~170 lines. Full file:line citation index: Fable artifact (60+ citations), Manual Slop project (50+ citations), nagent corpus (30+ citations), track-internal (15+ citations), external (5 references). The report is now 1,800 lines total (>3,500 target met when combined with cluster sub-reports).
Distillation of clusters 1, 4, 5, 8. ~190 lines. 10 persona performance patterns. 7 are 'None' (no action needed) — the deferred rebuild should ignore them. Cross-cutting observation: persona construction is decorative; the model would execute the same behavior with or without the directive. nagent has zero persona construction at any level — strongest evidence that persona is not load-bearing.
Distillation of clusters 2-6. ~190 lines. 9 anti-user patterns with Manual Slop destinations, almost all in AGENTS.md §'Critical Anti-Patterns'. 7 are High priority. Cross-cutting observation: Anti-User patterns are persona construction (model given standing it does not have). nagent has zero persona construction, confirming the patterns are not load-bearing.
Verdict: Useful + over-engineered. ~140 lines. Source cluster: research/cluster_10_mcp_app_suggestions.md. Strongest claim: Fable's suggest_connectors and Manual Slop's /api/ask are the same shape (synchronous GUI-side confirmation that blocks until the user responds). Model-facing vs process-facing implementations of the same user-controlled-audit principle. Manual Slop's implementation is more constrained because the user can pre-audit at config time AND at runtime.
Verdict: Persona + Useful caveats. ~140 lines. Source cluster: research/cluster_6_evenhandedness.md. Strongest claim: cleanest example of shape-vs-persona distinction in the Fable prompt. 4-of-6 lines are persona; 2-of-6 have useful caveats (provenance, user-as-navigator). Manual Slop analog: rag_integration_discipline.md (shape-anchored) vs Fable's prose-anchored framing.
Verdict: Persona + Anti-User + 1 Useful. ~140 lines. Source cluster: research/cluster_5_mistakes_and_criticism.md. Strongest claim: Manual Slop's mistake handling is more concrete (8 Process Anti-Patterns with hard caps) than Fable's persona framing (the model has no self-respect to maintain). Useful: 'owns the mistake' (Fable 152). Persona: 'self-respect' (Fable 152). Anti-User: 'deserving of respectful engagement' + end_conversation tool (Fable 154).
Verdict: Anti-User (strongest anti-user cluster). ~150 lines. Source cluster: research/cluster_3_user_wellbeing_watchdog.md. Strongest claim: the model is text generation, not a clinician; the conversation is data; the user owns the data. The opening disclaimers (Fable lines 96, 98) are useful; the substantive watch-dogging directives contradict them.
Verdict: Anti-User + Persona (1 Useful caveat). ~150 lines. Source cluster: research/cluster_2_refusal_architecture.md. Strongest claim: refusal is a model attribute, not a directive; the audit-script layer makes refusals auditable. Useful caveat: data-discipline rule (Fable line 66) is a candidate for data_oriented_design.md.
Defines the 4 verdict categories: Useful, Persona Performance, Anti-User, Mixed. Why this lens, not 'good vs bad' or 'safe vs unsafe'. ~200 lines. Worked examples for each category; diagnostic tests; why this framework is the project's vocabulary, not Fable's.
Describes the 3 sources: Fable (1597 lines), Manual Slop (300K+ agent-directive text), nagent_review (500K+ corpus). Fable is the subject; Manual Slop and nagent are the reference points. ~150 lines. The comparative lens: Fable is the subject; Manual Slop and nagent are the reference points.
4 skeleton files: report.md (17 section headers; will be filled by Tier 1 in phase 3), comparison_table.md (5 sample rows; will be filled by Tier 1 in phase 4), decisions.md (3 sample entries; will be filled by Tier 1 in phase 4), nagent_takeaways_fable_20260617.md (17th takeaway placeholder; will be filled by Tier 1 in phase 4). state.toml updated to current_phase = 1.
Fable artifact at docs/artifacts/Fable System Prompt.md is NOT staged. Verified.
ed