db06dce05d
Skills guides wired (all were dead code — no templates declared skills:): - book_chapter.yml: YAFictionGuide + RomanceFictionGuide + SciFiFictionGuide - chapter_review.yml: same (Devon, Lane, Cora reviewers now have genre context) - chapter_roundtable.yml: same (debate participants use genre craft knowledge) - chapter_polish.yml: same (Iris polishes with full genre guide in context) - short_story.yml: same - blog_write.yml: BlogWritingGuide - recipe_develop.yml: RecipeWritingGuide All templates updated to include 'skills' in sections list so guides are injected as SKILLS & GUIDES block in the prompt. Iris RAG deduplication: - agents/iris/rag/agent.rag.md: 15 near-identical entries -> 2 canonical Entry 1: Bible & Continuity Check requirement Entry 2: Editorial assignments (Devon/Lane/Cora with their roles) 13 duplicates removed Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
63 lines
1.5 KiB
YAML
63 lines
1.5 KiB
YAML
name: chapter_review
|
|
description: >
|
|
Independent chapter review. Agent reads the chapter and produces a structured
|
|
critique in their editorial domain.
|
|
debug: true
|
|
model: power
|
|
|
|
skills:
|
|
- guides/YAFictionGuide.md
|
|
- guides/RomanceFictionGuide.md
|
|
- guides/SciFiFictionGuide.md
|
|
|
|
agent_prompt:
|
|
- system.md
|
|
|
|
sections:
|
|
- project
|
|
- rag
|
|
- skills
|
|
- message
|
|
- instructions
|
|
|
|
steps:
|
|
- type: think
|
|
max_tokens: 4000
|
|
hint: |
|
|
TARGET AUDIENCE: {genre_audience}
|
|
GENRE: {genre_name}
|
|
CHAPTER: {chapter_ref}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
CHAPTER TEXT:
|
|
{chapter_text}
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Write a detailed editorial review from your perspective.
|
|
Be specific — cite line numbers or quote passages where relevant.
|
|
Structure your review as:
|
|
1. STRENGTHS (what is working)
|
|
2. CONCERNS (what needs attention, in priority order)
|
|
3. VERDICT (pass / revise / rewrite — and why)
|
|
|
|
- type: document
|
|
filename: "review-{chapter_ref}-{agent_slug}"
|
|
|
|
- type: close
|
|
rag_update: false
|
|
|
|
adjudication:
|
|
enabled: true
|
|
pass_threshold: 60
|
|
deliverable_type: editorial_review
|
|
criteria:
|
|
specificity:
|
|
weight: 40
|
|
description: "Review cites specific passages, scenes, or structural elements — not vague general commentary"
|
|
actionability:
|
|
weight: 35
|
|
description: "Each concern includes a concrete, implementable suggestion for improvement"
|
|
coverage:
|
|
weight: 25
|
|
description: "Review addresses both strengths and concerns, ending with a clear VERDICT (pass/revise/rewrite)"
|