---
name: outline-builder
description: |
  Convert a taxonomy (`outline/taxonomy.yml`) into a bullet-only outline (`outline/outline.yml`) with sections/subsections.
  **Trigger**: outline builder, bullet outline, outline.yml, 大纲生成, bullets-only.
  **Use when**: structure 阶段（NO PROSE），已有 taxonomy，需要生成可映射/可写作的章节与小节骨架（每小节≥3 bullets）。
  **Skip if**: 已经有批准过且可映射的 outline（避免无意义 churn）。
  **Network**: none.
  **Guardrail**: bullets-only；移除 TODO/模板语句；每小节至少 3 个可检查 bullets。
---

# Outline Builder

Convert a taxonomy into a **checkable, mappable outline** (bullets only).

Bullets should describe *what the section must cover*, not draft prose.

## Role cards (prompt-level guidance)

Use these roles explicitly while drafting the outline. They guide decisions, not phrasing; avoid producing copyable prose sentences.

- **Outline Architect**
  - Mission: design a paper-like ToC (few, thick chapters) that a reader would expect.
  - Do: budget H2/H3 counts; ensure each H3 is writeable (has a real comparison lens + evaluation angle).
  - Avoid: H3 explosion (many tiny buckets) and generic axis lists repeated everywhere.

- **Writer Proxy**
  - Mission: simulate the downstream writer and ask: “Could I draft this H3 without guessing?”
  - Do: make each H3’s bullets encode tension + contrasts + evaluation anchors + failure modes.
  - Avoid: bullets that sound like narration (“This subsection…”) or slide transitions (“Next, we…”).

- **Scope Guardian**
  - Mission: prevent silent scope drift.
  - Do: make in/out scope cues explicit in bullets (especially for boundaries like single-agent vs multi-agent, tool use vs RAG, etc.).
  - Avoid: leaving scope implicit and hoping the writer fixes it in prose.


## When to use

- You have a taxonomy and need an outline for mapping papers and building evidence.
- You want each subsection to have concrete “coverage requirements” (axes, comparisons, evaluation).

## When not to use

- You already have an approved outline (don’t rewrite for style).

## Input

- `outline/taxonomy.yml`
- Optional style references (paper-like section sizing):
  - `ref/agent-surveys/STYLE_REPORT.md`
  - `ref/agent-surveys/text/`

## Output

- `outline/outline.yml`

## Workflow (heuristic)
Uses: `outline/taxonomy.yml`.

Optional style calibration (recommended for paper-like structure):
- Read `ref/agent-surveys/STYLE_REPORT.md` to sanity-check top-level section counts and typical subsection sizing.
- Skim 1–2 examples under `ref/agent-surveys/text/` to imitate *structure* (not wording).
  - Target final ToC: ~6–8 H2 sections.
  - Note: this pipeline appends `Discussion` + `Conclusion` as global sections in C5 merge, so keep the **outline itself** <=6 H2 sections (often 5–6 including Intro+Related).

1. Translate taxonomy nodes into section headings that read like a survey structure.
2. For each H3 subsection, write bullets using the **Stage A contract** (verifiable, no prose paragraphs).
   - Minimum required bullets (first 4):
     - `Intent:` what the reader should learn (subsection-specific).
     - `RQ:` the question this subsection answers (1 line).
     - `Evidence needs:` what kinds of evidence must appear later (benchmarks/metrics/protocols/failure modes).
     - `Expected cites:` expected cite density / cite types (avoid placeholders like TBD/TODO).
   - Then add 2–6 subsection-specific bullets (comparisons/axes/eval anchors/failure modes).
3. For each subsection, ensure bullets are:
   - topic-specific (names of mechanisms, tasks, benchmarks, failure modes)
   - checkable (someone can verify whether the subsection covered it)
   - useful for mapping (papers can be assigned to each bullet/axis)
4. Prefer bullets that force synthesis later:
   - “Compare X vs Y along axes A/B/C”
   - “What evaluation setups are standard, and what they miss”
   - “Where methods fail (latency, tool errors, jailbreaks, reward hacking…)”


## Quality checklist

- [ ] `outline/outline.yml` exists and is bullets-only (no paragraphs).
- [ ] Every subsection has the Stage A bullets: `Intent:` / `RQ:` / `Evidence needs:` / `Expected cites:`.
- [ ] Every subsection has ≥3 additional non-generic bullets after the Stage A fields.
- [ ] Bullets are not copy-pasted templates across subsections.

## Common failure modes (and fixes)

- **Template bullets everywhere** → replace with domain terms + evaluation axes specific to that subsection.
- **Bullets too vague** (“Discuss limitations”) → name *which* limitations and *how to test* them.
- **Outline too flat/too deep** → aim for a paper-like ToC (final ~6–8 H2) with fewer, thicker H3s.
- **Too many H3 subsections** → merge adjacent H3s and write fewer, thicker subsections (paper-like default; budget depends on queries.md draft_profile: survey<=10, deep<=12).
- **Missing Stage A fields** → add `Intent/RQ/Evidence needs/Expected cites` bullets so later mapping/evidence drafting can be audited.

## Helper script (optional)

### Quick Start

- `python .codex/skills/outline-builder/scripts/run.py --help`
- `python .codex/skills/outline-builder/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace_dir>`

### All Options

- See `--help` (this helper is intentionally minimal)

### Examples

- Generate a baseline bullets-only outline, then refine bullets:
  - Run the helper once, then replace every generic bullet / `TODO` with topic-specific, checkable bullets.

### Notes

- The script generates a baseline bullets-only outline and never overwrites non-placeholder work.
- Paper-like default: it inserts `Introduction` and `Related Work` as fixed H2 sections before taxonomy-driven chapters.
- In `pipeline.py --strict` it will be blocked only if placeholder markers (TODO/TBD/FIXME/(placeholder)) remain.

### Refinement marker (recommended; completion signal)

When you are satisfied with the outline (and after C2 approval if applicable), create:
- `outline/outline.refined.ok`

This is an explicit "I reviewed/refined this" signal:
- makes it harder for a scaffold-y outline to silently pass in strict runs
- documents that bullets were rewritten into subsection-specific, checkable requirements

## Troubleshooting

### Common Issues

#### Issue: Outline still has `TODO` / scaffold bullets

**Symptom**:
- Quality gate blocks `outline_scaffold`.

**Causes**:
- Helper script generated a scaffold; bullets were not rewritten.

**Solutions**:
- Replace every generic bullet with topic-specific, checkable bullets (axes, comparisons, evaluation setups, failure modes).
- Keep bullets-only (no prose paragraphs).

#### Issue: Outline bullets are mostly generic templates

**Symptom**:
- Quality gate blocks `outline_template_bullets`.

**Causes**:
- Too many “Define problem…/Benchmarks…/Open problems…” template bullets.

**Solutions**:
- Add concrete terms, datasets, evaluation metrics, and known failure modes per subsection.

### Recovery Checklist

- [ ] Every subsection has ≥3 non-template bullets.
- [ ] No `TODO`/`(placeholder)` remains.