design-instance
Map the Scholar method onto a new domain. Interviews the owner through the eight configuring questions (goal, unit, fidelity ladder, status axis, vocabulary, gates, roles, evaluator), starts from the
SKILL.md.claude/skills/design-instance/SKILL.md
GitHubDesign an instance
Step 1: find the closest existing instance
Read instances/README.md. Pick the one or two closest specs and read them fully. Say which you picked and why, in one sentence each.
Step 2: interview through the eight questions
Ask one question at a time. Offer the closest instance's answer as a starting point. Do not accept a vague answer; each question has a test.
| # | Question | The answer passes when |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Goal: what are we trying to establish, for whom, and what is off limits? | It names a holder (so "for" and "against" mean something) and a finished deliverable |
| 2 | Unit: what is the smallest thing a conclusion can cite, and how is it located? | A locator exists that a program can resolve back to exact text |
| 3 | Fidelity ladder: what counts as read from the source? | At least one confirming grade is not agent output; recollection and agent summaries never confirm |
| 4 | Status axis: may a unit be used at all? | There is a resolver (rule or adapter) that decides status per unit, and "unusable but true" is possible |
| 5 | Vocabulary: what framework do the experts judge by? | It is transcribed from an authoritative source with a location; issues crosswalk to it |
| 6 | Gates: what must the database refuse? | Each gate names a table, field, value and required evidence, and has a reject probe and an accept probe written out |
| 7 | Roles: who attacks, judges and audits? | At least one adversarial role and one decision-maker role; the auditor has graded verdicts |
| 8 | Evaluator: what fixed test decides whether the system is right or improving? | It has a mechanical part agents cannot edit; a real outcome is named if one exists |
Step 3: check the non-negotiables
Refuse to finalize until all hold:
- Coverage is provable (every unit labeled once; validator planned).
- Important labels carry verbatim quotes checked by a program.
- Gates live in the datastore and each has both-way probes.
- Fidelity and status are separate axes.
- Negative results have a place (ruled_out, refuted, rejected) and are never gated.
- Outcomes of attempts and attacks live on edges.
- Bulk ingest writes artifacts only.
- Lenses are projections; nothing is copied per reader.
- Human-owned files are listed (gates, ladders, evaluator, privacy).
- Privacy: deny list outside the repo; allowed providers named; no client data in engine files.
- Licensing of any borrowed material recorded.
Step 4: choose modules
List each module from docs/MODULES.md as "as-is" or "adapter needed" (and describe the adapter), plus optional modules (staleness for mutable corpora; discovery for hypothesis generation).
Step 5: write the files
Copy instances/_template/ to instances/<name>/. Fill in INSTANCE.md (all 13 sections, synthetic examples only) and instance.yaml.
Step 6: pilot plan and cost
- Pilot: one chunk end to end:
- intake
- labels
- validator self-test (planted misquote and missing label must fail)
- load
- one gate with probes
- one lens
- one role run
- two-labeler agreement sample
- Cost estimate: units × tokens per unit. The reference point is about 810 subagent tokens per unit for full expert reading with validation (instance 1: about 7.4M tokens over 9,101 units). Adjust down for status-aware skipping and tiered routing, and state the assumptions.
Step 7: report
Summarize for the owner:
- the eight answers
- what is unusual about this domain
- the adapters to build
- the pilot steps
- the cost estimate
- the open questions
Record decisions in docs/DECISIONS.md if they change the method.