stage5 prompt: make section ordering a hard constraint with explicit wrong/correct examples

Validation/quality-check sections can NEVER precede construction sections.
Added concrete wrong vs correct ordering example using the exact snare design
case that failed. Elevated from 'typically' guidance to non-negotiable rule.
This commit is contained in:
jlightner 2026-04-01 11:35:59 +00:00
parent 78c01b22ca
commit 84e617ab64

View file

@ -55,19 +55,29 @@ Merge moments that address the same problem. When the creator contradicts themse
## Section ordering — follow the workflow ## 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: 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.
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)
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 ## Reader context