-workflow/04.5-main-draft/main-draft.md (the main draft after Phase 4.5 integration, for observing the author's actual writing fingerprint)
• .article-workflow/brief.md (Phase 0 editorial Brief, to cross-reference confirmed direction, attitude, and author judgments)
• Optional: .article-workflow/sources/oral-draft/ (to sense the original spoken style)
• Optional: .article-workflow/00-cleaned-sources/terminology-notes.md (confirmed proper noun conventions)

Default output:

• .article-workflow/style-bible.md

If a previous project already has .article-workflow/05-polish-rounds/style-bible.md, read it for reference, but write the new artifact to the root-level .article-workflow/style-bible.md by default, to avoid confusion with Phase 5 round artifacts.

Core Principles

• Extract patterns from real text; do not invent definitions. Every "author characteristic" must be traceable to a corresponding passage in the main draft.
• Do not treat "general standards of good writing" as style: distinguish between "good Chinese" and "this author's Chinese."
• Positive descriptions (what to preserve) and negative lists (what to forbid) are equally important. Negative lists often have stronger binding force on subsequent agents.
• Proper nouns, terminology, and formatting conventions must be precise enough for mechanical checking.
• No-change zones must cover: rhetorical-question progression, short-sentence judgments, colloquial connectors, turning-point rhythms, and personal reflections in closing paragraphs — these are the tone carriers most easily deleted by mistake during polishing.
• Clearly distinguish "trimmable" from "untouchable": list trimmable content types as well, to prevent subsequent polishing from going to either extreme (change nothing vs. change everything).
• When encountering ambiguities that would affect the overall polishing direction (e.g., whether a class of tone words belongs to the author's voice or is redundant, whether the author intentionally uses a certain type of expression), proactively use AskQuestion to ask the author to confirm; if the main draft's characteristics are clear and ambiguities are few, do not force questions just for form's sake.
• After the artifact is written, a sub-agent review must be launched; the sub-agent only provides review opinions, and the main agent decides whether to adopt them.