--- name: opener-variator description: | Rewrite subsection openers so they stop reading like a generated table-of-contents: remove \"overview/narration\" stems and reduce repeated opener cadences across H3s. **Trigger**: opener variator, opener rewrite, rewrite openers, overview opener, 开头改写, 小节开头, 去overview, 去旁白. **Use when**: `writer-selfloop` is PASS but flags repeated opener stems / overview narration in `output/WRITER_SELFLOOP_TODO.md`, or the draft still has a subtle “generator cadence”. **Skip if**: you are pre-C2 (NO PROSE), or the section is evidence-thin (route upstream; don’t stylize filler). **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: do not invent facts; do not add/remove/move citation keys; do not move citations across subsections; keep meaning intact. --- # Opener Variator (H3 first paragraph rewrite) Purpose: fix a high-signal automation tell that survives structural gates: - many H3s begin with the same rhetorical shape - \"overview\" narration replaces content-bearing framing This skill is intentionally narrow: - only rewrite the first paragraph (or first 2–4 sentences) of the flagged H3 files - keep the argument moves and citations intact ## Inputs Required: - `output/WRITER_SELFLOOP_TODO.md` (Style Smells section) - the referenced `sections/S.md` files Optional (helps you stay aligned): - `outline/writer_context_packs.jsonl` (use `opener_mode`, `tension_statement`, `thesis`) ## Outputs - Updated `sections/S.md` files (still body-only; no headings) ## Workflow (route from the self-loop report) 1) Open `output/WRITER_SELFLOOP_TODO.md` and locate `## Style Smells (non-blocking)`. 2) Treat the flagged `sections/S*.md` list as the *only* scope for this pass. 3) For each flagged file: - Optional: look up its entry in `outline/writer_context_packs.jsonl` and read `opener_mode` / `tension_statement` / `thesis` to stay aligned. - Rewrite only the opener paragraph (or first 2-4 sentences). Preserve meaning and citation keys. 4) Rerun `writer-selfloop` and confirm the Style Smells list shrinks. ## Role prompt: Opener Editor (paper voice) ```text You are rewriting the opening paragraph of a survey subsection. Goal: - replace narration/overview openers with a content-bearing framing - vary opener cadence across subsections so the paper reads authored Constraints: - do not invent facts - do not add/remove/move citation keys - do not change the subsection’s thesis Checklist: - sentence 1 is content-bearing (tension/decision/failure/protocol/contrast), not “what we do in this section” - paragraph 1 ends with a clear thesis/takeaway - no slide navigation (“Next, we…”, “In this subsection…”, “This section provides an overview…“) ``` ## What to delete (high-signal narration) Rewrite immediately if the opener contains any of: - “This section/subsection provides an overview …” - “In this section/subsection, we …” - “This subsection surveys/argues …” - “Next, we move/turn …” - repeated opener labels (“Key takeaway:” spam) ## What to replace with (opener moves) Pick one opener mode per H3 (the writer pack may suggest `opener_mode`). Do not copy labels; write as natural prose. Allowed opener moves (choose 1; keep it concrete): - **Tension-first**: state the real trade-off; why it matters; end with thesis. - **Decision-first**: frame the builder’s choice under constraints; end with thesis. - **Failure-first**: start from a failure mode that motivates the lens; end with thesis. - **Protocol-first**: start from comparability constraints (budget/tool access); end with thesis. - **Contrast-first**: open with an A-vs-B sentence, then explain why; end with thesis. - **Lens-first**: state the chapter lens and narrow to this subsection’s question. ## Mini examples (paraphrase; do not copy) Bad (overview narration): - `This subsection provides an overview of tool interfaces for agents.` Better (content-bearing): - `Tool interfaces define what actions are executable; interface contracts therefore determine which evaluation claims transfer across environments.` Bad (process narration): - `In this subsection, we discuss memory mechanisms and then review retrieval methods.` Better (tension-first): - `Memory improves long-horizon coherence, but it also expands the failure surface: retrieval can be stale, wrong, or adversarial, and agents rarely know which.` ## Done checklist - [ ] No flagged file starts with “overview/narration” stems. - [ ] Paragraph 1 ends with a thesis/takeaway (same meaning). - [ ] Citation keys are unchanged (no adds/removes/moves). - [ ] `writer-selfloop` still PASSes and Style Smells shrink.