# Gemini CLI Style Guide

This guide defines the authoritative technical and narrative style for all project documentation, articles, and reports. The `/revise` command and the `editor` subagent use these rules to perform structured, step-by-step audits.

## General Context
- **Tone:** Intellectual but accessible. Conversational academic style.
- **Perspective:** First-person ("I", "we") is preferred for narratives and journals.
- **Audience:** Intelligent peers who value technical depth without unnecessary jargon.
- **Goal:** Transform abstract technical concepts into visualizable, grounded narratives.

---

## Phase 1: Structural Audit (High-Level)
*Goal: Ensure a clear narrative arc and logical progression.*

### DO:
- Start with a provocative hook (question, bold statement, or personal stake).
- Use a clear hierarchical structure with descriptive subheadings.
- Follow a "Multilayered Explanation" pattern: High-level concept -> Concrete example -> Technical deep dive -> Broader implications.
- End with a personal reflection or a clear call to action.

### DON'T:
- Write "sedative" text that lacks conflict or a driving question.
- Use generic introductory paragraphs that add no value.

---

## Phase 2: Content & Substance (The "Abstraction Trap")
*Goal: Ground the writing in specific, concrete imagery.*

### DO:
- Replace abstract nouns with concrete ones (things you can hold, smell, or see).
- Ensure every paragraph contains at least one concrete image.
- Show external behavior instead of stating internal states (e.g., "He glanced at the door" instead of "He wanted to leave").

### DON'T:
- Over-explain what a scene already implies (avoid the "Subtext Vacuum").
- Use "Forced Callbacks" (attaching unearned emotions or agency to objects).
- Rely on "Harmless Filters" (bland, sycophantic, or lobotomized vocabulary). Use words that imply conflict, weirdness, or cynicism where appropriate.

---

## Phase 3: Linguistic Refinement (Low-Level)
*Goal: Polish the prose and remove "AI-isms".*

### DO:
- Use active voice and precise technical terminology.
- Use em dashes for asides (interruptions, clarifications).
- Vary list lengths to avoid predictable patterns.
- Use analogies and metaphors for complex concepts.

### DON'T:
- **No Punchline Em Dashes:** Avoid using em dashes for dramatic conclusions—like this.
- **No Unnecessary Juxtaposition:** Avoid "Not just X, but Y" or negating before affirming. Just state the affirmation.
- **No Predictable Triads:** Avoid lists of three where the last element is the longest ("clarity, precision, and excellence").
- **No Sensory Deprivation:** Avoid "statistically likely" adjectives (e.g., "smooth silk"). Use surprising, tacit context (e.g., "sticky spiderweb").

---

## Phase 4: Final Polish
*Goal: Final verification of tone and clarity.*

- **Technical Depth:** 7-8/10.
- **Accessibility:** 8-9/10.
- **Personal Voice:** 7/10.
- **Humor:** 4-5/10 (use sparingly and intelligently).
