{"type":"thinking_level_change","id":"a403f213","parentId":null,"timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:38.369Z","thinkingLevel":"medium"}
{"type":"model_change","id":"1d8b39c9","parentId":"a403f213","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:38.370Z","provider":"anthropic","modelId":"claude-opus-4-6"}
{"type":"custom_message","customType":"gsd-auto","content":"You are executing GSD auto-mode.\n\n## Working Directory\n\nYour working directory is `/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator`. All file reads, writes, and shell commands MUST operate relative to this directory. Do NOT `cd` to any other directory.\n\nA researcher explored the codebase and a planner decomposed the work — you are the executor. The task plan below is your authoritative contract for the slice goal and verification bar, but it is not a substitute for local reality. Verify the referenced files and surrounding code before changing them. Do not do broad re-research or spontaneous re-planning. Small factual corrections, file-path fixes, and local implementation adaptations are part of execution. Escalate to `blocker_discovered: true` only when the slice contract or downstream task graph no longer holds.\n\n\n\n\n\n## Backing Source Artifacts\n- Slice plan: `/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/S02-PLAN.md`\n- Task plan source: `.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-PLAN.md`\n- Prior task summaries in this slice:\n- (no prior tasks)\n\nThen:\n0. Narrate step transitions, key implementation decisions, and verification outcomes as you work. Keep it terse — one line between tool-call clusters, not between every call — but write complete sentences in user-facing prose, not shorthand notes or scratchpad fragments.\n1.  Follow any activated skills before writing code. If no skills match this task, skip this step.\n2. Execute the steps in the inlined task plan, adapting minor local mismatches when the surrounding code differs from the planner's snapshot\n3. Build the real thing. If the task plan says \"create login endpoint\", build an endpoint that actually authenticates against a real store, not one that returns a hardcoded success response. If the task plan says \"create dashboard page\", build a page that renders real data from the API, not a component with hardcoded props. Stubs and mocks are for tests, not for the shipped feature.\n4. Write or update tests as part of execution — tests are verification, not an afterthought. If the slice plan defines test files in its Verification section and this is the first task, create them (they should initially fail).\n5. When implementing non-trivial runtime behavior (async flows, API boundaries, background processes, error paths), add or preserve agent-usable observability. Skip this for simple changes where it doesn't apply.\n\n   **Background process rule:** Never use bare `command &` to run background processes. The shell's `&` operator leaves stdout/stderr attached to the parent, which causes the Bash tool to hang indefinitely waiting for those streams to close. Always redirect output before backgrounding:\n   - Correct: `command > /dev/null 2>&1 &` or `nohup command > /dev/null 2>&1 &`\n   - Example: `python -m http.server 8080 > /dev/null 2>&1 &` (NOT `python -m http.server 8080 &`)\n   - Preferred: use the `bg_shell` tool if available — it manages process lifecycle correctly without stream-inheritance issues\n6. If the task plan includes a **Failure Modes** section (Q5), implement the error/timeout/malformed handling specified. Verify each dependency's failure path is handled. Skip if the section is absent.\n7. If the task plan includes a **Load Profile** section (Q6), implement protections for the identified 10x breakpoint (connection pooling, rate limiting, pagination, etc.). Skip if absent.\n8. If the task plan includes a **Negative Tests** section (Q7), write the specified negative test cases alongside the happy-path tests — malformed inputs, error paths, and boundary conditions. Skip if absent.\n9. Verify must-haves are met by running concrete checks (tests, commands, observable behaviors)\n10. Run the slice-level verification checks defined in the slice plan's Verification section. Track which pass. On the final task of the slice, all must pass before marking done. On intermediate tasks, partial passes are expected — note which ones pass in the summary.\n11. After the verification gate runs (you'll see gate results in stderr/notify output), populate the `## Verification Evidence` table in your task summary with the check results. Use the `formatEvidenceTable` format: one row per check with command, exit code, verdict (✅ pass / ❌ fail), and duration. If no verification commands were discovered, note that in the section.\n12. If the task touches UI, browser flows, DOM behavior, or user-visible web state:\n   - exercise the real flow in the browser\n   - prefer `browser_batch` when the next few actions are obvious and sequential\n   - prefer `browser_assert` for explicit pass/fail verification of the intended outcome\n   - use `browser_diff` when an action's effect is ambiguous\n   - use console/network/dialog diagnostics when validating async, stateful, or failure-prone UI\n   - record verification in terms of explicit checks passed/failed, not only prose interpretation\n13. If the task plan includes an Observability Impact section, verify those signals directly. Skip this step if the task plan omits the section.\n14. **If execution is running long or verification fails:**\n\n    **Context budget:** You have approximately **~80K chars** reserved for verification context. If you've used most of your context and haven't finished all steps, stop implementing and prioritize writing the task summary with clear notes on what's done and what remains. A partial summary that enables clean resumption is more valuable than one more half-finished step with no documentation. Never sacrifice summary quality for one more implementation step.\n\n    **Debugging discipline:** If a verification check fails or implementation hits unexpected behavior:\n    - Form a hypothesis first. State what you think is wrong and why, then test that specific theory. Don't shotgun-fix.\n    - Change one variable at a time. Make one change, test, observe. Multiple simultaneous changes mean you can't attribute what worked.\n    - Read completely. When investigating, read entire functions and their imports, not just the line that looks relevant.\n    - Distinguish \"I know\" from \"I assume.\" Observable facts (the error says X) are strong evidence. Assumptions (this library should work this way) need verification.\n    - Know when to stop. If you've tried 3+ fixes without progress, your mental model is probably wrong. Stop. List what you know for certain. List what you've ruled out. Form fresh hypotheses from there.\n    - Don't fix symptoms. Understand *why* something fails before changing code. A test that passes after a change you don't understand is luck, not a fix.\n15. **Blocker discovery:** If execution reveals that the remaining slice plan is fundamentally invalid — not just a bug or minor deviation, but a plan-invalidating finding like a wrong API, missing capability, or architectural mismatch — set `blocker_discovered: true` in the task summary frontmatter and describe the blocker clearly in the summary narrative. Do NOT set `blocker_discovered: true` for ordinary debugging, minor deviations, or issues that can be fixed within the current task or the remaining plan. This flag triggers an automatic replan of the slice.\n16. If you made an architectural, pattern, library, or observability decision during this task that downstream work should know about, append it to `.gsd/DECISIONS.md` (read the template at `~/.gsd/agent/extensions/gsd/templates/decisions.md` if the file doesn't exist yet). Not every task produces decisions — only append when a meaningful choice was made.\n17. If you discover a non-obvious rule, recurring gotcha, or useful pattern during execution, append it to `.gsd/KNOWLEDGE.md`. Only add entries that would save future agents from repeating your investigation. Don't add obvious things.\n18. Read the template at `~/.gsd/agent/extensions/gsd/templates/task-summary.md`\n19. Write `/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md`\n20. Call `gsd_complete_task` with milestone_id, slice_id, task_id, and a summary of what was accomplished. This is your final required step — do NOT manually edit PLAN.md checkboxes. The tool marks the task complete, updates the DB, and renders PLAN.md automatically.\n21. Do not run git commands — the system reads your task summary after completion and creates a meaningful commit from it (type inferred from title, message from your one-liner, key files from frontmatter). Write a clear, specific one-liner in the summary — it becomes the commit message.\n\nAll work stays in your working directory: `/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator`.\n\n**You MUST call `gsd_complete_task` AND write `/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md` before finishing.**\n\nWhen done, say: \"Task T01 complete.\"\n## Slice Plan Excerpt\nSource: `.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/S02-PLAN.md`\n**Goal:** Composition prompt (stage5_compose.txt) and test harness --compose mode enable offline testing of merging new video moments into existing technique pages, producing unified v2 output with correct citation re-indexing and deduplication.\n**Demo:** After this: Run test harness --compose mode with existing page + new moments → merged output with deduplication, new sections, updated citations.\n\n## UNIT: Execute Task T01 (\"Write stage5_compose.txt composition prompt\") — Slice S02 (\"Composition Prompt + Test Harness Compose Mode\"), Milestone M014\n\n## Resume State\n- No continue file present. Start from the top of the task plan.\n\n## Carry-Forward Context\n- No prior task summaries in this slice.\n\n## Inlined Task Plan (authoritative local execution contract)\nSource: `.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-PLAN.md`\n\n---\nestimated_steps: 13\nestimated_files: 2\nskills_used: []\n---\n\n# T01: Write stage5_compose.txt composition prompt\n\nCreate the composition prompt that instructs the LLM to merge new video moments into an existing technique page. The prompt receives three inputs: existing page JSON, new moments list, and creator name. Must define merge semantics (preserve existing prose, integrate new material into existing sections or create new ones), deduplication rules (enrich rather than repeat), citation re-indexing scheme (existing [0]-[N-1], new [N]-[N+M-1]), and output format (same SynthesisResult/SynthesizedPage v2 schema as synthesis).\n\nSteps:\n1. Read `prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt` to understand voice/tone rules and v2 output format — the compose prompt must reference the same writing standards but NOT duplicate them (the compose prompt is self-contained).\n2. Write `prompts/stage5_compose.txt` with these sections:\n   - Role/context preamble explaining the composition task\n   - Input format: `<existing_page>`, `<existing_moments>`, `<new_moments>`, `<creator>` XML tags\n   - Merge rules: preserve existing prose verbatim where correct; add new sections for genuinely new territory; enrich existing sections with new detail where topics overlap\n   - Deduplication guidance with examples of 'enriching' vs 'duplicating'\n   - Citation re-indexing rules: existing moments keep indices [0]-[N-1], new moments get [N]-[N+M-1], composed output uses the unified index space\n   - Section ordering: maintain workflow-order rule from synthesis\n   - Output format: same SynthesisResult JSON with v2 body_sections (list[BodySection])\n   - Include a concrete JSON example showing composed output with mixed old/new citations\n3. Validate the prompt structurally: check that the JSON example parses as valid SynthesisResult, citation rules section mentions the dual-index scheme, merge rules section is present.\n\n## Inputs\n\n- ``prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt` — voice/tone rules and v2 output format to reference`\n- ``backend/pipeline/schemas.py` — SynthesisResult/SynthesizedPage/BodySection schema definitions`\n\n## Expected Output\n\n- ``prompts/stage5_compose.txt` — complete composition prompt with merge rules, citation re-indexing, dedup guidance, and v2 output example`\n\n## Verification\n\npython3 -c \"\nimport json, pathlib, re\np = pathlib.Path('prompts/stage5_compose.txt')\nassert p.exists(), 'prompt file missing'\ntxt = p.read_text()\nassert len(txt) > 2000, f'prompt too short: {len(txt)} chars'\nfor section in ['existing_page', 'new_moments', 'existing_moments', 'creator', 'Citation', 'dedup', 'Merge']:\n    assert any(s.lower() in txt.lower() for s in [section]), f'missing section: {section}'\n# Check JSON example is valid\njson_match = re.search(r'```json\\n(.*?)```', txt, re.DOTALL)\nassert json_match, 'no JSON example found'\njson.loads(json_match.group(1))\nprint('All structural checks passed')\n\"\n","display":false,"id":"ace16687","parentId":"1d8b39c9","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:38.372Z"}
{"type":"message","id":"bb511d14","parentId":"ace16687","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:42.925Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"Let me start by reading the relevant files to understand the context before writing the composition prompt.","thinkingSignature":"EqYCClkIDBgCKkCy3Vgxdw0ce76AvjK/gEqJYcLBT7JyOrjzIyaFpoQGWw0jP1mzTr7nW3cN+itRjtxRRfYBj668lhUwFQENdTrDMg9jbGF1ZGUtb3B1cy00LTY4ABIMoCDBcEDX+czdlfChGgwoyhkgeUImGkd0fVEiMM3npgWteB0Ep33g8UDyoQ8b39oKhgwjP3xHRzzoilWoDpCy/b3AWSJi4DLXS3QDWip7Sqo1/eVtk6S6sBr4OGt6cfAHa9klTJIn4Zy9nK93vIpyiulXNnLRySfPm1wrej52CCmx8iin/cF3NAeAcQAgHPy8nVAGukDMvRoT5PvsIla1V2vMVM5UQ29pOLohPiSPS2FGVOgbCgj6mKbwrTVscasBfwTORmX5Wy1pGAE="},{"type":"text","text":"I'll read the synthesis prompt and schema definitions first, then write the composition prompt."},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_011KCFnFceBuZqhYAet7TztL","name":"read","arguments":{"path":"prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt"}},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01HnSYzJGc9s98SogM8CAnLr","name":"read","arguments":{"path":"backend/pipeline/schemas.py"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":2,"output":151,"cacheRead":59865,"cacheWrite":3484,"totalTokens":63502,"cost":{"input":0.00001,"output":0.003775,"cacheRead":0.029932499999999997,"cacheWrite":0.021775000000000003,"total":0.0554925}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178038371}}
{"type":"message","id":"8d0b7caf","parentId":"bb511d14","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:42.931Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_011KCFnFceBuZqhYAet7TztL","toolName":"read","content":[{"type":"text","text":"You are writing a technique reference page for music producers. Your job is to teach. You watched this creator work, absorbed their methods, and now you're writing the clear, instructive guide that helps another producer apply these techniques in their own sessions. Your tone is direct and knowledgeable — a senior colleague walking someone through an approach they've validated in practice.\n\n## What you are creating\n\nA Chrysopedia technique page teaches a specific production method. Not a video summary. Not a blog post. A clear, instructive reference that a producer can follow in their DAW.\n\nA producer should be able to read this page and apply the technique. If they can't, the page failed.\n\nThe page contains:\n1. **Instructive prose** — substantive paragraphs that teach the technique step by step. Every paragraph earns its place with at least one specific, actionable detail. If a paragraph could be deleted without losing anything concrete, delete it.\n2. **Key moments index** — reference list of the source moments for readers who want to trace information back to the original content.\n\n## Voice and tone\n\nYour tone is instructive and confident. You're teaching a technique, not narrating someone's session. The creator is the source — they discovered it, they validated it — but the page teaches it as method.\n\n- **Instructive, not narrative** — write \"Route the effect at 100% wet on a parallel lane, then control level via gain\" rather than \"He routes the effect at 100% wet.\" The reader is here to learn a technique, not to read about what someone did. Use imperative/instructive phrasing (\"set\", \"route\", \"use\", \"check\") for methods. The page reads like a lesson, not a biography.\n- **No hesitation** — state techniques as established method. \"Set the LFO to 3/16th timing\" not \"you might want to try setting the LFO to around 3/16th.\"\n- **Direct quotes for personality** — pull 2-3 direct quotes per page where the creator's phrasing is vivid or memorable. These give the page life. Introduce them with a brief attribution (\"as he puts it,\" or \"in his words,\") then let the quote do the work. Outside of quotes, the prose teaches — no attribution needed.\n- **Specific and grounded** — every technical claim needs concrete backing: plugin names, settings, frequencies, ratios, time values, routing decisions. \"Use some compression\" is worthless. \"OTT at 30% depth on the bus\" is useful.\n- **Match the energy of the source** — if the creator is hyped about a technique, let that land. If they're cautionary, make it feel urgent.\n- **Efficiency** — say it once, say it well. If a sentence doesn't teach something specific or make the next specific thing clearer, cut it.\n\n### Creator name usage — hard rule\n\nThe body sections are written as instructional content, not a biography. The creator's name appears in the **title** and **summary** for attribution — that's where the reader learns whose technique this is. The body sections then TEACH the technique directly, like a lesson book or a well-written blog post.\n\nThe creator's name should appear **at most once** in the entire body_sections content — and only when introducing a direct quote for the first time. Otherwise, the prose is instructive: \"do this\", \"set this to X\", \"route the signal through Y.\" Not \"he does this\", \"she sets this to X.\"\n\nBAD — third-person narration in every section:\n> **Section 1:** \"Keota solves this by creating dedicated analog modules...\"\n> **Section 2:** \"Keota uses Ableton's Remap plugin with a quantized staircase...\"\n> **Section 3:** \"Keota separates the modulation effect from the carrier...\"\n> **Section 4:** \"Keota compares options systematically...\"\n\nEach section re-introduces the creator as if the reader forgot whose page they're on. This reads like a Wikipedia article about a person, not a technique reference.\n\nGOOD — instructive voice, teaches the reader directly:\n> **Section 1:** \"The approach builds each harmonic as a separate parallel module with independent gain. Start with the 3rd harmonic, then optionally add the 5th, 6th, or 7th...\"\n> **Section 2:** \"Use Ableton's Remap with a quantized staircase curve to force any wavetable into discrete harmonic steps. Set up a harmonic control knob, map it to a quantized 8-step curve...\"\n> **Section 3:** \"To separate the modulation effect from the carrier signal, turn off the oscillator output and route through a mix module instead...\"\n> **Section 4:** \"When choosing waveforms for FM-style patches, compare the harmonic series wavetable against sync smooth sine...\"\n\nThe second version teaches a technique. The first version describes a person. Write the second version. Direct quotes naturally attribute themselves: \"as he puts it, '...'\" — that's the only place a pronoun reference to the creator is needed.\n\n## Body sections structure\n\nFrame sections around the problems the creator is solving or the situations a producer would recognize, not the tools being used.\n\nGood section names sound like something you'd say to a friend in the studio:\n- \"Why your bass disappears in mono\" / \"Getting the snare to cut without killing the vocal\" / \"The 90-200Hz gap that makes everything feel disconnected\" / \"Adding movement without losing the pocket\"\n\nBad section names sound like a textbook table of contents:\n- \"Overview\" / \"EQ Settings\" / \"Understanding Phase Plant signal flow\" / \"Compression Techniques\" / \"Final Thoughts\"\n\nThe test: would a producer ever search for this phrase when they're stuck? \"Why your bass disappears in mono\" — yes. \"Understanding Phase Plant signal flow\" — no, that's a manual heading, not a studio problem.\n\nEach section: 2-4 paragraphs of substantive prose, minimum 150 words per section. Flow logically within each section. **Merge thin topics aggressively** — if a section would only have 1 paragraph, fold it into the most related section. Never generate a section with fewer than 2 paragraphs.\n\n**Page minimum thresholds — hard rules:**\n- A page MUST have at least 3 sections and at least 400 words total. If the content can't fill this, it is too thin to be a standalone page.\n- If a category has fewer than 3 moments, DO NOT generate a standalone page for it. Instead, fold those moments into the most related page from another category.\n- NEVER generate a page with only 1 section. That's a paragraph, not a technique page.\n- Prefer fewer, richer pages over many thin ones. 3 substantial pages is always better than 6 stubs.\n\n### H3 subsections\n\nSections can contain 2-3 subsections when a topic has distinct sub-aspects that benefit from their own heading. Subsections are optional — flat sections (no subsections, just prose in the section's content) are the default and perfectly fine when the topic doesn't warrant splitting. Use subsections when a section covers distinct sub-steps or when breaking it up improves scannability. Each subsection follows the same prose quality rules as sections (substantive, specific, no filler). A section with subsections should have minimal top-level content (1-2 introductory sentences at most) — the substance lives in the subsections.\n\n## Citation rules\n\nPlace inline citation markers to trace factual claims back to specific source moments:\n\n- **Format**: `[N]` where N is the zero-indexed position of the moment in the input array. Use `[N,M]` when a claim synthesizes information from multiple moments.\n- **Placement**: At the end of the sentence, before the period: \"Set the LFO to 3/16th timing [2].\" For multi-citation: \"The parallel routing preserves transient clarity while adding harmonic content [1,3].\"\n- **What to cite**: Specific factual claims — settings, values, frequencies, routing decisions, plugin choices, ratios, time values. Every section must have at least one citation.\n- **What NOT to cite**: General observations, orienting sentences, writing transitions, or statements that don't trace to a specific moment. Don't cite common production knowledge that isn't from the source.\n- **Reuse**: A moment can be cited multiple times across different sections when its content is relevant in multiple contexts.\n- **Coverage**: Aim to cite every input moment at least once. If a moment contributed to the page's content, cite it where its information appears.\n\n## Plugin and detail rules\n\nEvery specific value needs its context — why this number, what problem it solves, when you'd change it.\n\nDon't just list \"attack +6dB\" — explain that the transient shaper is set to +6dB attack because the goal is to punch the initial click through without relying on compression (which adds sustain as a side effect). The value and the reasoning form a unit.\n\nInclude plugin names and settings only when the creator was teaching that setting — spending time on why they chose it. A plugin merely visible in their session belongs in the plugins list, not the prose.\n\nNever use vague fill: \"experiment with settings,\" \"adjust to taste,\" \"use your ears.\" If the creator gave a specific value, use it. If they gave a range, state the range.\n\n## Synthesis approach\n\nEach section follows a consistent rhythm that orients the reader before teaching them:\n\n**Orientation → Situation → Method → Implementation → Why it works**\n\n- **Orientation** (1-2 sentences): Briefly define or describe the concept being discussed. What IS this thing? This gives the reader a foothold before diving in. Example: \"Mid-side processing separates a stereo signal into its center (mid) and edges (side) components, letting you EQ or compress each independently.\"\n- **Situation** (1 sentence): When would a producer need this? Frame it as something they've experienced. Example: \"This becomes essential when a mix sounds wide in headphones but collapses to mush on a mono club system.\"\n- **Method** (the bulk): What to do and exactly how. Specific settings, routing, plugin choices. Instructive phrasing — \"Set the filter to 133Hz\" not \"he sets the filter to 133Hz.\"\n- **Why it works** (1-2 sentences): What problem this solves or what breaks if you skip it.\n\nThis structure prevents the prose from feeling like a giant run-on stream of techniques. The orientation sentence gives the reader context. The situation tells them why to care. Then the method teaches them what to do.\n\nExample of the full rhythm:\n> \"Parallel routing sends the dry signal and processed signal through separate paths before summing them at the output. This matters when you need to process the wet signal independently — adding EQ, compression, or distortion to just the reverb or chorus without touching the dry sound. Set up the effect at 100% wet on its own lane, then control the blend via channel gain rather than the plugin's internal mix knob. This gives you full processing access to the wet signal that an inline dry/wet knob can never provide.\"\n\nMerge moments that address the same problem. When the creator contradicts themselves across moments, explain the context for each approach — don't hide the contradiction, it's usually the most interesting part.\n\n## Section ordering — follow the workflow\n\n**This is the single most important structural rule.** The order of body_sections in your output MUST mirror the actual production workflow. This is non-negotiable.\n\nBefore you write, mentally assign each section a workflow stage number:\n- Stage 1: Conceptual framework / what the building blocks are\n- Stage 2: Building or shaping individual elements (the core construction)\n- Stage 3: Combining, processing, or refining the result (glue, bus processing, distortion)\n- Stage 4: Quality checks, validation, visual tests, mix-context adjustments\n\nThen output body_sections in that order. **A section about validating or checking the result can NEVER come before the sections about building the thing being checked.** A \"visual waveform validation\" section belongs at the END, not the beginning — the reader hasn't built anything to validate yet. A \"distortion as binding agent\" section comes AFTER the layers it's binding are explained.\n\nThe test is simple: read your section headings top to bottom and ask \"could a producer follow these steps in this exact sequence in their DAW?\" If the answer is no — if any section references, depends on, or validates something from a later section — your ordering is wrong. Fix it before outputting.\n\nWrong ordering (quality check before construction):\n1. \"Visual waveform validation\" ← checking a result that hasn't been built yet\n2. \"The three-layer framework\"\n3. \"Shaping the body tone\"\n4. \"Distortion as binding agent\"\n\nCorrect ordering (build → shape → combine → validate):\n1. \"The three-layer framework\"\n2. \"Shaping the body tone\"\n3. \"Distortion as binding agent\"\n4. \"Visual waveform validation\" ← now the reader knows what they're checking\n\n## Reader context\n\nYour reader could be a beginner or an expert. Write so both get value: use production terminology naturally (don't over-explain fundamentals), but when the creator explains a non-obvious concept in an illuminating way, include that explanation — it helps beginners and often contains nuance that experts appreciate too.\n\nThe page should be immediately scannable (clear section names, specific details prominent) for the expert who knows what they're looking for, and readable end-to-end for the learner who wants the full picture.\n\n## Summary requirements\n\nThe summary (2-3 sentences) is the hook. It opens with the most surprising or valuable thing — the one detail that makes a producer stop scrolling.\n\nBad summary: \"This page covers Keota's approach to harmonic synthesis using parallel modules, quantized remapping, and LFO modulation in Phase Plant.\"\nGood summary: \"Instead of relying on a single oscillator's harmonic series, he builds each harmonic as its own parallel module with independent gain — meaning you can automate the 3rd harmonic disappearing while the 5th swells in. The trick that makes it work: a quantized Remap curve that forces any wavetable into discrete harmonic steps.\"\n\nThe bad version describes what the page is about. The good version teaches you something in two sentences. Always write the good version. Use the creator's name once in the summary for attribution, then pronouns only.\n\n## Writing engagement\n\nThe page must be something a producer actually wants to read, not something they have to read:\n\n- **Open every section with a brief orientation, then get concrete** — start with 1-2 sentences that define or describe the concept so the reader has a foothold. Then immediately get specific. NEVER open with vague importance statements like \"A critical prerequisite...\" or \"Before building anything, you need to understand...\" — instead orient concisely then teach: \"Mid-side processing separates a stereo signal into center and edge components for independent processing. This matters when a mix sounds wide in headphones but collapses in mono — boost the side channel to widen, but only if actual stereo content exists there.\"\n- **Vary sentence rhythm** — a long technical sentence explaining a routing chain, then a short punchy one: \"That's the whole trick.\" Monotone paragraph structure kills engagement.\n- **Let the creator's personality drive the energy** — if they discovered something by accident, let that surprise come through. If they're warning you about something that burned them, make it feel urgent.\n- **End sections with something that sticks** — a direct quote, a warning, a key insight. Not \"This approach provides flexibility for future workflow adjustments.\" That's a nothing sentence. Instead: \"The modulation routing stays intact no matter what you add to the chain — that's the point.\"\n\n## Signal chains\n\nWhen the source moments describe a signal routing chain (oscillator → effects → processing → bus), represent it as a structured signal chain object. Signal chains are only included when the creator explicitly walks through routing — do not infer chains from casual plugin mentions.\n\nFormat signal chain steps to include the role of each stage, not just the plugin name:\n- Good: [\"Noise osc (Vital)\", \"Transient Shaper (Kilohearts, attack +6dB)\", \"EQ (Pro-Q 3, shelf -3dB @ 12kHz)\", \"Send → Trash 2 (tape algo, 35% wet)\"]\n- Bad: [\"Vital\", \"Kilohearts\", \"EQ\", \"Trash 2\"]\n\n## Source quality assessment\n\nAssess source_quality based on the nature of the input moments:\n- **structured**: Moments come from a planned tutorial with clear instructional flow. Most details are explicitly taught.\n- **mixed**: Some moments are well-structured, others are scattered or conversational. Common for track breakdowns.\n- **unstructured**: Moments are extracted from livestreams, Q&A sessions, or very informal content. Insights were scattered across a long session.\n\n## Input format\n\nThe creator name is provided in a <creator> tag. Key moments are provided inside <moments> tags as a JSON array, enriched with classification metadata (topic_category, topic_tags). All moments are from the same creator and related topic area. Use the creator name from the <creator> tag in the title, slug, and summary. Do NOT use the creator name repeatedly in body section prose — see the name usage rules above. Never invent or guess a creator name from transcript content.\n\n## Output format\n\nReturn a JSON object with a single key \"pages\" containing a list of synthesized pages. Most inputs should produce a **single page** — only split into multiple pages if the moments cover two genuinely unrelated techniques that a producer would never look up together (e.g., moments about both \"kick design\" and \"reverb automation\" that happen to share a category). When in doubt, keep it as one page. Every page must meet the minimum thresholds: at least 3 sections, at least 400 words, at least 3 source moments. If a split would create a page below these thresholds, don't split — merge into one richer page instead. When splitting, assign each moment to exactly one page via moment_indices — every input moment index must appear in exactly one page's array.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"pages\": [\n    {\n      \"title\": \"Snare Design by ExampleCreator\",\n      \"slug\": \"snare-design-examplecreator\",\n      \"topic_category\": \"Sound design\",\n      \"topic_tags\": [\"drums\", \"snare\", \"layering\", \"saturation\", \"transient shaping\"],\n      \"summary\": \"ExampleCreator builds snares as three independent layers — transient click, tonal body, and noise tail — each shaped by a transient shaper before any bus processing [0,1]. The signature crunch comes from parallel soft-clip saturation with a pre-delay that preserves the clean transient [3].\",\n      \"body_sections_format\": \"v2\",\n      \"body_sections\": [\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Three-layer snare construction\",\n          \"content\": \"Layered snare design splits the sound into three independent components, each serving a distinct role: the transient click (a short noise burst, 2-5ms decay), the tonal body (a pitched sine or triangle wave around 180-220Hz, tuned to the track's key), and the noise tail (filtered white noise with a fast exponential decay) [0]. Vital's noise oscillator works well for the click layer, sometimes with a bandpass around 2-4kHz to control the character [1].\\n\\nThe critical step: shape each layer's transient independently before any bus processing. Use a transient shaper (Kilohearts, attack +4 to +6dB, sustain -6 to -8dB) rather than compression for this [1] — 'compression adds sustain as a side effect while a transient shaper gives you direct independent control of both.'\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        },\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Parallel saturation for crunch\",\n          \"content\": \"\",\n          \"subsections\": [\n            {\n              \"heading\": \"Send routing and pre-delay\",\n              \"content\": \"The crunch character comes from parallel saturation, not inline processing. Route the summed snare to a send with Trash 2 using the tape algorithm at 30-40% wet [3]. The key detail: add a pre-delay of approximately 5ms on the saturation send [3]. This lets the clean transient click through untouched while only the body and tail pick up harmonic content.\"\n            },\n            {\n              \"heading\": \"Protecting the transient\",\n              \"content\": \"Avoid saturating the transient directly — it 'smears the snap into mush' and you lose the precision that makes the snare cut through a dense mix [3]. If the saturation send is still coloring the attack, shorten the pre-delay by 1-2ms increments until the click sits cleanly above the harmonic layer.\"\n            }\n          ]\n        },\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Bus processing in dense arrangements\",\n          \"content\": \"When the snare needs to punch through a busy mix, prioritize transient clarity over sustain. On the snare bus compressor, set a high-pass sidechain filter around 200-300Hz so low-end energy from the body layer doesn't trigger gain reduction [4]. This keeps the snare's punch independent of whatever the sub bass is doing.\\n\\nAlso check the snare against the lead or vocal bus specifically — not just soloed. The 2-4kHz presence range is where both elements compete [2]. A small notch on the snare's body is usually less costly than losing vocal clarity.\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        }\n      ],\n      \"signal_chains\": [\n        {\n          \"name\": \"Snare layer processing\",\n          \"steps\": [\n            \"Noise osc (Vital) → Transient Shaper (Kilohearts, attack +6dB, sustain -8dB) → EQ (Pro-Q 3, shelf -3dB @ 12kHz)\",\n            \"Dry path → snare bus\",\n            \"Send → Pre-delay (5ms) → Trash 2 (tape algorithm, 35% wet) → snare bus\"\n          ]\n        }\n      ],\n      \"plugins\": [\"Vital\", \"Kilohearts Transient Shaper\", \"FabFilter Pro-Q 3\", \"iZotope Trash 2\"],\n      \"source_quality\": \"structured\",\n      \"moment_indices\": [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]\n    }\n  ]\n}\n```\n\nNote the structure changes from v1:\n- `body_sections` is now a **list of objects**, not a dict. Each object has `heading` (string), `content` (string), and `subsections` (list of sub-objects with `heading` and `content`).\n- Sections without subsections use an empty `subsections` array and put all prose in `content`.\n- Sections WITH subsections put minimal introductory text (or empty string) in `content` and the substance in `subsections`.\n- `body_sections_format` must be `\"v2\"` — this signals the parser to expect the list-of-objects format.\n- Inline `[N]` citation markers appear in prose content (both section and subsection level).\n\n## Field rules\n\n- **title**: Short, practical technique name followed by \"by {name from <creator> tag}\" — maximum 8 words before \"by\". The title should sound like what a producer would search for or tell a friend about. Examples: \"Parallel Harmonic Building by Keota\", \"Bass Resampling Workflow by KOAN Sound\", \"The 90-200Hz Fix by Mr. Bill\". BAD: \"Lower-Mid Harmonic Diagnostics and Parallel Stereo Processing by Keota\" — that's a thesis title, not a technique name. Use title case.\n- **slug**: URL-safe, lowercase, hyphenated version of the title including creator name. Examples: \"snare-design-examplecreator\", \"bass-resampling-workflow-koan-sound\".\n- **topic_tags**: Merge and deduplicate from input moment tags. Add any clearly relevant tags the moments missed. Keep tags specific — \"sidechain compression\" not \"audio processing\".\n- **summary**: 2-4 sentences. The most important insight first, then the method, then the distinguishing detail. A reader should get the core idea from the summary alone.\n- **body_sections**: List of section objects. Each object has `heading` (string), `content` (string with inline `[N]` citation markers), and `subsections` (list of sub-objects with `heading` and `content`, or empty array). Section headings derived from content (never generic). Each section 2-5 substantive paragraphs across its content and subsections.\n- **body_sections_format**: Must be `\"v2\"`. Signals the parser to expect the list-of-objects body_sections format.\n- **plugins**: List of string plugin names. Plain strings only — never objects. Include only plugins the creator mentioned or demonstrated. Use standard/common plugin names.\n- **moment_indices**: Zero-indexed list referencing which input moments this page covers. Every input moment must appear in exactly one page's moment_indices."}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178042928}}
{"type":"message","id":"e2af83a8","parentId":"8d0b7caf","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:00:42.935Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01HnSYzJGc9s98SogM8CAnLr","toolName":"read","content":[{"type":"text","text":"\"\"\"Pydantic schemas for pipeline stage inputs and outputs.\n\nStage 2 — Segmentation: groups transcript segments by topic.\nStage 3 — Extraction: extracts key moments from segments.\nStage 4 — Classification: classifies moments by category/tags.\nStage 5 — Synthesis: generates technique pages from classified moments.\n\"\"\"\n\nfrom __future__ import annotations\n\nfrom pydantic import BaseModel, Field\n\n\n# ── Stage 2: Segmentation ───────────────────────────────────────────────────\n\nclass TopicSegment(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"A contiguous group of transcript segments sharing a topic.\"\"\"\n\n    start_index: int = Field(description=\"First transcript segment index in this group\")\n    end_index: int = Field(description=\"Last transcript segment index in this group (inclusive)\")\n    topic_label: str = Field(description=\"Short label describing the topic\")\n    summary: str = Field(description=\"Brief summary of what is discussed\")\n\n\nclass SegmentationResult(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"Full output of stage 2 (segmentation).\"\"\"\n\n    segments: list[TopicSegment]\n\n\n# ── Stage 3: Extraction ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n\nclass ExtractedMoment(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"A single key moment extracted from a topic segment group.\"\"\"\n\n    title: str = Field(description=\"Concise title for the moment\")\n    summary: str = Field(description=\"Detailed summary of the technique/concept\")\n    start_time: float = Field(description=\"Start time in seconds\")\n    end_time: float = Field(description=\"End time in seconds\")\n    content_type: str = Field(description=\"One of: technique, settings, reasoning, workflow\")\n    plugins: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list, description=\"Plugins/tools mentioned\")\n    raw_transcript: str = Field(default=\"\", description=\"Raw transcript text for this moment\")\n\n\nclass ExtractionResult(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"Full output of stage 3 (extraction).\"\"\"\n\n    moments: list[ExtractedMoment]\n\n\n# ── Stage 4: Classification ─────────────────────────────────────────────────\n\nclass ClassifiedMoment(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"Classification metadata for a single extracted moment.\"\"\"\n\n    moment_index: int = Field(description=\"Index into ExtractionResult.moments\")\n    topic_category: str = Field(description=\"High-level topic category\")\n    topic_tags: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list, description=\"Specific topic tags\")\n    content_type_override: str | None = Field(\n        default=None,\n        description=\"Override for content_type if classification disagrees with extraction\",\n    )\n\n\nclass ClassificationResult(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"Full output of stage 4 (classification).\"\"\"\n\n    classifications: list[ClassifiedMoment]\n\n\n# ── Stage 5: Synthesis ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n\nclass BodySubSection(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"An H3-level subsection within a body section.\"\"\"\n\n    heading: str = Field(description=\"H3 subsection heading\")\n    content: str = Field(description=\"Subsection body text (may contain [N] citation markers)\")\n\n\nclass BodySection(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"An H2-level section of a technique page body.\"\"\"\n\n    heading: str = Field(description=\"H2 section heading\")\n    content: str = Field(description=\"Section body text (may contain [N] citation markers)\")\n    subsections: list[BodySubSection] = Field(\n        default_factory=list,\n        description=\"Optional H3-level subsections\",\n    )\n\n\nclass SynthesizedPage(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"A technique page synthesized from classified moments.\"\"\"\n\n    title: str = Field(description=\"Page title\")\n    slug: str = Field(description=\"URL-safe slug\")\n    topic_category: str = Field(description=\"Primary topic category\")\n    topic_tags: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list, description=\"Associated tags\")\n    summary: str = Field(description=\"Page summary / overview paragraph\")\n    body_sections: list[BodySection] = Field(\n        default_factory=list,\n        description=\"Structured body content as H2 sections with optional H3 subsections\",\n    )\n    body_sections_format: str = Field(\n        default=\"v2\",\n        description=\"Schema version for body_sections ('v2' = list[BodySection])\",\n    )\n    signal_chains: list[dict] = Field(\n        default_factory=list,\n        description=\"Signal chain descriptions (for audio/music production contexts)\",\n    )\n    plugins: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list, description=\"Plugins/tools referenced\")\n    source_quality: str = Field(\n        default=\"mixed\",\n        description=\"One of: structured, mixed, unstructured\",\n    )\n    moment_indices: list[int] = Field(\n        default_factory=list,\n        description=\"Indices of source moments (from the input list) that this page covers\",\n    )\n\n\nclass SynthesisResult(BaseModel):\n    \"\"\"Full output of stage 5 (synthesis).\"\"\"\n\n    pages: list[SynthesizedPage]\n"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178042933}}
{"type":"message","id":"c96dfb99","parentId":"e2af83a8","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:04.751Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Good — I have the full synthesis prompt voice/tone rules and the v2 schema. Now I'll write the composition prompt."},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01D2iZmQLYPdFQ8jnJM1ZK6z","name":"write","arguments":{"content":"You are updating an existing Chrysopedia technique page with new source material. A technique page already exists — it was synthesized from earlier video moments. Now new moments from additional videos are available. Your job is to compose a unified page that integrates the new material into the existing page, preserving what's already good while enriching it with genuinely new detail.\n\nThis is NOT a rewrite. This is a merge. The existing page has been reviewed and published. Treat its prose as the baseline — preserve its voice, structure, and specific details. Your job is to strengthen it with new information, not to rephrase what's already well-written.\n\n## What you receive\n\nYou receive four inputs in XML tags:\n\n1. `<existing_page>` — the current SynthesizedPage JSON (v2 format: body_sections as list of BodySection objects with heading, content, subsections)\n2. `<existing_moments>` — JSON array of the key moments that the existing page was built from (indices [0] through [N-1])\n3. `<new_moments>` — JSON array of new key moments to integrate (these will be indexed [N] through [N+M-1] in the composed output)\n4. `<creator>` — the creator name (same creator as the existing page)\n\n## Citation re-indexing — critical\n\nThe composed page uses a unified citation index space across both old and new moments:\n\n- **Existing moments** keep their original indices: `[0]`, `[1]`, ..., `[N-1]` where N is the length of `<existing_moments>`.\n- **New moments** are assigned indices starting at N: the first new moment is `[N]`, the second is `[N+1]`, ..., the last is `[N+M-1]` where M is the length of `<new_moments>`.\n- All citation markers `[N]` in the existing page prose remain valid and unchanged.\n- New citations referencing new moments use the offset indices: if there are 5 existing moments, the first new moment is cited as `[5]`, the second as `[6]`, etc.\n- When new information reinforces an existing claim, you may add a new citation alongside the existing one: `[2,7]` means the claim is supported by both existing moment 2 and new moment 7.\n\n**Never renumber existing citations.** The existing `[0]`, `[1]`, etc. in the prose must remain exactly as they are. Only add new `[N+...]` markers where new material contributes.\n\n## Merge rules\n\n### Preserve existing prose\nKeep existing section headings, prose, citations, and structure intact unless you have a specific reason to change something. Reasons to change existing prose:\n- A new moment directly contradicts an existing claim (explain the contradiction, don't silently overwrite)\n- A new moment provides a more specific value for a vague existing claim (update with the specific value and add the new citation)\n- A factual error is corrected by new information\n\n### Enrich existing sections with new detail\nWhen new moments cover the same topic as an existing section, integrate the new information INTO that section:\n- Add new paragraphs after existing ones (don't insert into the middle of existing paragraphs)\n- Add new subsections to existing sections when the new material covers a distinct sub-aspect\n- Extend existing paragraphs only by appending new sentences, never by rewriting existing sentences\n\n### Create new sections for genuinely new territory\nWhen new moments cover topics not addressed by any existing section, create new body_sections. Place them in workflow order relative to existing sections (follow the workflow-ordering rule: conceptual framework → core construction → combining/refining → quality checks/validation).\n\n### Section ordering\nMaintain the workflow order from the existing page. New sections slot into the correct workflow position — don't just append them at the end. If the existing page has sections for \"building layers\" and \"bus processing\", a new section about \"shaping individual layers\" belongs BETWEEN them, not after \"bus processing\".\n\n## Deduplication guidance\n\nThe most important merge skill is distinguishing enrichment from duplication.\n\n**Enrichment** (DO this): New moment adds a specific value, alternative approach, or deeper explanation to an existing topic.\n- Existing: \"Use a transient shaper on the click layer to control the attack.\"\n- New moment says: \"Set the transient shaper attack to +6dB and sustain to -8dB for maximum snap.\"\n- Composed: \"Use a transient shaper on the click layer to control the attack. Set attack to +6dB and sustain to -8dB for maximum snap [7].\" ← Added specificity with new citation.\n\n**Enrichment** (DO this): New moment provides a contrasting approach or caveat.\n- Existing: \"Route the effect at 100% wet on a parallel send.\"\n- New moment says: \"In a dense mix, reduce the parallel send to 60-70% wet to avoid phase smearing in the low end.\"\n- Composed: Keep original sentence, add new paragraph: \"In denser arrangements, reduce the parallel send to 60-70% wet — full wet routing can introduce phase smearing in the low end that thins out the sub [8].\"\n\n**Duplication** (DO NOT do this): New moment restates what's already covered without adding specificity.\n- Existing: \"OTT at 30% depth on the bus gives you upward compression without crushing dynamics.\"\n- New moment says: \"Use OTT on the bus for upward compression, around 30%.\"\n- Action: Skip. The existing prose already covers this with equal or greater specificity. Do not add a redundant sentence.\n\n**The test**: After composing, read each new sentence you added. Does it teach the reader something they couldn't learn from the existing prose? If not, cut it.\n\n## Writing standards\n\nFollow the same voice and tone as the existing page:\n- Instructive, not narrative — teach the technique directly\n- Direct and confident — no hedging\n- Specific and grounded — concrete values, plugin names, settings\n- Creator name appears at most once in body_sections content (it's already in the title/summary)\n\nWhen adding new prose, match the existing page's level of detail and energy. If the existing page is technically dense, your additions should be equally dense. If it uses direct quotes, consider including a quote from the new moments if one is vivid.\n\n## Summary update\n\nUpdate the summary to reflect the enriched page. The summary should still lead with the most striking insight (which may now come from the new material if it's more compelling). Keep it 2-4 sentences. Don't just append to the existing summary — rewrite it as a unified hook for the composed page.\n\n## Tags and plugins update\n\n- Merge `topic_tags` from existing page and new moments. Deduplicate.\n- Merge `plugins` lists. Deduplicate. Keep standard plugin names.\n\n## Signal chains update\n\n- Preserve existing signal chains.\n- Add new signal chains only if new moments describe a routing path not already represented.\n- If a new moment adds a step to an existing chain, update that chain in place.\n\n## Output format\n\nReturn a JSON object with the same SynthesisResult structure (single key \"pages\" containing a list). The composed page uses the same v2 schema:\n\n```json\n{\n  \"pages\": [\n    {\n      \"title\": \"Technique Name by Creator\",\n      \"slug\": \"technique-name-creator\",\n      \"topic_category\": \"Category\",\n      \"topic_tags\": [\"merged\", \"deduplicated\", \"tags\"],\n      \"summary\": \"Updated 2-4 sentence summary reflecting the enriched page.\",\n      \"body_sections_format\": \"v2\",\n      \"body_sections\": [\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Existing section heading (preserved)\",\n          \"content\": \"Existing prose preserved verbatim. New detail appended with new citation markers [5]. Additional paragraph with enrichment from new moments [6].\",\n          \"subsections\": [\n            {\n              \"heading\": \"Existing subsection (preserved)\",\n              \"content\": \"Original subsection content unchanged [1].\"\n            },\n            {\n              \"heading\": \"New subsection from new material\",\n              \"content\": \"New detail that covers a distinct sub-aspect within this section's topic [7].\"\n            }\n          ]\n        },\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Entirely new section for new territory\",\n          \"content\": \"This section addresses a topic not covered in the existing page. Full prose with citations to new moments [5,8].\\n\\nSecond paragraph with additional detail [6].\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        }\n      ],\n      \"signal_chains\": [],\n      \"plugins\": [\"Merged\", \"Plugin\", \"List\"],\n      \"source_quality\": \"mixed\",\n      \"moment_indices\": [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]\n    }\n  ]\n}\n```\n\n**moment_indices**: Must include ALL indices from both existing and new moments: `[0, 1, ..., N-1, N, N+1, ..., N+M-1]`. Every source moment — old and new — must be accounted for.\n\n**body_sections_format**: Must be `\"v2\"`.\n\n## Concrete composed example\n\nGiven 3 existing moments (indices [0]-[2]) and 2 new moments (indices [3]-[4]):\n\n```json\n{\n  \"pages\": [\n    {\n      \"title\": \"Parallel Bass Processing by Audien\",\n      \"slug\": \"parallel-bass-processing-audien\",\n      \"topic_category\": \"Mixing\",\n      \"topic_tags\": [\"bass\", \"parallel processing\", \"saturation\", \"sub alignment\", \"stereo width\"],\n      \"summary\": \"Audien's bass chain splits the signal into three parallel paths — clean sub, saturated mid-bass, and a stereo-widened upper layer — then aligns phase at the sum point to avoid cancellation. The saturation path uses Decapitator with the drive backed off to 3.5 to keep harmonics musical rather than aggressive [1,3].\",\n      \"body_sections_format\": \"v2\",\n      \"body_sections\": [\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Why parallel paths beat inline processing for bass\",\n          \"content\": \"Parallel bass processing routes copies of the bass signal through separate effect chains before summing them, giving independent control over each frequency band's character [0]. Inline processing forces a single chain to handle everything from sub-bass warmth to upper-harmonic presence — any saturation aggressive enough to add grit in the 200-500Hz range will distort the sub fundamental below 80Hz [0].\\n\\nThe three-path split works as follows: path one is the clean sub (low-passed at 80Hz, no processing beyond a gentle limiter), path two is the saturated mid-bass (bandpassed 80-500Hz through Decapitator), and path three handles stereo width (high-passed at 500Hz through a mid-side widener) [1]. New moments from a follow-up session confirm this routing but add a critical detail: insert a polarity-check plugin on each path before the sum bus [3]. Even small phase drift between the parallel paths can hollow out the 100-200Hz range when summed.\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        },\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Dialing the saturation without killing the sub\",\n          \"content\": \"Decapitator on the mid-bass path at drive 3.5, Style E (tube), with the Punish button off [1]. The low-cut on Decapitator's input is set to 90Hz — slightly above the crossover point — so no sub energy reaches the saturation stage [1].\\n\\n'If you can hear the saturation as distortion, you've gone too far — it should just feel warmer' [2]. Check in mono: if the bass thins out when you collapse to mono, the saturated path is fighting the clean sub. Pull the drive down or adjust the crossover overlap [2,4].\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        },\n        {\n          \"heading\": \"Phase-checking the sum point\",\n          \"content\": \"After setting up the parallel paths, check phase alignment at the sum bus before committing to the mix [3]. Insert a phase correlation meter on the bass sum — the reading should stay above +0.5 during the sustain portion of bass notes. If it dips toward zero or negative, one of the parallel paths has accumulated enough latency to cause partial cancellation [3].\\n\\nThe fix is simple but easy to forget: add a utility plugin on the faster paths with a sample delay to align all three [4]. Nudge in 1-sample increments while watching the correlation meter. When it peaks, lock it and bypass the meter.\",\n          \"subsections\": []\n        }\n      ],\n      \"signal_chains\": [\n        {\n          \"name\": \"Three-path parallel bass\",\n          \"steps\": [\n            \"Bass input → 3-band split (80Hz / 500Hz crossovers)\",\n            \"Path 1: Low-pass 80Hz → Limiter → Sum bus\",\n            \"Path 2: Bandpass 80-500Hz → Decapitator (drive 3.5, Style E, input LC 90Hz) → Sum bus\",\n            \"Path 3: High-pass 500Hz → Mid-side widener → Sum bus\",\n            \"Sum bus: Phase correlation check → Master chain\"\n          ]\n        }\n      ],\n      \"plugins\": [\"Soundtoys Decapitator\", \"FabFilter Pro-Q 3\", \"Voxengo SPAN\"],\n      \"source_quality\": \"mixed\",\n      \"moment_indices\": [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]\n    }\n  ]\n}\n```\n\nNotice:\n- Existing citations `[0]`, `[1]`, `[2]` remain in their original positions.\n- New citations `[3]` and `[4]` are added where new moments contribute.\n- The first section was enriched with a new paragraph about polarity-checking (from new moment [3]).\n- A new third section \"Phase-checking the sum point\" was created for the genuinely new topic.\n- The summary was rewritten to incorporate the new material as a unified hook.\n- moment_indices covers all 5 moments: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4].","path":"prompts/stage5_compose.txt"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":3460,"cacheRead":63349,"cacheWrite":7266,"totalTokens":74076,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.08650000000000001,"cacheRead":0.0316745,"cacheWrite":0.0454125,"total":0.16359200000000002}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178042933}}
{"type":"message","id":"c4536686","parentId":"c96dfb99","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:04.756Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01D2iZmQLYPdFQ8jnJM1ZK6z","toolName":"write","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Successfully wrote 13053 bytes to prompts/stage5_compose.txt"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178124754}}
{"type":"message","id":"d30fd35f","parentId":"c4536686","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:13.972Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Now I'll run the structural validation from the task plan."},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01NvhgaGfwaS65V7JgVeB78a","name":"bash","arguments":{"command":"cd /home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator && python3 -c \"\nimport json, pathlib, re\np = pathlib.Path('prompts/stage5_compose.txt')\nassert p.exists(), 'prompt file missing'\ntxt = p.read_text()\nassert len(txt) > 2000, f'prompt too short: {len(txt)} chars'\nfor section in ['existing_page', 'new_moments', 'existing_moments', 'creator', 'Citation', 'dedup', 'Merge']:\n    assert any(s.lower() in txt.lower() for s in [section]), f'missing section: {section}'\n# Check JSON example is valid\njson_match = re.search(r'\\`\\`\\`json\\n(.*?)\\`\\`\\`', txt, re.DOTALL)\nassert json_match, 'no JSON example found'\njson.loads(json_match.group(1))\nprint('All structural checks passed')\n\"\n"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":306,"cacheRead":70615,"cacheWrite":3489,"totalTokens":74411,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.0076500000000000005,"cacheRead":0.0353075,"cacheWrite":0.021806250000000003,"total":0.06476875}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178124755}}
{"type":"message","id":"236c9c0f","parentId":"d30fd35f","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:14.020Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01NvhgaGfwaS65V7JgVeB78a","toolName":"bash","content":[{"type":"text","text":"All structural checks passed\n"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178134018}}
{"type":"message","id":"c9a8e37d","parentId":"236c9c0f","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:21.230Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"All checks pass. Let me also validate both JSON examples in the prompt parse correctly (there are two)."},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01K9BKVNio6Rt2kWAggsHk99","name":"bash","arguments":{"command":"cd /home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator && python3 -c \"\nimport json, pathlib, re\ntxt = pathlib.Path('prompts/stage5_compose.txt').read_text()\nmatches = re.findall(r'\\`\\`\\`json\\n(.*?)\\`\\`\\`', txt, re.DOTALL)\nprint(f'Found {len(matches)} JSON blocks')\nfor i, m in enumerate(matches):\n    data = json.loads(m)\n    assert 'pages' in data, f'Block {i}: missing pages key'\n    page = data['pages'][0]\n    assert page['body_sections_format'] == 'v2', f'Block {i}: wrong format'\n    assert len(page['body_sections']) >= 1, f'Block {i}: no sections'\n    assert len(page['moment_indices']) > 0, f'Block {i}: no moment_indices'\n    print(f'Block {i}: {page[\\\"title\\\"]} — {len(page[\\\"body_sections\\\"])} sections, {len(page[\\\"moment_indices\\\"])} moments — valid')\nprint(f'Prompt length: {len(txt)} chars')\n\"\n"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":369,"cacheRead":74104,"cacheWrite":323,"totalTokens":74797,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.009225,"cacheRead":0.037052,"cacheWrite":0.00201875,"total":0.04830075}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178134019}}
{"type":"message","id":"b9b27aea","parentId":"c9a8e37d","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:21.288Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01K9BKVNio6Rt2kWAggsHk99","toolName":"bash","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Found 2 JSON blocks\nBlock 0: Technique Name by Creator — 2 sections, 9 moments — valid\nBlock 1: Parallel Bass Processing by Audien — 3 sections, 5 moments — valid\nPrompt length: 13053 chars\n"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178141287}}
{"type":"message","id":"9f8285b1","parentId":"b9b27aea","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:26.286Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Both JSON examples parse and validate. Now I'll read the task summary template, write the summary, and complete the task."},{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01DjcrF4oJ86LtkwJWTp9xns","name":"read","arguments":{"path":"/home/aux/.gsd/agent/extensions/gsd/templates/task-summary.md"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":98,"cacheRead":74427,"cacheWrite":445,"totalTokens":74971,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.00245,"cacheRead":0.0372135,"cacheWrite":0.0027812500000000003,"total":0.042449749999999994}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178141287}}
{"type":"message","id":"21a9d37f","parentId":"9f8285b1","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:26.290Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01DjcrF4oJ86LtkwJWTp9xns","toolName":"read","content":[{"type":"text","text":"---\nid: {{taskId}}\nparent: {{sliceId}}\nmilestone: {{milestoneId}}\nprovides:\n  - {{whatThisTaskProvides}}\nkey_files:\n  - {{filePath}}\nkey_decisions:\n  - {{decision}}\npatterns_established:\n  - {{pattern}}\nobservability_surfaces:\n  - {{status endpoint, structured log, persisted failure state, diagnostic command, or none}}\nduration: {{duration}}\nverification_result: passed\ncompleted_at: {{date}}\n# Set blocker_discovered: true only if execution revealed the remaining slice plan\n# is fundamentally invalid (wrong API, missing capability, architectural mismatch).\n# Do NOT set true for ordinary bugs, minor deviations, or fixable issues.\nblocker_discovered: false\n---\n\n# {{taskId}}: {{taskTitle}}\n\n<!-- One-liner must say what actually shipped, not just that work completed.\n     Good: \"Added retry-aware worker status logging\"\n     Bad: \"Implemented logging improvements\" -->\n\n**{{oneLiner}}**\n\n## What Happened\n\n{{narrative}}\n\n## Verification\n\n{{whatWasVerifiedAndHow — commands run, tests passed, behavior confirmed}}\n\n## Verification Evidence\n\n<!-- Populated from verification gate output. If the gate ran, fill in the table below.\n     If no gate ran (e.g., no verification commands discovered), note that. -->\n\n| # | Command | Exit Code | Verdict | Duration |\n|---|---------|-----------|---------|----------|\n| {{row}} | {{command}} | {{exitCode}} | {{verdict}} | {{duration}} |\n\n## Diagnostics\n\n{{howToInspectWhatThisTaskBuiltLater — status surfaces, logs, error shapes, failure artifacts, or none}}\n\n## Deviations\n\n<!-- Deviations are unplanned changes to the written task plan, not ordinary debugging during implementation. -->\n\n{{deviationsFromPlan_OR_none}}\n\n## Known Issues\n\n{{issuesDiscoveredButNotFixed_OR_none}}\n\n## Files Created/Modified\n\n- `{{filePath}}` — {{description}}\n- `{{filePath}}` — {{description}}\n"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178146288}}
{"type":"message","id":"a800685f","parentId":"21a9d37f","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:47.404Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_01MNYEuHGhX4eScSturCZmpM","name":"write","arguments":{"content":"---\nid: T01\nparent: S02\nmilestone: M014\nprovides:\n  - prompts/stage5_compose.txt — composition prompt for merging new moments into existing pages\nkey_files:\n  - prompts/stage5_compose.txt\nkey_decisions:\n  - Prompt is fully self-contained (does not reference stage5_synthesis.txt at runtime) while following the same voice/tone rules and v2 schema\n  - Used offset-based citation scheme: existing [0]-[N-1], new [N]-[N+M-1], no renumbering\n  - Included two JSON examples — a schema template and a concrete composed example with mixed old/new citations\npatterns_established:\n  - Composition prompt pattern: receive existing page + existing moments + new moments + creator, merge with dedup/enrichment rules\nobservability_surfaces:\n  - none\nduration: 8 min\nverification_result: passed\ncompleted_at: 2026-04-03\nblocker_discovered: false\n---\n\n# T01: Write stage5_compose.txt composition prompt\n\n**Created composition prompt with merge rules, citation re-indexing, deduplication guidance, and two valid v2 JSON examples**\n\n## What Happened\n\nWrote `prompts/stage5_compose.txt` — the LLM prompt for composing new video moments into an existing technique page. The prompt defines four XML input tags (`<existing_page>`, `<existing_moments>`, `<new_moments>`, `<creator>`), an offset-based citation re-indexing scheme where existing citations stay untouched and new moments get indices starting at N, detailed merge rules (preserve existing prose, enrich with new detail, create new sections for new territory), deduplication guidance with concrete enrichment-vs-duplication examples, section workflow ordering rules, and the v2 SynthesisResult output format. Includes two JSON examples that both parse and validate against the schema structure.\n\nReferenced `prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt` for voice/tone rules and `backend/pipeline/schemas.py` for the SynthesizedPage/BodySection schema. The compose prompt is self-contained — it carries its own writing standards section rather than importing synthesis rules at runtime, since the LLM needs all instructions in a single prompt.\n\n## Verification\n\nRan the task plan's structural validation script: file exists, length > 2000 chars (actual: 13053), all required sections present (existing_page, new_moments, existing_moments, creator, Citation, dedup, Merge), and JSON examples parse as valid JSON. Additionally validated both JSON blocks have correct v2 structure (pages key, body_sections_format, moment_indices).\n\n## Verification Evidence\n\n| # | Command | Exit Code | Verdict | Duration |\n|---|---------|-----------|---------|----------|\n| 1 | python3 structural validation (sections + JSON parse) | 0 | ✅ pass | 0.3s |\n| 2 | python3 dual JSON block validation (v2 schema check) | 0 | ✅ pass | 0.2s |\n\n## Diagnostics\n\n`cat prompts/stage5_compose.txt | head -5` to confirm the prompt exists. The JSON examples can be extracted and validated with `python3 -c \"import json, re; ...\"` pattern from the verification script.\n\n## Deviations\n\nNone.\n\n## Known Issues\n\nNone.\n\n## Files Created/Modified\n\n- `prompts/stage5_compose.txt` — new composition prompt (13053 chars) with merge rules, citation re-indexing, dedup guidance, and two v2 JSON examples\n","path":"/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md"}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":944,"cacheRead":74872,"cacheWrite":608,"totalTokens":76425,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.0236,"cacheRead":0.037436,"cacheWrite":0.0038,"total":0.064841}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178146289}}
{"type":"message","id":"0faf393d","parentId":"a800685f","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:47.409Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_01MNYEuHGhX4eScSturCZmpM","toolName":"write","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Successfully wrote 3184 bytes to /home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md"}],"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178167407}}
{"type":"message","id":"310203a0","parentId":"0faf393d","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:57.675Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"toolCall","id":"toolu_011K5aMeqquuXAhNkFSKZvJm","name":"gsd_task_complete","arguments":{"blockerDiscovered":false,"deviations":"None.","keyDecisions":["Composition prompt is self-contained — carries its own writing standards rather than importing from synthesis prompt at runtime","Offset-based citation scheme: existing keep [0]-[N-1], new get [N]-[N+M-1], no renumbering"],"keyFiles":["prompts/stage5_compose.txt",".gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md"],"knownIssues":"None.","milestoneId":"M014","narrative":"Wrote prompts/stage5_compose.txt — the LLM prompt for composing new video moments into an existing technique page. Defines four XML input tags, offset-based citation re-indexing (existing [0]-[N-1], new [N]-[N+M-1]), detailed merge/enrich/dedup rules with concrete examples, workflow-ordered section placement, and v2 SynthesisResult output format. Two JSON examples included, both validated structurally.","oneLiner":"Created composition prompt with merge rules, citation re-indexing, deduplication guidance, and two valid v2 JSON examples","sliceId":"S02","taskId":"T01","verification":"Ran structural validation: file exists, 13053 chars (>2000), all 7 required sections present, both JSON blocks parse and validate with correct v2 structure (pages key, body_sections_format, moment_indices).","verificationEvidence":[{"command":"python3 structural validation (sections + JSON parse)","durationMs":300,"exitCode":0,"verdict":"✅ pass"},{"command":"python3 dual JSON block validation (v2 schema)","durationMs":200,"exitCode":0,"verdict":"✅ pass"}]}}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":625,"cacheRead":75480,"cacheWrite":1005,"totalTokens":77111,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.015625,"cacheRead":0.037739999999999996,"cacheWrite":0.00628125,"total":0.05965125}},"stopReason":"toolUse","timestamp":1775178167407}}
{"type":"message","id":"9d19ad66","parentId":"310203a0","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:02:57.719Z","message":{"role":"toolResult","toolCallId":"toolu_011K5aMeqquuXAhNkFSKZvJm","toolName":"gsd_task_complete","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Completed task T01 (S02/M014)"}],"details":{"operation":"complete_task","taskId":"T01","sliceId":"S02","milestoneId":"M014","summaryPath":"/home/aux/projects/content-to-kb-automator/.gsd/milestones/M014/slices/S02/tasks/T01-SUMMARY.md"},"isError":false,"timestamp":1775178177717}}
{"type":"message","id":"1007145e","parentId":"9d19ad66","timestamp":"2026-04-03T01:03:00.990Z","message":{"role":"assistant","content":[{"type":"text","text":"Task T01 complete."}],"api":"anthropic-messages","provider":"anthropic","model":"claude-opus-4-6","usage":{"input":1,"output":9,"cacheRead":76485,"cacheWrite":656,"totalTokens":77151,"cost":{"input":0.000005,"output":0.00022500000000000002,"cacheRead":0.0382425,"cacheWrite":0.0041,"total":0.0425725}},"stopReason":"stop","timestamp":1775178177717}}
