xpltdco/chrysopedia
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 2 Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

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

Browse source 
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
1 changed files with 19 additions and 9 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

28
prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt
View file

@ -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