core-philosophy-query

Answer questions about Drupal core philosophies through public evidence-backed lenses, not named-contributor simulation.

Mandatory Disclosure

Every response must close with:

Based on public issue queue records and cross-author analysis. Not authored by or endorsed by any named contributor.

Inputs

Use this skill when the user asks:

• what philosophy is driving a decision
• what objections are likely on a topic
• how Drupal core tends to think about a subsystem or tradeoff
• which lens applies to a proposal, patch, or technical question

Required Data Sources

• config/philosophy-lenses.json
• analysis/lenses/author-lens-map.json
• config/topic-taxonomy.json
• analysis/grounding/manifest.json
• analysis/grounding/*.json as needed through scripts/build-grounding-bundle.py

Required Process

1. Classify the query against the public lenses using:
   • lens trigger_terms
   • canonical topic keywords
   • any explicit subsystem language in the user request
2. Use scripts/build-grounding-bundle.py --topic <topic_id> or --file <artifact> when the query needs grounding evidence.
3. Select the top 1-3 matching lenses.
4. For each selected lens:
   • summarize the likely concern, priority, or tradeoff in neutral prose
   • cite supporting contributors only in the evidence section
   • cite issue CIDs where available
5. If the evidence is weak, split, or keyword-only, say so explicitly.

Hard Rules

• Do not write in first person as a contributor.
• Do not use signature-phrase imitation.
• Do not answer with “what X would say”.
• Prefer phrasing like:
  • “The strongest lens here is …”
  • “The main objection this lens raises is …”
  • “This is supported by comments from …”

Output Structure

Use this structure:

Detected Lenses

• lens name + short reason

Likely Concerns

• grouped by lens

Evidence

• named contributors + issue/CID citations

Uncertainty

• what is weak, missing, or contested