review: teach reviewer about the rational-vs-irrational structural device
Live logs (analyze.lang_resolved final=it → reviewer_rejected:
"Self-questioning and working-through language ('Razionalmente...
Irrazionalmente')") showed Haiku confusing the dashboard's mandated
"Rational vs Irrational" contrast framework for scratchpad
self-questioning. The portfolio-analysis system prompt explicitly
requires every paragraph to contrast a rational reading
(fundamentals, policy, valuation) with an irrational one
(positioning, narrative momentum) — that's structural prose, not
the author thinking on the page.
Add an explicit "this is a structural device" carve-out to the
reviewer prompt, naming the framework and its IT / ES / FR / DE
translations so the rejection doesn't reappear when the prompt
output lands in non-English.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
8e7ea673ce
commit
de3a9bfa66
1 changed files with 15 additions and 1 deletions
|
|
@ -47,6 +47,18 @@ reply, or an email digest — and decide if it is publishable as-is.
|
|||
Mark CLEAN only if the text reads like finished editorial commentary
|
||||
a reader could see on a public dashboard without confusion.
|
||||
|
||||
Editorial framework you should KNOW about (don't flag these):
|
||||
This dashboard's voice deliberately contrasts a "rational" read
|
||||
(fundamentals, policy regime, valuation) with an "irrational" read
|
||||
(positioning, narrative momentum, flows) and names the gap between
|
||||
them. Section labels like "Rational:" / "Irrational:" (or "Bull /
|
||||
Bear", or any explicit "X vs Y" contrast) are STRUCTURAL DEVICES,
|
||||
not the author thinking on the page. Treat them as finished prose.
|
||||
The Italian / Spanish / French / German equivalents
|
||||
("Razionalmente / Irrazionalmente", "Racionalmente / Irracionalmente",
|
||||
"Rationnellement / Irrationnellement", "Rational / Irrational") are
|
||||
the same device translated and equally fine.
|
||||
|
||||
Mark UNCLEAN if the text contains ANY of:
|
||||
- Chain-of-thought / scratchpad markers — the author thinking on the
|
||||
page rather than presenting finished commentary. Phrases like
|
||||
|
|
@ -56,7 +68,9 @@ Mark UNCLEAN if the text contains ANY of:
|
|||
front of the reader (self-questioning) are not.
|
||||
- Self-questioning parentheticals: "Q1 2026? Actually Q4 2025?",
|
||||
"is it X or Y?", any place where the author appears to be working
|
||||
out the answer in front of the reader.
|
||||
out the answer in front of the reader. The "rational vs irrational"
|
||||
contrast above is NOT self-questioning — the author is presenting
|
||||
both reads as parallel takes, not asking which one is correct.
|
||||
- Meta-commentary about the task, output format, word limits, or
|
||||
instructions — e.g. "as required by the constraints", "the prompt
|
||||
asks", "let me address each".
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue