.. Migration note (2026m04d04): Claude copied this file during VV-to-HELL migration.
   Old path: ``vv/jub/oov2/prompts/prompt_reap-design-questions-during-integration.rst`` (as given by LLoL)
   New path: ``hell/ll/jub/b/41/prompt_reap-design-questions-during-integration.rst`` (as chosen by Claude)
   Category: JUB OOv2 prompt

.. meta::
   :description: Agent prompt for collecting evidence on open BEST Names design questions while simultaneously performing matheology content integration tasks.
   :keywords: JUB OOv2, design questions, integration, agent prompt, BEST Names, D2 grammar, data collection, reap, evidence, dual-task
   :author: Yah, Yas, everyone, LLoL as Laurence Loewe of Laodicea, ClaudeOp46Max, Anthropic, and Spirit of Boolean Truth
   :og:card:title: Reap Design Questions<br>During Integration
   :og:card:description: Two tasks, one session. This agent prompt collects design evidence as a side effect of performing content integration, maximizing session value.

.. SOCIAL-CARD-QUALITY-COMPARE --- OO (default effort) vs PP (max effort), 2026-03-26
   OO :description: Agent prompt for collecting evidence on open design questions while performing matheology content integration tasks.
   OO :keywords: JUB OOv2, design questions, integration, agent prompt, BEST Names, D2 grammar, data collection, matheology, reap, evidence
   OO :og:card:title: Reap Design Questions<br>During Integration
   OO :og:card:description: Agent prompt for simultaneously collecting design question evidence while performing content integration tasks.
   PP :description: Agent prompt for collecting evidence on open BEST Names design questions while simultaneously performing matheology content integration tasks.
   PP :keywords: JUB OOv2, design questions, integration, agent prompt, BEST Names, D2 grammar, data collection, reap, evidence, dual-task
   PP :og:card:title: Reap Design Questions<br>During Integration
   PP :og:card:description: Two tasks, one session. This agent prompt collects design evidence as a side effect of performing content integration, maximizing session value.

.. SOCIAL-CARD-REVIEW --- generated by Claude Opus 4.6, 2026-03-26
   dv_ClaOp46_PP_2026m03d26 --- max-effort rewrite, read full page.
   :description: 142 chars | :og:card:title: 41 chars (excl <br>)
   - [ ] PP title more compelling than OO title
   - [ ] PP description more accurate than OO description
   - [ ] Description hooks without misleading
   - [ ] Keywords specific to this page's actual content
   - [ ] No language rule violations
   - [ ] Character counts verified

:orphan:

*********************************************************************
Reap Design Questions During Integration --- Agent Prompt
*********************************************************************

.. note::

   **Draft prompt for integration agents.** Run this prompt (or embed
   its instructions) when an agent is sorting, moving, or compiling
   matheology content into the BEST Names structure. The agent performs
   its primary integration task AND simultaneously collects evidence
   for open design questions.

   **Prerequisite:** The agent must have read CLAUDE.md and the AHA doc
   (at minimum Sections 1--16). The agent must know the flat D2 grammar
   and the label conventions.

   **Safety:** This prompt asks the agent to APPEND findings to data
   collection files. It does not ask the agent to resolve design
   questions or modify the grammar.

----

/clear
/compact

You are performing content integration for the matheology project. Read
CLAUDE.md first. Obey all rules (especially: append-only llogs, no
"validate/verify" language, use HELD/BREACH not PASS/FAIL).

Read the AHA doc Sections 1--16:
``source/matheology/compiler/ww/5d-link-naming-matheology-aha.rst``

Your primary task is [INSERT SPECIFIC INTEGRATION TASK HERE].

While doing that primary task, you have a secondary task: **collect
evidence for open design questions.** You are the one touching every
piece of content. You are in the best position to notice patterns that
no amount of architectural analysis can reveal. Do not let these
observations pass silently.

**For each piece of content you move, sort, or compile, ask yourself
these five questions:**

1. **D1/D2 combinations:** What model is this content for? What D2 type
   does it represent? Is this combination already in the testing matrix,
   or is it new? If a useful combination is *missing* (content that
   should exist but doesn't), note that too.

   Append findings to:
   ``source/matheology/compiler/ee/d1-d2-testing-matrix.rst``

2. **Should Pet have con/pro?** This is the most consequential open
   question. The instinct "add generic disputatio to all models" is
   architecturally clean but may be premature. Watch specifically for:

   - Objections currently filed under Jub that actually target Pet
     axioms (e.g., con11 targets ax1_A1, which is a Pet axiom).
   - Content where an author naturally writes "this Pet axiom
     contradicts..." or "an objection to ax5_A5 is..."
   - Absence of such patterns --- if nobody naturally objects to Pet
     axioms directly, that is evidence that ``con``/``pro`` may be
     structurally specific to Jub's quest format.

   Report these observations in the D1/D2 testing matrix (same file as
   question 1), using status ``W`` for "would be useful" or ``N`` for
   "not naturally emerging."

3. **Natural chaining:** Does this content naturally combine two D2
   concepts? For example, does a limitation discussion specifically
   target the *logic framework* of an axiom (``logic-limit`` chain),
   or could it be filed under ``limit`` alone? If a single type suffices,
   say so. If the chain adds genuine meaning, say what meaning.

   Append findings to:
   ``source/matheology/compiler/ee/d2-chaining-evidence.rst``

4. **Cross-model echoes:** Does the same element number in a different
   model address the same conceptual topic? Does this content reference
   a parallel in another model? Note any suspected echoes, even weak ones.

   Append findings to:
   ``source/matheology/compiler/ee/alignment-class-echoes.rst``

5. **"model" collision:** Does this content use the word "model" in a
   context where it could be confused between D2 type ``model`` and PoR
   field #40 ``ModelUsedIn``? Note any actual ambiguity (not just
   co-occurrence).

   Append findings to:
   ``source/matheology/compiler/ee/por-field-collision-check.rst``

6. **PoR field real-world usage:** For each element you migrate, which
   PoR fields (Section 9) does the existing content naturally populate
   (``Y``), which require expert invention (``I``), and which remain
   empty stubs (``E``)? Most importantly: does the content want a field
   that the current PoR does not have? Record proposed new fields in
   the "Proposed New Fields" table. See the dedicated prompt at
   ``source/matheology/vv/jub/oov2/prompts/prompt_por-field-usage-census.rst``
   for detailed instructions and sampling strategy.

   Append findings to:
   ``source/matheology/compiler/ee/por-field-usage-census.rst``

**Reporting format:** Each finding file has a list-table. Append rows
in the same column format as the existing sample entries. Do not modify
or delete existing rows. If you have nothing to report for a question,
do not append anything --- silence is a valid finding.

**At the end of your integration session,** write a brief summary
(3--5 sentences) at the bottom of each findings file where you added
rows, noting: how many findings, any patterns you noticed, any
surprises. Append this to the "Summary" section of the file.

**Do not resolve design questions.** Your job is to collect evidence,
not to make architectural decisions. If you have a strong opinion,
state it in the Note column --- but the decision belongs to the
architect reviewing these findings after integration completes.


.. admonition:: TELES migration report (2026m04d04)

   Mechanical identifier migration applied to this file.
   All axiom/theorem text references were migrated from short form
   (e.g., A15) to compound form (e.g., ax15_A15) as part of the
   matheology compound naming operation. Both forms refer to the
   same formal object. The old form survives as the suffix to
   ensure consistency with the oldest records; the new form adds
   a temporary-status prefix. Forward-facing pages use brief form
   (ax15) only. See
   :ref:`hell-ll-other-b15-teles-renaming-prompt` for the complete
   mapping table and :ref:`legacy-5d-link-names-table-for-pet-jub-model` for the permanent
   reference.