ed/manual_slop
Private
Public Access
0
0
Fork 0
Code Activity

conductor(track): Add fable_review_20260617 spec + metadata

Browse Source 
Critical-analysis track for Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 system prompt (1585 lines, the public 'Mythos' version). 10 cluster sub-reports written by Tier 3 workers in parallel, synthesized by Tier 1 into a 17-section report (>3500 LOC) with 3 side artifacts. T-shirt size: XL. Fable artifact at docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt is local-only and MUST NOT be committed (per user hard rule). No day estimates (per conductor/workflow.md §Tier 1 Track Initialization Rules).
This commit is contained in:
Edward R. Gonzalez
2026-06-17 01:15:58 -04:00
parent c1d9a966d7
commit 058e2c9385
2 changed files with 511 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/metadata.json
+91
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
{
"track_id": "fable_review_20260617",
"name": "Fable System Prompt Review (Critical Analysis)",
"initialized": "2026-06-17",
"owner": "tier1-orchestrator (spec + synthesis); tier2-tech-lead (dispatch + QA)",
"priority": "medium",
"status": "spec_approved",
"type": "research-only (critical-analysis deliverable; no src/ changes, no tests/ changes, no new deps)",
"domain": "meta-tooling (the report is a critical-analysis deliverable; the track produces no Application code)",
"user_hard_rule": "docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt is NEVER committed. The artifact stays at that local path; the report and the cluster sub-references quote line ranges (≤15 words per quote) but the file does not enter git. Do not modify .gitignore for this; the rule is enforced by the implementer's discipline, not by a tracked file. git add . MUST be inspected before each commit in this track.",
"scope": {
"new_files": [
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/spec.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/metadata.json",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/state.toml",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_1_product_branding.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_2_refusal_architecture.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_3_user_wellbeing_watchdog.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_4_tone_and_formatting.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_5_mistakes_and_criticism.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_6_evenhandedness.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_7_epistemic_discipline.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_8_memory_and_storage.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_9_computer_use.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_10_mcp_app_suggestions.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/report.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/comparison_table.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/decisions.md",
"conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md"
],
"modified_files": [
"conductor/tracks.md (register the track in the appropriate section)"
],
"deleted_files": [],
"external_resources": [
"docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt (LOCAL-ONLY; 1585 lines, 120KB; the subject of the review; NEVER COMMITTED)",
"conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/ (the nagent corpus; 11 files; all in scope)"
]
},
"blocked_by": [],
"blocks": [
"the deferred nagent-rebuild (the recommendations in decisions.md are inputs to that future track; the rebuild is not this track)"
],
"estimated_phases": 7,
"tshirt_size": "XL (similar to the nagent_review v2.3 rewrite at 4,969 lines; 10 cluster sub-reports + 17-section synthesis report + 3 side artifacts = ~10,300 LOC total)",
"estimated_effort": "scope: 1 spec + 1 metadata.json + 1 state.toml + 10 cluster sub-reports (~3,500 LOC) + 1 main report (4,800 LOC) + 3 side artifacts (1,350 LOC) = T-shirt size XL. Method: scope (per conductor/workflow.md §Tier 1 Track Initialization Rules). NO day estimates.",
"phases": [
{"id": 1, "name": "Initialize track + skeletons", "tshirt": "S", "sub_agents": 0},
{"id": 2, "name": "Dispatch 10 cluster sub-agents in parallel", "tshirt": "L", "sub_agents": 10},
{"id": 3, "name": "Tier 1 writes 17 synthesis sections (max-token-output strategy)", "tshirt": "XL", "sub_agents": 0},
{"id": 4, "name": "Tier 1 writes 3 side artifacts", "tshirt": "M", "sub_agents": 0},
{"id": 5, "name": "Self-review per the brainstorming skill", "tshirt": "S", "sub_agents": 0},
{"id": 6, "name": "User review gate", "tshirt": "S", "sub_agents": 0},
{"id": 7, "name": "Final commit + register track in conductor/tracks.md", "tshirt": "S", "sub_agents": 0}
],
"spec": "spec.md",
"plan": "to be authored by the writing-plans skill after spec approval",
"verification_criteria": [
"All 10 cluster sub-reports exist at conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_N_*.md and are 200-500 lines each.",
"Every cluster sub-report cites specific Fable line numbers, project file:line refs, and nagent section refs.",
"Every cluster sub-report has a verdict (Useful / Persona Performance / Anti-User / Mixed) with justification.",
"Every cluster sub-report has a 'Synthesis notes for the Tier 1 writer' section.",
"The synthesis report conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/report.md has all 17 sections present and non-empty.",
"The synthesis report is >3500 LOC.",
"Every synthesis section references its source cluster(s) by file:line.",
"The 3 side artifacts exist at conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/{comparison_table.md, decisions.md, nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md}.",
"comparison_table.md has ~100 rows.",
"decisions.md has 15-20 concrete recommendations.",
"nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md is ~150 lines.",
"The Fable artifact at docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt was NEVER committed. Verification command: git log --all --full-history -- 'docs/artifacts/Fable*' returns zero entries.",
"Self-review pass complete (placeholder scan, internal consistency, scope check, ambiguity check).",
"User has reviewed and approved the final report.",
"conductor/tracks.md is updated to register the track.",
"All commits are per-file atomic with git notes.",
"state.toml final state is current_phase = 7 and the track is in the appropriate section per the convention."
],
"pre_existing_failures_remaining": [],
"deferred_to_followup_tracks": [
{"title": "Deferred nagent-rebuild (Manual Slop agent-directive overhaul)", "description": "User-deferred 1-2 weeks (per 2026-06-17 user message). The Fable review's decisions.md is one of several inputs to this rebuild; the rebuild itself is not this track.", "track_status": "user-deferred (no track yet)"}
],
"risk_register": [
{"name": "Fable prompt grows/evolves during the track", "likelihood": "low", "impact": "low", "mitigation": "The artifact is a snapshot at 2026-06-17; we note the date. If the user has a newer version, the track re-dispatches the cluster agents."},
{"name": "10 sub-agents in parallel = high token cost", "likelihood": "medium", "impact": "medium (cost)", "mitigation": "Each sub-agent gets a 500-line output budget; the dispatch is mma_exec.py --role tier3-worker with explicit context files. Total cluster output: ~3,500 LOC across 10 files."},
{"name": "Tier 1's synthesis hits context pressure after 17 sections", "likelihood": "medium", "impact": "high (track stalls mid-synthesis)", "mitigation": "Per-section commits serve as a rollback point; if Tier 1 hits pressure mid-section, the section can be handed off to a fresh Tier 1 with the cluster reports + the previous sections as context."},
{"name": "User disagrees with a verdict", "likelihood": "low", "impact": "low", "mitigation": "The user-review gate at the end of phase 6 catches this; revisions are local."},
{"name": "Cluster sub-agents over-quote Fable (copyright)", "likelihood": "low", "impact": "medium", "mitigation": "Each cluster's acceptance check enforces the ≤15-word quote discipline; Fable's own rule applied externally."},
{"name": "Fable artifact accidentally committed", "likelihood": "low", "impact": "high (user's hard rule violated)", "mitigation": "The Fable artifact is NEVER in the same git add as anything else. Per-commit git status inspection. Final verification: git log --all --full-history -- 'docs/artifacts/Fable*' returns zero."},
{"name": "Tier 2 doesn't dispatch cluster sub-agents correctly", "likelihood": "medium", "impact": "medium", "mitigation": "The Tier 1's spec includes the read budget per sub-agent (§5). The Tier 2's plan must include explicit context-file lists per dispatch."},
{"name": "Tier 1's report deviates from the cluster verdicts (editorial drift)", "likelihood": "low", "impact": "low", "mitigation": "The synthesis report's verdicts are anchored to the cluster reports' verdicts; if a synthesis section changes a verdict, it must explicitly note the override."}
]
}
conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/spec.md
+420
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,420 @@
# Track: Fable System Prompt Review (Critical Analysis)
**Status:** Spec approved 2026-06-17
**Initialized:** 2026-06-17
**Owner:** Tier 1 Orchestrator (spec + synthesis); Tier 2 Tech Lead (dispatch + QA)
**Priority:** Medium (user-requested critical review; informs the deferred nagent-rebuild, scheduled 1-2 weeks out)
**Type:** Research-only (no `src/` changes, no `tests/` changes, no new deps, no agent-directive modifications)
**Domain:** Meta-Tooling (the report is a *critical-analysis deliverable*; the track produces no Application code)
> **Purpose.** This track produces a single critical-analysis report: a side-by-side comparison of Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 system prompt (the public version of "Mythos") against Manual Slop's existing agent-directive corpus and Mike Acton's nagent patterns, with verdicts on which Fable patterns are *generally useful*, which are *persona performance* (irrelevant constraint dressing), and which are *anti-user watch-dogging* (the model is text generation, not a clinician). The report is the *evidence document* the user can use to argue against Fable-style "helpful, harmless, honest" framing in agent systems. The track is *research-only*; no edits to the project's directives, no follow-up implementation.
> **Companion doc.** The actual report is at `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/report.md`. This `spec.md` is the conductor/track wrapper: the design intent, the cluster architecture, the synthesis plan, the verification criteria, the out-of-scope notes, and the connection to the deferred nagent-rebuild.
> **Hard rule (the user was explicit).** `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` is **never committed**. The artifact stays at that local path; the report and the cluster sub-references quote line ranges (≤15 words per quote, the same discipline Fable itself applies to its own search results) but the file does not enter git. **Do not** modify `.gitignore` for this; the rule is enforced by the implementer's discipline, not by a tracked file. `git add .` MUST be inspected before each commit in this track.
---
## 1. Overview
This track produces a critical analysis of Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 system prompt (1585 lines, 120KB), comparing it against:
1. **Manual Slop's existing agent-directive corpus** — `AGENTS.md` (200 lines), `conductor/*.md` (workflow.md, product.md, product-guidelines.md, tech-stack.md, edit_workflow.md, tracks.md, index.md), `conductor/code_styleguides/*.md` (11 files), `.opencode/agents/*.md` (6 files), `.opencode/commands/*.md` (9 files), `docs/*.md` (40+ files including 36 `guide_*.md`), and the superpowers-plugin content loaded via the opencode `skill` tool.
2. **Mike Acton's nagent reports** in `conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/` — the original `nagent_takeaways_20260608.md`, the `report.md`, the `decisions.md`, the `comparison_table.md`, and the v2 series (`nagent_review_v2_20260612.md`, `v2_1`, `v2_2`, `v2_3`).
The analytical framework is the user's own framing: **how much of Fable is generally useful vs. how much is "nerf on the model's capabilities" via persona constraint, anti-user watch-dogging, or fake-clinician framing?**
The report follows the nagent_review track's distributed-sub-agent pattern: 10 cluster sub-reports written in parallel by Tier 3 workers, then synthesized by Tier 1 in 17+ section-passes using a max-token-output strategy to hit **>3500 LOC total**.
### 1.1 What this track produces
| Artifact | Purpose | Owner | Approx LOC |
|---|---|---|---|
| `spec.md` | This file — the track design. | Tier 1 | ~400 |
| `metadata.json` | The track metadata (id, scope, blocks, etc.). | Tier 1 | ~50 |
| `state.toml` | The track state (current_phase, task tracking). | Tier 1 | ~80 |
| `research/cluster_1_product_branding.md` | Cluster 1 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~300 |
| `research/cluster_2_refusal_architecture.md` | Cluster 2 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~400 |
| `research/cluster_3_user_wellbeing_watchdog.md` | Cluster 3 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~400 |
| `research/cluster_4_tone_and_formatting.md` | Cluster 4 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~300 |
| `research/cluster_5_mistakes_and_criticism.md` | Cluster 5 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~250 |
| `research/cluster_6_evenhandedness.md` | Cluster 6 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~350 |
| `research/cluster_7_epistemic_discipline.md` | Cluster 7 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~400 |
| `research/cluster_8_memory_and_storage.md` | Cluster 8 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~400 |
| `research/cluster_9_computer_use.md` | Cluster 9 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~350 |
| `research/cluster_10_mcp_app_suggestions.md` | Cluster 10 sub-report. | Tier 3 sub-agent | ~300 |
| `report.md` | The main synthesis report (17 sections, >3500 LOC). | Tier 1 | ~4800 |
| `comparison_table.md` | Flat side-by-side verdict table. | Tier 1 | ~700 |
| `decisions.md` | Recommendations for the deferred nagent-rebuild. | Tier 1 | ~500 |
| `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md` | Fable-specific extension to `nagent_takeaways_20260608.md`. | Tier 1 | ~150 |
**Total new files:** 17 (16 markdown + 1 metadata.json + 1 state.toml). Approx total LOC: ~10,300.
### 1.2 Non-Goals
- **Not** modifying any agent-directive file in the project. The recommendations go in `decisions.md` for the user's deferred nagent-rebuild (1-2 weeks out).
- **Not** building any recommendation. The deferred rebuild is its own track.
- **Not** comparing Fable to other commercial system prompts (OpenAI, Google, xAI). Out of scope; Fable is the named subject.
- **Not** reading every line of every project file. Cluster sub-agents read the relevant sections of the relevant files; full-file reads are unnecessary and would waste context.
- **Not** committing the Fable artifact. The artifact stays at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt`; clusters quote line ranges but the file itself never enters git.
- **Not** adding new `src/` code, new tests, `pyproject.toml` dependencies, or `scripts/` files.
- **Not** running automated tests. The track is research-only; verification is the brainstorming-skill self-review plus user review.
---
## 2. Current State Audit (as of commit `HEAD`, 2026-06-17)
### 2.1 Already Implemented (DO NOT re-implement)
The Fable artifact exists at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` (120,039 bytes, 1585 lines). The cluster sub-agents and the synthesis report reference it by file path + line range. The artifact is the *only* Fable source material; nothing else Fable-specific is in the project.
The nagent_review corpus is at `conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/`:
| File | LOC | Bytes | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
| `nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md` | 4969 | 276,531 | The latest full rewrite (v2.3, 2026-06-12). The 14 patterns + the 16 future-track candidates. |
| `nagent_review_v2_20260612.md` | 1335 | 68,428 | The v2 draft (preserved per user). |
| `nagent_review_v2_1_20260612.md` | 1197 | 58,844 | The user-revised v2.1 (CLAUDE.md → AGENTS.md swap, RAG reframe, cache TTL GUI controls). |
| `nagent_review_v2_2_20260612.md` | 712 | 35,356 | The v2.2 incremental. |
| `nagent_takeaways_20260608.md` | 599 | 31,238 | The original 10 takeaways from the v1 review. |
| `report.md` | 1024 | 52,544 | The v1 14-section deep-dive. |
| `decisions.md` | 286 | 18,433 | The 10 future-track candidates from v1. |
| `comparison_table.md` | 211 | 10,849 | The flat side-by-side table from v1. |
| `spec.md` | 240 | 21,173 | The v1 spec. |
| `state.toml` | — | 19,477 | The track state. |
| `metadata.json` | — | 20,034 | The track metadata. |
The agent-directive files that the clusters will reference (per the user's scope clarification):
| Directory | File count | Approx total LOC |
|---|---|---|
| `AGENTS.md` (root) | 1 | ~200 |
| `conductor/*.md` | 7 | ~3000 |
| `conductor/code_styleguides/*.md` | 11 | ~2400 |
| `.opencode/agents/*.md` | 6 | ~1100 |
| `.opencode/commands/*.md` | 9 | ~700 |
| `docs/*.md` (excluding `superpowers/`) | 40+ | ~16,000 |
| `conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/*` | 11 | ~10,500 |
| superpowers plugin content (loaded via `skill` tool) | — | n/a (in-context only) |
### 2.2 Gaps to Fill (This Track's Scope)
- **The synthesis report.** A 17-section, >3500-LOC critical analysis of Fable against the project's directives and nagent patterns. Does not exist.
- **The 10 cluster sub-reports.** Distributed parallel sub-agent output. Do not exist.
- **The comparison table.** A flat verdict-by-verdict cross-reference of Fable's themes against the project's themes. Does not exist.
- **The decisions file.** Concrete recommendations for the deferred nagent-rebuild. Does not exist.
- **The nagent_takeaways extension.** A Fable-specific addendum to the v1 takeaways file. Does not exist.
### 2.3 Pre-Existing Conditions the Track Must Respect
- The deferred nagent-rebuild: per the user, the project's agent directives are not yet overhauled based on `nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md`. The Fable review is a *parallel* analysis that will inform (but not consume) the deferred rebuild.
- The data-oriented error handling convention: the project's `Result[T]` / `ErrorInfo` convention (per `conductor/code_styleguides/error_handling.md`) is the data-grounded contrast to Fable's persona-driven error-handling guidance. The synthesis report uses the convention's terminology when discussing Fable's error responses.
- The "less Python does, the better" heuristic: the synthesis report is itself a critical-analysis document; the report's verbosity is deliberate (per the user's max-token-output strategy) but the *conclusions* should be terse and actionable.
---
## 3. Goals (Priority Order)
| Priority | Goal | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| **A (primary value)** | The synthesis report (`report.md`, >3500 LOC) covers all 17 sections, each with a clear verdict on every Fable pattern in scope. | The report is the deliverable. |
| **A (primary value)** | The 10 cluster sub-reports (`research/cluster_*.md`) cite specific Fable line numbers, project file:line refs, and nagent section refs. | The clusters are the evidence base. The synthesis report cites them by file:line. |
| **A (primary value)** | The "Useful vs Persona vs Anti-User" framework is applied consistently to every cluster. Every Fable pattern gets a verdict; no pattern is left unjudged. | The framework is the analytical lens the user asked for. |
| **B (analytical)** | The 3 side artifacts (`comparison_table.md`, `decisions.md`, `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md`) are produced and consistent with the synthesis report. | The side artifacts make the synthesis referenceable and actionable for the deferred rebuild. |
| **B (process)** | The cluster sub-agents enforce the ≤15-word quote discipline (Fable's own rule applied externally). No long paraphrased passages that mirror Fable's structure (also Fable's rule, per `search_instructions`). | Defensive against the Fable copyright pattern; the report is "evidence document" not "Fable reproduction." |
| **B (process)** | Each cluster is independently verifiable: a reader can re-derive the verdict by reading the cluster sub-report + the cited Fable lines + the cited project files. | The report's credibility depends on traceability. |
| **C (housekeeping)** | `conductor/tracks.md` is updated to register the track in the "Recently Completed" section when the track ships. | Standard per-track convention. |
| **C (housekeeping)** | The Fable artifact at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` is **not** committed. The track's git history contains zero references to the artifact's bytes (only to the path for citation). | The user's hard rule. |
---
## 4. Architecture (the cluster + synthesis design)
### 4.1 Cluster Sub-Report Template (per `research/cluster_N_*.md`)
Each cluster follows the `cluster_8_metadesk.md` template from `intent_dsl_survey_20260612/`:
```markdown
# Cluster N: {Title}
**Sub-agent dispatch:** Tier 3 Worker (2026-06-17). Read-only research task.
**Sources read:**
- `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` lines X-Y
- {project file:line refs}
- {nagent_review file:line refs}
---
## 1. What Fable says
{Verbatim quotes ≤15 words with line numbers; paraphrases otherwise.}
## 2. What this project does
{Citations from AGENTS.md, conductor/*.md, .opencode/*, code_styleguides/*.md, docs/*.md}
## 3. What nagent does
{Citations from nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md and friends.}
## 4. Verdict
{Useful / Persona Performance / Anti-User / Mixed, with 1-paragraph justification.}
## 5. Synthesis notes for the Tier 1 writer
{Which synthesis report section(s) this cluster feeds; key claims to surface; quotes to use.}
---
**Sub-report complete.** This is the evidence base for §{N} of `report.md`.
```
### 4.2 The Synthesis Report Plan (`report.md`, 17 sections, >3500 LOC)
| § | Section | Approx LOC | Source clusters | Verdict orientation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | TL;DR + Verdict Scorecard (1-page summary table) | 100 | All | (summary) |
| 1 | The 3 Sources (Fable, Manual Slop, nagent) — what's in scope | 200 | n/a | (framing) |
| 2 | The "Useful vs Persona vs Anti-User" Framework | 250 | n/a | (methodology) |
| 3 | Fable's Product Branding & "Helpful Assistant" Persona | 300 | 1 | Persona Performance |
| 4 | Fable's Refusal Architecture & "Safety Theater" | 350 | 2 | Anti-User + Persona |
| 5 | Fable's Mental-Health Watchdog Framing | 350 | 3 | Anti-User |
| 6 | Fable's Tone & Formatting Constraints | 250 | 4 | Useful + Persona |
| 7 | Fable's Mistake Handling | 200 | 5 | Persona |
| 8 | Fable's Evenhandedness & Contested Content | 300 | 6 | Persona + Useful caveats |
| 9 | Fable's Epistemic Discipline & Search Strategy | 350 | 7 | Useful |
| 10 | Fable's Memory System & Persistent Storage | 350 | 8 | Useful + nagent-stronger |
| 11 | Fable's Computer-Use / File Workflow | 300 | 9 | Useful + over-broad |
| 12 | Fable's MCP App Suggestions | 250 | 10 | Useful + over-engineered |
| 13 | The "Genuinely Useful" Patterns (Manual Slop should adopt) | 350 | 7-10 | Useful summary |
| 14 | The "Anti-User Watchdog" Patterns (Manual Slop should explicitly reject) | 350 | 2-6 | Anti-User summary |
| 15 | The "Persona Performance" Patterns (irrelevant to the rebuild) | 250 | 1, 4, 5, 8 | Persona summary |
| 16 | Recommendations for the deferred nagent-rebuild | 200 | All | Actionable |
| 17 | References (file:line index) | 150 | All | Index |
| **Total** | | **~4,800** | | |
The "max token output strategy" works like this: each section is its own `write`/`manual-slop_edit_file` call by Tier 1, with the cluster reports + the previous sections loaded into context. 17 sections = 17 atomic commits (per `conductor/workflow.md` §"Task Workflow" step 9).
### 4.3 The Cluster-to-Section Mapping
The synthesis report's section count (17) is intentionally larger than the cluster count (10) so each cluster's evidence can be spread across multiple synthesis sections (e.g., Cluster 2 "refusal" feeds §4 directly and §14's anti-user summary; Cluster 7 "epistemic" feeds §9 directly and §13's useful summary).
### 4.4 Tier 1's Workflow Per Section
1. Read the relevant cluster sub-report(s) in full.
2. Read the cited Fable lines (via `manual-slop_get_file_slice`).
3. Read the cited project file lines (via `manual-slop_get_file_slice` or `manual-slop_py_get_definition` for code refs).
4. Read the cited nagent_review sections (via `manual-slop_get_file_slice`).
5. Write the synthesis section with a `write` or `manual-slop_set_file_slice` call.
6. Self-review the section for placeholders, internal consistency, scope, ambiguity.
7. Commit with a 1-3 sentence commit message; attach a git note summarizing the section.
8. Move to the next section.
---
## 5. The 10 Cluster Specifications
| # | Cluster | Fable source | Project refs | nagent refs | Sub-agent read budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Product Branding & "Helpful Assistant" Persona** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:1-31` (`product_information`) | `AGENTS.md` (root); `conductor/product.md`; `docs/Readme.md` (the "What This Is" framing) | n/a (nagent doesn't have product branding) | 600 lines |
| 2 | **Refusal Architecture & "Safety Theater"** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:32-53` (`refusal_handling`, `legal_and_financial_advice`) | `AGENTS.md` §"Critical Anti-Patterns"; `conductor/workflow.md` §"Skip-Marker Policy"; `conductor/code_styleguides/error_handling.md` | nagent §14 (Own the Inputs); nagent §2.1 (4 memory dimensions) | 800 lines |
| 3 | **User Wellbeing / Mental-Health Watchdog** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:78-110` (`user_wellbeing`) | `conductor/product-guidelines.md` §"AI-Optimized Compact Style"; `conductor/code_styleguides/agent_memory_dimensions.md`; `docs/guide_discussions.md` | nagent §2.1 (4 memory dimensions, esp. the knowledge dim); nagent §13 (Compaction) | 800 lines |
| 4 | **Tone & Formatting Constraints** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:54-77` (`tone_and_formatting`, `lists_and_bullets`); plus cross-ref to line 110's "no engagement" rule in `user_wellbeing` | `AGENTS.md` (root); `conductor/product-guidelines.md`; `.opencode/agents/tier*.md` | nagent §3.8 (CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md @import pattern) | 600 lines |
| 5 | **Mistakes & Criticism Handling** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:134-140` (`responding_to_mistakes_and_criticism`) | `AGENTS.md` §"receiving-code-review"; `.opencode/agents/tier3-worker.md`; `conductor/workflow.md` §"Process Anti-Patterns" | nagent §5.5 (Self-review); nagent §3.4 (Compaction self-review) | 500 lines |
| 6 | **Evenhandedness & Contested Content** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:120-132` (`evenhandedness`) | `AGENTS.md` §"receiving-code-review"; `conductor/code_styleguides/rag_integration_discipline.md` | nagent §2.10 (RAG integration discipline) | 700 lines |
| 7 | **Epistemic Discipline & Search Strategy** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:142-150, 422-565` (`knowledge_cutoff`, `search_instructions`) | `conductor/code_styleguides/rag_integration_discipline.md`; `conductor/code_styleguides/cache_friendly_context.md`; `docs/guide_rag.md` | nagent §3.2 (Cache ordering); nagent §2.10 (RAG discipline); nagent §13 (Compaction) | 800 lines |
| 8 | **Memory System & Persistent Storage** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:152-236` (`memory_system`, `persistent_storage_for_artifacts`) | `src/models.py` (History); `docs/guide_discussions.md`; `conductor/code_styleguides/agent_memory_dimensions.md`; `docs/guide_knowledge_curation.md` | nagent §2.1 (4 memory dimensions); nagent §3.9 (Per-file knowledge notes) | 800 lines |
| 9 | **Computer-Use / Skills / File Workflow** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:287-420` (`computer_use`, `file_creation_advice`, `producing_outputs`) | `docs/guide_tools.md` (MCP tools); `conductor/tech-stack.md` (file system); `conductor/edit_workflow.md` | nagent §11 (Large files); nagent §12 (Tool discovery, `--description` self-describing) | 700 lines |
| 10 | **MCP App Suggestions & Third-Party Connectors** | `Fable System Prompt.txt:238-285` (`mcp_app_suggestions`) | `docs/guide_mcp_client.md`; `docs/guide_tools.md` §"MCP"; `docs/guide_state_lifecycle.md` §"Hook API" | nagent §12 (Tool discovery, `--description` self-describing); nagent §2.7 (Conversations are editable state) | 600 lines |
**Sub-agent read budget total:** 6,900 lines across 10 sub-agents. Each sub-agent gets one `mma_exec.py --role tier3-worker` dispatch with explicit context files (the Fable slice + the project file refs + the nagent section refs) and an output budget of 300-500 lines per cluster.
---
## 6. Functional Requirements
### 6.1 Cluster Sub-Agent Output
Each of the 10 cluster sub-reports MUST:
1. Cite Fable lines verbatim (≤15 words per quote) with `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` file:line references.
2. Cite project file:line references for every "what this project does" claim.
3. Cite nagent_review section references for every "what nagent does" claim.
4. Provide a verdict (Useful / Persona Performance / Anti-User / Mixed) with 1-paragraph justification.
5. Provide a "Synthesis notes for the Tier 1 writer" section naming the target synthesis report section(s) and key claims to surface.
6. Be 200-500 lines.
7. Be committed to `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_N_*.md` as a separate file (1 file per cluster; 10 commits total).
### 6.2 Synthesis Report Output
The synthesis report (`report.md`) MUST:
1. Have all 17 sections present and non-empty.
2. Total >3500 LOC.
3. Each section references its source cluster(s) by file:line.
4. Each section's "verdict orientation" (per the table in §4.2) is clear and consistent with the cluster's verdict.
5. Be committed in 17 atomic commits (1 per section), each with a 1-3 sentence commit message and a git note.
### 6.3 Side Artifacts
The 3 side artifacts MUST:
1. `comparison_table.md` — flat table with ~100 rows (one per Fable sub-theme), columns: Fable sub-theme | Fable line | Project file:line | nagent section | Verdict. ~700 lines.
2. `decisions.md` — 15-20 concrete recommendations for the deferred nagent-rebuild, each with: rationale, source evidence (cluster file:line), suggested Manual Slop destination (AGENTS.md / code_styleguide / etc.), priority. ~500 lines.
3. `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md` — a 17th takeaway to append to the nagent_takeaways_20260608.md model: "Persona-performance directives don't survive the Fable audit; only epistemic + memory + workflow rules have durable value." ~150 lines.
### 6.4 The Fable Artifact Discipline
- The artifact at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` MUST NOT be committed.
- Every `git add` in this track MUST be inspected before commit to verify no Fable artifact bytes enter the index.
- The cluster sub-reports and the synthesis report reference the artifact by file path + line range only.
- If a cluster sub-agent or a synthesis section needs to quote more than 15 words from Fable, it MUST paraphrase instead (per Fable's own rule at `Fable System Prompt.txt:486-499`).
- The final track commit includes a verification step: `git log --all --full-history -- 'docs/artifacts/Fable*'` MUST return zero entries.
### 6.5 Track Registration
- `conductor/tracks.md` is updated to register the track in the appropriate section (research track; under "Active" while in progress, "Recently Completed" when shipped).
- `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/state.toml` is initialized at the start of phase 1 and updated per task.
---
## 7. Non-Functional Requirements
### 7.1 Process Discipline
- All commits are per-file atomic (per `conductor/workflow.md` §"Task Workflow" step 9).
- All commits have git notes attached (per `conductor/workflow.md` §"Task Workflow" step 9.2).
- All tasks are recorded in `state.toml` with commit SHAs.
- No day / hour / minute estimates in any track artifact. T-shirt size only (per `conductor/workflow.md` §"Tier 1 Track Initialization Rules" + the user's 2026-06-16 directive).
- The 1-space indentation rule applies to the `metadata.json` and `state.toml` only (Markdown is not Python; the rule doesn't apply to prose).
### 7.2 Documentation Conventions
- The synthesis report uses the 1-sentence-per-line pattern for dense content (per `conductor/product-guidelines.md` §"AI-Optimized Compact Style").
- The synthesis report uses `#region: Name` / `#endregion: Name` for large sections (not applicable to markdown; this is a Python-only rule).
- All file:line references are stable (the report is the durable artifact; the Fable artifact may change).
### 7.3 Audit Hooks (Optional)
- This track is research-only; no `scripts/audit_*.py` scripts are added or modified. The deferred nagent-rebuild is the appropriate place for any new audit scripts.
---
## 8. Architecture Reference
- **`docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt`** (1585 lines, 120KB) — the subject of the review. **Local-only; never committed.**
- **`conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/`** — the nagent corpus. All 11 files in scope. The 17 sections of the synthesis report reference this corpus for "what nagent does" claims.
- **`AGENTS.md`** (root) — the project's top-level agent-facing rules. Cluster 1, 4, 5, 6 reference this.
- **`conductor/product.md`** (27K) — the product vision. Cluster 1 references the "What This Is" framing.
- **`conductor/product-guidelines.md`** (20K) — the AI-Optimized Compact Style. Clusters 3, 4 reference the formatting heuristics.
- **`conductor/workflow.md`** (63K) — the operational workflow. Clusters 2, 5 reference the Skip-Marker Policy + Process Anti-Patterns.
- **`conductor/tech-stack.md`** (15K) — the tech stack. Cluster 9 references the file-system + tools layout.
- **`conductor/edit_workflow.md`** (9K) — the edit workflow. Cluster 9 references the 1-space indentation + small-edits rule.
- **`conductor/code_styleguides/`** (11 files, ~140K) — the convention catalog. Clusters 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 reference these (especially `error_handling.md`, `agent_memory_dimensions.md`, `rag_integration_discipline.md`, `cache_friendly_context.md`, `knowledge_artifacts.md`, `feature_flags.md`).
- **`.opencode/agents/*.md`** (6 files) — the 4 MMA tier agents + explore + general. Clusters 1, 4, 5 reference these for the "what every agent sees" baseline.
- **`.opencode/commands/*.md`** (9 files) — the 5 conductor commands + 4 mma commands. Cluster 5 references the `/conductor-new-track` command for the "this is a track" framing.
- **`docs/AGENTS.md`** — the agent-facing mirror. Cluster 1 references the "What This Is" framing.
- **`docs/guide_*.md`** (36 files, ~580K) — the 14 deep-dive guides. Clusters 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 reference these selectively (especially `guide_tools.md`, `guide_mcp_client.md`, `guide_discussions.md`, `guide_rag.md`, `guide_knowledge_curation.md`).
- **Superpowers plugin content** (loaded via the `skill` tool) — the brainstorming, writing-plans, test-driven-development, etc. skills. The Tier 1's self-review uses the brainstorming skill; the Tier 2's plan-phase uses the writing-plans skill. Not directly cited in the synthesis report.
- **`docs/reports/PLANNING_DIGEST_*.md`** (if present) — the most recent planning digest. Used for "what's the recommended execution order" sanity check; not directly cited in the report.
---
## 9. Phases (the implementation plan Tier 2 will execute)
| Phase | Description | T-shirt | Sub-agents | Exit criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **1** | Initialize track directory + skeleton `report.md` (with section headers), `comparison_table.md` (with column headers), `decisions.md` (with template), `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md` (empty). Initialize `state.toml`. Register track in `conductor/tracks.md` "Active" section. | S | 0 | All skeleton files exist; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 1`. |
| **2** | Dispatch 10 cluster sub-agents in parallel (Tier 3 workers, read-only). Each writes `research/cluster_N_*.md` (200-500 lines). Verify each sub-report: source citations present, ≤15-word quotes only, verdict present, synthesis notes present. | L | 10 parallel | All 10 cluster sub-reports committed; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 2`. |
| **3** | Tier 1 reads all cluster reports, writes the synthesis report sections one at a time (17 sections, 17 commits). Each section references its cluster(s) by file:line. | XL | 0 (Tier 1) | All 17 sections committed; `report.md` >3500 LOC; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 3`. |
| **4** | Tier 1 writes the 3 side artifacts (`comparison_table.md`, `decisions.md`, `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md`). | M | 0 (Tier 1) | All 3 side artifacts committed; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 4`. |
| **5** | Self-review per the brainstorming skill (placeholder scan, internal consistency, scope check, ambiguity check) on the full report + side artifacts. Fix any issues inline. | S | 0 (Tier 1) | Self-review checklist complete; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 5`. |
| **6** | User review gate. Tier 1 presents the report to the user. User approves or iterates. | S | 0 (user) | User approves (or iterates until approved); `state.toml` says `current_phase = 6`. |
| **7** | Final commit + git notes + register track as completed in `conductor/tracks.md` "Recently Completed" section. Update `state.toml` to `current_phase = 7` and `status = "active"` until archived. | S | 0 (Tier 1) | Track registered; `state.toml` final; `state.toml` says `current_phase = 7`. |
**Total scope:** 1 spec + 1 metadata.json + 1 state.toml + 10 cluster sub-reports (~3,500 LOC) + 1 main report (4,800 LOC) + 3 side artifacts (1,350 LOC) = **T-shirt size: XL** (similar to the nagent_review v2.3 rewrite at 4,969 lines).
---
## 10. Verification Criteria
The track is "done" when all of the following are true:
- [ ] All 10 cluster sub-reports exist at `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_N_*.md` and are 200-500 lines each.
- [ ] Every cluster sub-report cites specific Fable line numbers, project file:line refs, and nagent section refs.
- [ ] Every cluster sub-report has a verdict (Useful / Persona Performance / Anti-User / Mixed) with justification.
- [ ] Every cluster sub-report has a "Synthesis notes for the Tier 1 writer" section.
- [ ] The synthesis report `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/report.md` has all 17 sections present and non-empty.
- [ ] The synthesis report is >3500 LOC.
- [ ] Every synthesis section references its source cluster(s) by file:line.
- [ ] The 3 side artifacts exist at `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/{comparison_table.md, decisions.md, nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md}`.
- [ ] `comparison_table.md` has ~100 rows.
- [ ] `decisions.md` has 15-20 concrete recommendations.
- [ ] `nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md` is ~150 lines.
- [ ] The Fable artifact at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt` was **never committed**. Verification command: `git log --all --full-history -- 'docs/artifacts/Fable*'` returns zero entries.
- [ ] Self-review pass complete (placeholder scan, internal consistency, scope check, ambiguity check).
- [ ] User has reviewed and approved the final report.
- [ ] `conductor/tracks.md` is updated to register the track.
- [ ] All commits are per-file atomic with git notes.
- [ ] `state.toml` final state is `current_phase = 7` and the track is in "Recently Completed" (or the appropriate section per the convention).
---
## 11. Risks & Mitigations
| Risk | Impact | Likelihood | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fable prompt grows/evolves during the track | Low (the artifact is a snapshot) | Low | The artifact is a snapshot at 2026-06-17; we note the date. If the user has a newer version, the track re-dispatches the cluster agents. |
| 10 sub-agents in parallel = high token cost | Medium (cost) | Medium | Each sub-agent gets a 500-line output budget; the dispatch is `mma_exec.py --role tier3-worker` with explicit context files. Total cluster output: ~3,500 LOC across 10 files. |
| Tier 1's synthesis hits context pressure after 17 sections | High (track stalls mid-synthesis) | Medium | Per-section commits serve as a rollback point; if Tier 1 hits pressure mid-section, the section can be handed off to a fresh Tier 1 with the cluster reports + the previous sections as context. |
| The user disagrees with a verdict (e.g., "no, that pattern is actually useful") | Low (user-review gate catches it) | Low | The user-review gate at the end of phase 6 catches this; revisions are local. |
| Cluster sub-agents over-quote Fable (copyright) | Medium (report becomes a Fable reproduction) | Low | Each cluster's acceptance check enforces the ≤15-word quote discipline; Fable's own rule applied externally. |
| Fable artifact accidentally committed | High (user's hard rule violated) | Low | The Fable artifact is **never** in the same `git add` as anything else. Per-commit `git status` inspection. Final verification: `git log --all --full-history -- 'docs/artifacts/Fable*'` returns zero. |
| Tier 2 doesn't dispatch cluster sub-agents correctly (e.g., the dispatch is too narrow, missing context files) | Medium (cluster reports are weak) | Medium | The Tier 1's spec includes the read budget per sub-agent (§5). The Tier 2's plan must include explicit context-file lists per dispatch. |
| Tier 1's report deviates from the cluster verdicts (editorial drift) | Low (verdict consistency check catches it) | Low | The synthesis report's verdicts are anchored to the cluster reports' verdicts; if a synthesis section changes a verdict, it must explicitly note the override. |
---
## 12. Out of Scope (Explicit)
- **Modifying any agent-directive file in the project.** The recommendations go in `decisions.md` for the user's deferred nagent-rebuild (1-2 weeks out).
- **Building the recommended changes.** The deferred rebuild is its own track.
- **Comparing Fable to other commercial system prompts** (OpenAI, Google, xAI). Out of scope; Fable is the named subject.
- **Reading every line of every project file.** Cluster sub-agents read the relevant sections of the relevant files; full-file reads are unnecessary and would waste context.
- **Committing the Fable artifact.** The artifact stays at `docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt`; clusters quote line ranges but the file itself never enters git.
- **Adding new `src/` code, new tests, `pyproject.toml` dependencies, or `scripts/` files.**
- **Running automated tests.** The track is research-only; verification is the brainstorming-skill self-review plus user review.
- **Creating new `docs/Readme.md` or `docs/AGENTS.md` entries.** The report is at `conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/`; it is not in the docs index.
- **The deferred nagent-rebuild itself.** The recommendations in `decisions.md` are inputs to that future track; the rebuild is not this track.
---
## 13. See Also
### 13.1 Internal References
- **`docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.txt`** — the subject of the review. Local-only.
- **`conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/`** — the nagent corpus. All 11 files in scope.
- **`conductor/tracks/intent_dsl_survey_20260612/`** — the closest model for this track. The `research/cluster_*.md` pattern is borrowed from this track's `cluster_3_intent_mapping.md`, `cluster_4_meta_tooling_dsls.md`, `cluster_8_metadesk.md`, `cluster_9_verse.md`.
- **`conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/spec.md`** — the v1 nagent review spec. The "what this track read" and "what this track produces" sections are the model for this spec.
- **`conductor/workflow.md` §"Tier 1 Track Initialization Rules"** — the rules this spec follows (no day estimates, scope-only, T-shirt size).
- **`conductor/product.md`** — the product vision. The synthesis report's "what this project does" claims are anchored to this.
- **`conductor/product-guidelines.md` §"AI-Optimized Compact Style"** — the formatting rules the synthesis report follows.
- **`conductor/code_styleguides/`** — the convention catalog. The synthesis report references these for "what this project does" claims.
- **`AGENTS.md`** (root) — the project's top-level agent-facing rules. The synthesis report's "what every agent sees" baseline.
- **`docs/Readme.md`** — the docs index. The 14 deep-dive guides under `docs/guide_*.md` are the per-source-file references the synthesis report cites.
### 13.2 External References
- **Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 / Mythos announcement:** `https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-fable-5-mythos-5` (referenced by Fable at line 14; the user did not request we read the announcement directly).
- **Mike Acton's nagent:** `https://github.com/macton/nagent` (the source of the nagent_review corpus).
- **Mike Acton's data-oriented design talks:** `https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mike+acton+data+oriented` (foundational; nagent is a specific application).
- **Ryan Fleury, "The Easiest Way To Handle Errors Is To Not Have Them":** `https://www.dgtlgrove.com/p/the-easiest-way-to-handle-errors` (cited in `data_oriented_error_handling_20260606`; consistent with nagent's "data, not control flow" stance).
- **The project's "errors are data" convention:** `conductor/code_styleguides/error_handling.md` (the data-oriented contrast to Fable's persona-driven error-handling guidance).
### 13.3 Track-internal References
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/spec.md`** — this file.
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/metadata.json`** — the track metadata (id, scope, blocks, etc.).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/state.toml`** — the track state (current_phase, task tracking).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/research/cluster_*.md`** — the 10 cluster sub-reports (executed by Tier 3 sub-agents in phase 2).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/report.md`** — the main synthesis report (executed by Tier 1 in phase 3).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/comparison_table.md`** — the flat verdict table (executed by Tier 1 in phase 4).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/decisions.md`** — the recommendations for the deferred nagent-rebuild (executed by Tier 1 in phase 4).
- **`conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md`** — the Fable-specific addendum to nagent_takeaways_20260608.md (executed by Tier 1 in phase 4).