docs: add project relationship context
This commit is contained in:
parent
0721f81127
commit
5ea3054a2c
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
|
|||
# Project Relationships
|
||||
|
||||
This file is the local project map for Writing Workbench. It exists so future sessions understand what this repository consumes, what it produces, and which neighboring repository owns each kind of asset.
|
||||
|
||||
## Local Identity
|
||||
|
||||
`writing-workbench` is the local tool-calling and process-record workspace for article writing after a Web-generated initial outline already exists.
|
||||
|
||||
It does not own upstream knowledge, canonical expert agents, or reusable automation tools.
|
||||
|
||||
## Neighboring Projects
|
||||
|
||||
| Project | Relationship To Writing Workbench | Writing Workbench Consumes | Writing Workbench Produces |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `knowledge-vault` | Upstream knowledge and publication archive | article discussions, source reports, past essays, Web initial outlines, published target paths | optional final essay copy or publication pointers maintained by the user |
|
||||
| `ccpe-system` | Supplier of expert cognitive assets and invocation protocols | lead writer agents, reviewer agents, runtime rules, model cards, invocation contracts | capability requests under `requirements/ccpe/` |
|
||||
| `skills-vault` | Supplier of deterministic automation tools | file processors, source splitters, markdown tools, report exporters, batch utilities | capability requests under `requirements/skills-vault/` |
|
||||
| `video-workbench` | Downstream sibling for dimensional output | finished article or article model when the user chooses to make video content | no default output |
|
||||
| `work-projects` | Separate software/customer project workspace | no default input | no default output |
|
||||
|
||||
## Boundary Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- Web discussion, source exploration, and initial outline generation happen before this repository.
|
||||
- A project starts here only after the user provides an initial outline and source paths.
|
||||
- Article-facing derived materials, reviewer sessions, writer sessions, outline versions, user decisions, and local drafts stay in the project folder.
|
||||
- Original sources remain authoritative in `knowledge-vault`; project material files are working aids.
|
||||
- Canonical agents, runtimes, model cards, and invocation protocols belong in `ccpe-system`.
|
||||
- Deterministic reusable tools belong in `skills-vault`.
|
||||
- Missing capabilities are requested through `requirements/`, not implemented ad hoc inside this repository.
|
||||
|
||||
## Practical Rule
|
||||
|
||||
Writing Workbench is a client and operating room:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
knowledge-vault provides sources and publication archive.
|
||||
ccpe-system provides expert actors and protocols.
|
||||
skills-vault provides tools.
|
||||
writing-workbench runs the article project and keeps the process record.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
|
|||
# CCPE Rebuild Context From Writing Workbench
|
||||
|
||||
Use this file as input context when starting a CCPE optimization or rebuild session.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why This Exists
|
||||
|
||||
Writing Workbench was rebuilt on 2026-06-15 because the earlier attempt treated deep writing as an end-to-end article production runtime. That failed in practice.
|
||||
|
||||
The new Writing Workbench starts only after the user has already produced a Web initial outline. CCPE should therefore stop optimizing for a fully autonomous article production pipeline and instead supply the concrete agents, protocols, and safety rules needed by this narrower workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current Writing Workbench Model
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
Web discussion and source digestion
|
||||
-> Web initial outline v1.0
|
||||
-> Writing Workbench project
|
||||
-> outline review preparation
|
||||
-> user-named reviewer invocation
|
||||
-> user reflection and decision
|
||||
-> user-directed lead writer repair
|
||||
-> revised outline v2.0+
|
||||
-> user-directed section/chapter drafting
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The user decides every stage transition.
|
||||
|
||||
## What CCPE Should Supply First
|
||||
|
||||
CCPE is currently most useful as a supplier for Writing Workbench.
|
||||
|
||||
Priority capabilities:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Lead writer agents
|
||||
- `韩愈` for academic essay / structured prose.
|
||||
- `蒙田` for essayistic reflection.
|
||||
- Other lead writers only when the user requests them.
|
||||
|
||||
2. Reviewer agents
|
||||
- `张辽` red-team review.
|
||||
- `巨人认知` macro-model review.
|
||||
- `认知显影` cognitive-structure inspection.
|
||||
- Any additional reviewer only after a concrete Writing Workbench requirement exists.
|
||||
|
||||
3. Invocation protocols
|
||||
- reviewer invocation packet;
|
||||
- lead writer repair packet;
|
||||
- returned-output record;
|
||||
- session/report contract;
|
||||
- no-simulation rule.
|
||||
|
||||
4. Context preparation rules
|
||||
- how to prepare source digests under context-window limits;
|
||||
- how to avoid compressing away material not represented in the initial outline;
|
||||
- how to distinguish source-grounded content from model-supplied additions.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Evaluation and decision support
|
||||
- review report contract;
|
||||
- conflict synthesis for user decision;
|
||||
- repair instruction builder;
|
||||
- outline versioning rules.
|
||||
|
||||
## Hard Boundaries For CCPE
|
||||
|
||||
CCPE should not store article project process records.
|
||||
|
||||
Do not put these in CCPE:
|
||||
|
||||
- full article project folders;
|
||||
- source digests made for one article;
|
||||
- reviewer `session.md` files for one article;
|
||||
- draft chapters;
|
||||
- user decision logs;
|
||||
- publication metadata for one essay.
|
||||
|
||||
These belong in `writing-workbench` or `knowledge-vault`.
|
||||
|
||||
## No-Simulation Requirement
|
||||
|
||||
The earlier workflow failed because the controller session simulated reviewer outputs after reading prompts.
|
||||
|
||||
For CCPE:
|
||||
|
||||
- dispatch packet is not execution;
|
||||
- prompt-to-send is not execution;
|
||||
- a controller summary is not a reviewer report;
|
||||
- a formal reviewer or writer output requires real invocation;
|
||||
- missing capability must block the project or produce a supplier request.
|
||||
|
||||
Formal simulation, when used for planning, must be labeled:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
simulation_only: true
|
||||
formal_output: false
|
||||
excluded_from_synthesis: true
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Supplier Relationship
|
||||
|
||||
Writing Workbench sends requests to CCPE through:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
writing-workbench/requirements/ccpe/
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
CCPE should treat those files as client requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
CCPE may produce:
|
||||
|
||||
- agent specs;
|
||||
- runtime protocols;
|
||||
- invocation contracts;
|
||||
- model cards;
|
||||
- evaluation rubrics;
|
||||
- usage notes for Writing Workbench.
|
||||
|
||||
CCPE should not implement deterministic scripts that belong in `skills-vault`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended CCPE Rebuild Focus
|
||||
|
||||
For the next CCPE optimization pass, prioritize:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Replace the old full Article Production Runtime assumption with a narrower `outline-review-and-repair` runtime.
|
||||
2. Encode Writing Workbench as the first concrete consumer of article-writing assets.
|
||||
3. Add a clear intake rule: CCPE builds only assets requested by a project, proven by recurring use, or required for invocation safety.
|
||||
4. Separate expert-agent assets from deterministic automation skills.
|
||||
5. Make the no-simulation boundary visible in every article-writing agent and runtime protocol.
|
||||
6. Add usage notes showing how Writing Workbench should call each agent without copying canonical specs into project folders.
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary For A New CCPE Session
|
||||
|
||||
Writing Workbench is not asking CCPE for a complete autonomous writing machine.
|
||||
|
||||
It needs a reliable supplier layer for:
|
||||
|
||||
- real lead writer invocation;
|
||||
- real reviewer invocation;
|
||||
- source/context preparation under context limits;
|
||||
- review synthesis for user decision;
|
||||
- user-directed outline repair;
|
||||
- careful section-level drafting support.
|
||||
|
||||
The user remains the director. CCPE supplies the actors, contracts, and guardrails.
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue