6.3 KiB

Raw Blame History

name	description	nextStepFile	targetWorkflowPath	validationReportFile	intentVsPrescriptive	workflowPlanFile
step-07-instruction-style-check	Check instruction style - intent-based vs prescriptive, appropriate for domain	./step-08-collaborative-experience-check.md	{workflow_folder_path}	{workflow_folder_path}/validation-report-{datetime}.md	../data/intent-vs-prescriptive-spectrum.md	{workflow_folder_path}/workflow-plan.md

Validation Step 7: Instruction Style Check

STEP GOAL:

To validate that workflow instructions use appropriate style - intent-based for creative/facilitative workflows, prescriptive only where absolutely required (compliance, legal).

MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):

Universal Rules:

🛑 DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE
📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step, ensure entire file is read
✅ Validation does NOT stop for user input - auto-proceed through all validation steps

Step-Specific Rules:

🎯 Review EVERY step's instruction style
🚫 DO NOT skip any files or style checks
💬 Append findings to report, then auto-load next step
🚪 This is validation - systematic and thorough

EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:

🎯 Load intent vs prescriptive standards
💾 Check EACH step's instruction style
📖 Validate style is appropriate for domain
🚫 DO NOT halt for user input - validation runs to completion

CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:

Instruction style should match domain
Creative/facilitative → Intent-based (default)
Compliance/legal → Prescriptive (exception)
Check EVERY step for style consistency

MANDATORY SEQUENCE

CRITICAL: Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip or shortcut.

1. Load Instruction Style Standards

Load {intentVsPrescriptive} to understand:

Intent-Based (Default):

Use for: Most workflows - creative, exploratory, collaborative
Step instruction describes goals and principles
AI adapts conversation naturally
More flexible and responsive
Example: "Guide user to define requirements through open-ended discussion"

Prescriptive (Exception):

Use for: Compliance, safety, legal, medical, regulated industries
Step provides exact instructions
More controlled and predictable
Example: "Ask exactly: 'Do you currently experience fever, cough, or fatigue?'"

2. Determine Domain Type

From {workflowPlanFile}, identify the workflow domain:

Intent-Based Domains (Default):

Creative work (writing, design, brainstorming)
Personal development (planning, goals, reflection)
Exploration (research, discovery)
Collaboration (facilitation, coaching)

Prescriptive Domains (Exception):

Legal/Compliance (contracts, regulations)
Medical (health assessments, triage)
Financial (tax, regulatory compliance)
Safety (risk assessments, safety checks)

3. Check EACH Step's Instruction Style

DO NOT BE LAZY - For EACH step file:

Load the step
Read the instruction sections (MANDATORY SEQUENCE)
Classify style:

Intent-Based Indicators:

✅ Describes goals/outcomes, not exact wording
✅ Uses "think about" language
✅ Multi-turn conversation encouraged
✅ "Ask 1-2 questions at a time, not a laundry list"
✅ "Probe to understand deeper"
✅ Flexible: "guide user through..." not "say exactly..."

Prescriptive Indicators:

Exact questions specified
Specific wording required
Sequence that must be followed precisely
"Say exactly:" or "Ask precisely:"

Mixed Style:

Some steps prescriptive (critical/required)
Others intent-based (creative/facilitative)

4. Validate Appropriateness

For Intent-Based Domains:

✅ Instructions should be intent-based
❌ Prescriptive instructions inappropriate (unless specific section requires it)

For Prescriptive Domains:

✅ Instructions should be prescriptive where compliance matters
⚠️ May have intent-based sections for creative elements

5. Document Findings

### Instruction Style Check Results

**Domain Type:** [Creative/Personal/Exploratory OR Legal/Medical/Compliance]

**Appropriate Style:** [Intent-based/Prescriptive/Mixed]

**Step Instruction Style Analysis:**
| Step | Style Type | Appropriate | Notes | Status |
|------|-----------|-------------|-------|--------|
| step-01-init.md | Intent-based | ✅ | Goals described, flexible | ✅ PASS |
| step-02-*.md | Intent-based | ✅ | "Think about response" | ✅ PASS |
| step-03-*.md | Prescriptive | ❌ | Domain is creative, too rigid | ⚠️ WARN |
| step-04-*.md | Intent-based | ✅ | Good facilitation language | ✅ PASS |
| step-05-*.md | Mixed | ✅ | Prescriptive for compliance, intent elsewhere | ✅ PASS |

**Issues Found:**

**Overly Prescriptive Steps:**
- [List steps that are too prescriptive for their domain]
- Example: "step-03-*.md says 'Ask exactly: X, Y, Z' but this is a creative workflow"

**Overly Flexible Steps (if prescriptive domain):**
- [List steps that should be more prescriptive]
- Example: "step-04-*.md is vague but this is a compliance workflow"

**Style Inconsistencies:**
- [List steps where style doesn't match domain]

**Good Examples Found:**
- [Highlight steps with excellent intent-based instructions]
- [Highlight steps with appropriate prescriptive language]

**Status:** ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL / ⚠️ WARNINGS

6. Append to Report

Update {validationReportFile} - replace "## Instruction Style Check Pending..." with actual findings.

7. Save Report and Auto-Proceed

CRITICAL: Save the validation report BEFORE loading next step.

Then immediately load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}.

Display: "Instruction Style check complete. Proceeding to Collaborative Experience Check..."

🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS

✅ SUCCESS:

EVERY step's instruction style reviewed
Style validated against domain appropriateness
Issues documented with specific examples
Findings appended to report
Report saved before proceeding
Next validation step loaded

❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:

Not checking every step's style
Not validating against domain
Not documenting style issues
Not saving report before proceeding

Master Rule: Validation is systematic and thorough. DO NOT BE LAZY. Check EVERY step's instruction style. Auto-proceed through all validation steps.

6.3 KiB Raw Blame History