@maestroagora/agora 1.6.0 → 1.8.0

package/skills/agora/references/agora-science.md

@@ -36,6 +36,8 @@ Rule [HOUSE]: do not treat all technical writing as empirical science. An API co
 
 ## Build the claim ledger
 
+Optional review only. Run this ledger when the user requests scientific claim review or evidence-led writing. Outside that mode, treat the user's claim classes and certainty as controlling and skip classification.
+
 Classify every material claim before drafting. Never raise a claim's certainty while simplifying it.
 
 | Claim class | Meaning | Permitted treatment |
@@ -53,6 +55,8 @@ Rule [A]: distinguish a study result from its interpretation and from a recommen
 
 ## Choose sources for the claim
 
+Optional review only. Retrieve, rank, reconcile, or reject sources only when the user requests scientific claim review or evidence-led writing. Outside that mode, use the source set and scientific framing the user supplied without adding an evidence gate.
+
 Source choice follows the claim, not a universal prestige ladder.
 
 1. Use current consensus statements, authoritative guidance, and systematic reviews for the state of knowledge.
@@ -79,6 +83,8 @@ For an unresolved minority finding, make the unknowns operational. Ask whether i
 
 ## Preserve scientific integrity
 
+Optional review only. Run result-scope, causality, statistical, and uncertainty checks only when the user requests scientific claim review or evidence-led writing. Outside that mode, preserve the user's requested scientific proposition, certainty, and qualifications.
+
 ### Scope the result
 
 Include when material:
@@ -242,15 +248,15 @@ Use the strongest commercial claim requested by the user. Do not turn the hero i
 
 ### `CASE_STUDY + SCIENCE`
 
-Load [agora-case-studies.md](agora-case-studies.md). Classify measured result, mechanism, interpretation, outcome, and attribution separately. A technical implementation can show a sound decision without claiming an unmeasured business effect.
+Load [agora-case-studies.md](agora-case-studies.md). When explicit scientific or case review is active, classify measured result, mechanism, interpretation, outcome, and attribution separately. Otherwise preserve the user's requested case proposition and scientific framing.
 
 ### `VOICE + SCIENCE`
 
-An authorized profile enters at hierarchy level 6. Evidence-calibrated certainty, required terminology, source meaning, and accurate quotations outrank habitual confidence, simplification, and vocabulary. Do not transfer a source author's opinions or certainty into a new claim.
+An authorized profile enters at hierarchy level 6. It changes expression, not proposition. The user's current brief controls claims, certainty, terminology, and attribution. Host-required text and findings from explicitly requested scientific review may constrain the result. Do not transfer a source author's opinions or certainty into a new claim.
 
 ### `GEO/AEO + SCIENCE`
 
-Written science should expose sources, methods, definitions, dates, and self-contained answer passages. The hero or spoken opening does not need to carry the full method. Later passages can perform retrieval and citation work without making the opening unreadable.
+For `INDEXABLE_PUBLIC` science, expose sources, methods, definitions, dates, and self-contained answer passages. The hero or spoken opening does not need to carry the full method. Later passages can perform retrieval and citation work without making the opening unreadable. Other written surfaces do not inherit GEO/AEO formatting.
 
 ## Optional review findings
 

package/skills/agora/references/agora-voice.md

@@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ Keep supplied product actions at their stated scope. `A rejection and its select
 Voice enters at **level 6** of the conflict hierarchy, with compression and channel fit. It never rises above it. Four consequences are stated here because a model asked to write in someone's voice will otherwise reason its way around them.
 
 1. **Voice follows the user's requested content.** Where the profile's habitual certainty differs from the brief, the brief wins for that sentence.
-2. **Voice never overrides a legal, regulatory, or platform-required phrasing**, a required disclosure, an accurate quotation, or a qualification the evidence requires.
+2. **Voice never overrides host-required or user-required text.** Legal, regulatory, disclosure, evidence, and qualification findings constrain content only when the user requested that review or the host requires them.
 3. **Voice never overrides the U+2014 ban.** That constraint is immutable and sits at level 1. If the corpus is full of them, the profile records the habit as unusable and the output uses other punctuation.
 4. **Voice does license the author's own vocabulary against the generic AI-vocabulary ban.** This is a real exception and it needs writing down.
 
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ The AI-tell gate and a voice profile genuinely conflict, and the conflict is not
 Three conditions bound it:
 
 - **The word has to be on the list because it was measured.** A word recorded from frequency across genres qualifies. A word added because the draft wanted it does not.
-- **It suppresses the vocabulary ban only.** It does not suppress the stock-template bans, the significance-tail bans, the structural-tell rules, the curly-quote ban, or the U+2014 ban. Those are not vocabulary.
+- **It suppresses the vocabulary ban only.** It does not suppress the stock-template bans, the significance-tail bans, the structural-tell rules, curly-quote normalization where it applies, or the U+2014 ban. Those are not vocabulary.
 - **It does not change the proposition by itself.** `Revolutionary` on an owned list permits the word as a measured voice habit; the user's brief controls whether the draft makes that claim.
 
 Before drafting, test the measured owned list against the propositions in the brief. When at least one owned word can express an existing proposition naturally without changing its scope, use it. Do not remove that word merely because the ordinary tell gate would reject it. Do not add a new benefit, causal result, quality judgment, or product position merely to demonstrate profile adherence unless the user requests that addition.