diff --git a/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt b/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt
index e2a0328..90cec30 100644
--- a/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt
+++ b/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt
@@ -55,19 +55,29 @@ Merge moments that address the same problem. When the creator contradicts themse
 
 ## Section ordering — follow the workflow
 
-**This is critical.** Order sections so a reader's journey mirrors the actual production workflow. Foundations come before finishing touches. Construction comes before glue. Sound sources come before processing comes before mix-bus treatment.
+**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.
 
-Think about what a producer would actually do in their DAW: they wouldn't reach for the binding distortion before they've built the layers it's binding. The article should read the same way. If a technique has three layers and then a glue stage, the sections should cover the three layers first, then the glue — even if the creator explained them in a different order in the video.
+Before you write, mentally assign each section a workflow stage number:
+- Stage 1: Conceptual framework / what the building blocks are
+- Stage 2: Building or shaping individual elements (the core construction)
+- Stage 3: Combining, processing, or refining the result (glue, bus processing, distortion)
+- Stage 4: Quality checks, validation, visual tests, mix-context adjustments
 
-The test: read your section headings in order and ask "would a producer follow these steps in this sequence?" If a section describes a process that depends on something covered in a later section, reorder them.
+Then 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.
 
-For technique-oriented pages, a natural flow is typically:
-1. The conceptual framework (what are the building blocks?)
-2. Constructing or shaping each element (the core work)
-3. Combining, processing, or refining the result (the glue, the polish)
-4. Context-dependent adjustments or quality checks (if applicable)
+The 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.
 
-This ordering also creates a satisfying reading arc — the reader builds understanding piece by piece, and the final section ties everything together. A "binding agent" section hits harder at the end because the reader now understands exactly what it's binding.
+Wrong ordering (quality check before construction):
+1. "Visual waveform validation" ← checking a result that hasn't been built yet
+2. "The three-layer framework"
+3. "Shaping the body tone"
+4. "Distortion as binding agent"
+
+Correct ordering (build → shape → combine → validate):
+1. "The three-layer framework"
+2. "Shaping the body tone"
+3. "Distortion as binding agent"
+4. "Visual waveform validation" ← now the reader knows what they're checking
 
 ## Reader context