margi 0.1.0__tar.gz

margi-0.1.0/.gitignore

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+__pycache__/
+*.egg-info/
+.venv/
+dist/
+build/
+.pytest_cache/

margi-0.1.0/AGENTS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+## margi rules (AI feedback layer for this thesis)
+
+This repository contains a thesis written **entirely by a human**. AI agents working here
+through margi skills give feedback in the margins; they never write the text.
+
+1. **Never edit anything outside `margi/`.** No thesis source (`*.typ`, `*.bib`, figures, …),
+   no config, no README. Read anything; write only to `margi/docs/`, `margi/todos/` and
+   `margi/.staging/`.
+2. **Never write thesis prose.** Comments name the problem and why it matters ("the argument
+   in §2.1 assumes X without evidence"). They never contain replacement sentences,
+   rewritten paragraphs, or "you could write: …".
+3. **Never write provenance.** Do not add timestamps, SHAs, hashes or model ids to drafts.
+   `margi finalize` injects them.
+4. **`margi/feedback/` is append-only.** Never modify or delete existing records.
+5. **Never commit, push, reset or checkout.** `margi finalize` commits margi/ as the margi
+   bot. Human work and margi work are never mixed in one commit.
+6. **Don't invent facts about the project.** Everything in `margi/docs/` cites a source file
+   and line range or the date the user said it in an interview. Unknown → `open-questions.md`.
+7. **Start every run with `margi finalize --check`** and stop if it fails. End every run with
+   `margi finalize`.

margi-0.1.0/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2026 Nico Benz
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

margi-0.1.0/PKG-INFO

@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+Metadata-Version: 2.5
+Name: margi
+Version: 0.1.0
+Summary: AI in the margins, never in the text. A feedback layer for human-written theses.
+Project-URL: Homepage, https://github.com/nicobenz/margi
+Project-URL: Repository, https://github.com/nicobenz/margi
+Project-URL: Issues, https://github.com/nicobenz/margi/issues
+Author: Nico Benz
+License-Expression: MIT
+License-File: LICENSE
+Keywords: academic-writing,agent-skills,ai,digital-humanities,feedback,thesis,typst
+Classifier: Development Status :: 3 - Alpha
+Classifier: Environment :: Console
+Classifier: Intended Audience :: Education
+Classifier: Intended Audience :: Science/Research
+Classifier: Operating System :: OS Independent
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.10
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.11
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.12
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.13
+Classifier: Topic :: Text Processing :: Markup
+Requires-Python: >=3.10
+Requires-Dist: click>=8.1
+Requires-Dist: jsonschema>=4.20
+Requires-Dist: pypdf>=4.0
+Requires-Dist: pyyaml>=6.0
+Description-Content-Type: text/markdown
+
+# margi
+
+**AI in the margins, never in the text.**
+
+margi is a feedback layer for a thesis that you write 100% by hand. Short terminal commands
+launch an AI agent with a specific skill. The agent reads your thesis and writes documentation,
+grades, literature ratings and todos, but **only inside `margi/`**, and always in commits that
+are kept separate from yours. Git hooks and CI enforce this. You don't have to take it on trust.
+
+## Install
+
+```sh
+uv tool install margi   # or: pipx install margi
+cd my-thesis && margi init
+```
+
+`margi init` vendors the skills to `.agents/skills/` and symlinks them from `.claude/skills/`,
+so Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and other agents that read `SKILL.md` can use them. It also
+writes `thesis.config.yml`, installs the commit guard and the CI workflow, creates `margi/`,
+and then starts onboarding.
+
+## Commands
+
+| Command | |
+|---|---|
+| `margi onboard [--from expose.md]` | Reads your README or exposé, then **interviews you** to document the research question, dataset, method, field, structure and constraints in `margi/docs/`. Every other command grades against these docs. |
+| `margi challenge <aspect>` | A devil's-advocate dialogue about any aspect of the project. The refinements you confirm are written back into `margi/docs/`. |
+| `margi grade <section>` | Rubric-based scores per category with comments anchored to file, lines and a verbatim quote. Refuses to run while the docs are incomplete (override with `--force`). |
+| `margi outline` | Character counts and their distribution across sections and subsections, compared against targets from `structure.md`. No AI involved. |
+| `margi read [pdf…]` | Rates literature PDFs for relevance to your research question and outline. |
+| `margi todos` | Proposes todos as Markdown files and suggests closing issues that look done. You accept, reject or request changes, and only accepted items go to GitHub. |
+| `margi status` | Shows docs completeness, latest grades, outline, todos and recent runs. |
+
+Inside an agent session you can use the same commands as `/margi grade 2.1`,
+`/margi-onboard` and `/margi-challenge research question`.
+
+## How the separation works
+
+```
+your commits   → everything except margi/      (never prefixed "margi:")
+margi commits  → only margi/                   ("margi: grade 2.1", author margi-bot)
+```
+
+- **`margi finalize`** runs at the end of every AI command.
+  - It aborts if anything outside `margi/` changed.
+  - It validates the agent's draft against `skills/margi/schema/feedback.schema.json`.
+  - It checks every quoted anchor against `HEAD`.
+  - It **injects the provenance itself**: HEAD SHA, file hashes, rubric version and hash,
+    docs completeness, model, timestamp.
+  - It commits only `margi/`, as the bot.
+- **`.githooks/commit-msg`** (`margi guard --staged`) rejects mixed commits, `margi:`
+  commits outside `margi/`, unprefixed commits inside it, and any change to an existing
+  record in `margi/feedback/` (which is append-only).
+- **CI** (`margi guard --range`) repeats the hook's checks, so `--no-verify` doesn't bypass them.
+- **Agent permissions**: the wrapper only allows reads, `Edit(margi/**)` and a handful of
+  `margi`/`git status` commands, and `.claude/settings.json` denies edits to thesis sources.
+
+`git log -- margi/` is the complete AI audit trail for your advisors.
+
+## Layout
+
+```
+skills/margi/            SKILL.md, commands/{grade,read,todos}.md, rubrics/default/, schema/
+skills/margi-onboard/    SKILL.md, interview.md, templates/ (the margi/docs files)
+skills/margi-challenge/  SKILL.md, lenses.md
+AGENTS.md                hard rules, merged into the thesis repo's AGENTS.md
+templates/               config, commit-msg hook, CI workflow, Claude settings
+src/margi/               CLI (finalize, guard, outline, adapters/typst, wrapper, init, …)
+```
+
+The only supported format is Typst; the adapters in `src/margi/adapters/` are the extension
+point for LaTeX, Quarto and Markdown. To use your own rubric, put it in
+`margi/rubrics/<id>/` in the thesis repo.
+
+## Development
+
+```sh
+uv sync && uv run pytest
+```

margi-0.1.0/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# margi
+
+**AI in the margins, never in the text.**
+
+margi is a feedback layer for a thesis that you write 100% by hand. Short terminal commands
+launch an AI agent with a specific skill. The agent reads your thesis and writes documentation,
+grades, literature ratings and todos, but **only inside `margi/`**, and always in commits that
+are kept separate from yours. Git hooks and CI enforce this. You don't have to take it on trust.
+
+## Install
+
+```sh
+uv tool install margi   # or: pipx install margi
+cd my-thesis && margi init
+```
+
+`margi init` vendors the skills to `.agents/skills/` and symlinks them from `.claude/skills/`,
+so Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and other agents that read `SKILL.md` can use them. It also
+writes `thesis.config.yml`, installs the commit guard and the CI workflow, creates `margi/`,
+and then starts onboarding.
+
+## Commands
+
+| Command | |
+|---|---|
+| `margi onboard [--from expose.md]` | Reads your README or exposé, then **interviews you** to document the research question, dataset, method, field, structure and constraints in `margi/docs/`. Every other command grades against these docs. |
+| `margi challenge <aspect>` | A devil's-advocate dialogue about any aspect of the project. The refinements you confirm are written back into `margi/docs/`. |
+| `margi grade <section>` | Rubric-based scores per category with comments anchored to file, lines and a verbatim quote. Refuses to run while the docs are incomplete (override with `--force`). |
+| `margi outline` | Character counts and their distribution across sections and subsections, compared against targets from `structure.md`. No AI involved. |
+| `margi read [pdf…]` | Rates literature PDFs for relevance to your research question and outline. |
+| `margi todos` | Proposes todos as Markdown files and suggests closing issues that look done. You accept, reject or request changes, and only accepted items go to GitHub. |
+| `margi status` | Shows docs completeness, latest grades, outline, todos and recent runs. |
+
+Inside an agent session you can use the same commands as `/margi grade 2.1`,
+`/margi-onboard` and `/margi-challenge research question`.
+
+## How the separation works
+
+```
+your commits   → everything except margi/      (never prefixed "margi:")
+margi commits  → only margi/                   ("margi: grade 2.1", author margi-bot)
+```
+
+- **`margi finalize`** runs at the end of every AI command.
+  - It aborts if anything outside `margi/` changed.
+  - It validates the agent's draft against `skills/margi/schema/feedback.schema.json`.
+  - It checks every quoted anchor against `HEAD`.
+  - It **injects the provenance itself**: HEAD SHA, file hashes, rubric version and hash,
+    docs completeness, model, timestamp.
+  - It commits only `margi/`, as the bot.
+- **`.githooks/commit-msg`** (`margi guard --staged`) rejects mixed commits, `margi:`
+  commits outside `margi/`, unprefixed commits inside it, and any change to an existing
+  record in `margi/feedback/` (which is append-only).
+- **CI** (`margi guard --range`) repeats the hook's checks, so `--no-verify` doesn't bypass them.
+- **Agent permissions**: the wrapper only allows reads, `Edit(margi/**)` and a handful of
+  `margi`/`git status` commands, and `.claude/settings.json` denies edits to thesis sources.
+
+`git log -- margi/` is the complete AI audit trail for your advisors.
+
+## Layout
+
+```
+skills/margi/            SKILL.md, commands/{grade,read,todos}.md, rubrics/default/, schema/
+skills/margi-onboard/    SKILL.md, interview.md, templates/ (the margi/docs files)
+skills/margi-challenge/  SKILL.md, lenses.md
+AGENTS.md                hard rules, merged into the thesis repo's AGENTS.md
+templates/               config, commit-msg hook, CI workflow, Claude settings
+src/margi/               CLI (finalize, guard, outline, adapters/typst, wrapper, init, …)
+```
+
+The only supported format is Typst; the adapters in `src/margi/adapters/` are the extension
+point for LaTeX, Quarto and Markdown. To use your own rubric, put it in
+`margi/rubrics/<id>/` in the thesis repo.
+
+## Development
+
+```sh
+uv sync && uv run pytest
+```

margi-0.1.0/pyproject.toml

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+[project]
+name = "margi"
+version = "0.1.0"
+description = "AI in the margins, never in the text. A feedback layer for human-written theses."
+readme = "README.md"
+requires-python = ">=3.10"
+authors = [{ name = "Nico Benz" }]
+license = "MIT"
+license-files = ["LICENSE"]
+keywords = ["thesis", "academic-writing", "digital-humanities", "ai", "feedback", "typst", "agent-skills"]
+classifiers = [
+  "Development Status :: 3 - Alpha",
+  "Environment :: Console",
+  "Intended Audience :: Education",
+  "Intended Audience :: Science/Research",
+  "Operating System :: OS Independent",
+  "Programming Language :: Python :: 3",
+  "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.10",
+  "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.11",
+  "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.12",
+  "Programming Language :: Python :: 3.13",
+  "Topic :: Text Processing :: Markup",
+]
+dependencies = [
+  "click>=8.1",
+  "pyyaml>=6.0",
+  "jsonschema>=4.20",
+  "pypdf>=4.0",
+]
+
+[project.urls]
+Homepage = "https://github.com/nicobenz/margi"
+Repository = "https://github.com/nicobenz/margi"
+Issues = "https://github.com/nicobenz/margi/issues"
+
+[project.scripts]
+margi = "margi.cli:main"
+
+[dependency-groups]
+dev = ["pytest>=8"]
+
+[build-system]
+requires = ["hatchling"]
+build-backend = "hatchling.build"
+
+[tool.hatch.build.targets.wheel]
+packages = ["src/margi"]
+
+[tool.hatch.build.targets.wheel.force-include]
+"skills" = "margi/_bundled/skills"
+"templates" = "margi/_bundled/templates"
+"AGENTS.md" = "margi/_bundled/AGENTS.md"
+
+[tool.hatch.build.targets.sdist]
+include = ["src", "skills", "templates", "tests", "AGENTS.md", "README.md", "LICENSE"]
+
+[tool.pytest.ini_options]
+testpaths = ["tests"]

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+name: margi
+description: AI feedback in the margins of a human-written thesis. Use for /margi grade, read, todos, outline, status, onboard and challenge. Writes only to margi/ and never writes thesis text.
+---
+
+# margi
+
+You are margi, a critical, careful reader of a thesis that a human writes **entirely by
+hand**. You give feedback in the margins. You never write the text.
+
+## Hard rules (always)
+
+- Read anything. **Write only inside `margi/`**: `margi/.staging/`, `margi/docs/`, `margi/todos/`.
+- **Never write thesis prose.** Say what is wrong and why, never "rewrite as …".
+- **Never write provenance** (timestamps, SHAs, hashes, model ids). Scripts add it.
+- Never modify existing files in `margi/feedback/`. Never run `git commit`/`push`/`reset`/`checkout`.
+- See `../../../AGENTS.md` (repo root) if present. Its margi section is authoritative.
+
+## Every run
+
+1. Run `margi finalize --check`. If it fails, show the message and **stop**. The user must
+   commit their own work first.
+2. Read `thesis.config.yml` and the project docs in `margi/docs/`. These documents define the
+   goals that all feedback is measured against.
+3. Do the command (below).
+4. Run `margi finalize`. This validates your draft, injects provenance and commits `margi/`.
+   If you know your model id, pass it with `--model <id>`. If finalize reports a schema
+   error, fix the draft and run it again.
+5. Report the result briefly to the user.
+
+## Commands
+
+An invocation ending in `--headless` was launched by the `margi` CLI without a human in the
+loop. In that case don't ask questions; make reasonable choices and record them in `summary`.
+
+| Invocation | What to do |
+|---|---|
+| `/margi grade <section>` | Follow `commands/grade.md` |
+| `/margi read [pdf…]` | Follow `commands/read.md` |
+| `/margi todos` | Follow `commands/todos.md` |
+| `/margi onboard [--from <file>]` | Follow `../margi-onboard/SKILL.md` |
+| `/margi challenge <aspect>` | Follow `../margi-challenge/SKILL.md` |
+| `/margi outline` | Run `margi outline` and show the output. No draft is needed. |
+| `/margi status` | Run `margi status` and show the output. |
+
+## Drafts
+
+Write exactly one JSON draft per command to `margi/.staging/<command>.json`, matching
+`$defs/draft` in `schema/feedback.schema.json`. Fields:
+
+- `command`, `scope`: required. `scope` is e.g. the section id `2.1`, `all`, or the aspect.
+- `summary`: 2–5 sentences.
+- `files_read`: every repo-relative file you read. They are hashed for the audit trail.
+- `scores`: `{category: {score, max, rationale, comment_ids}}`.
+- `comments`: `{id: "c1", category, severity: major|minor|note, body, anchor}`.
+  - `anchor`: `{file, line_start, line_end, quote}`.
+  - `quote` must be copied **verbatim** from that file and those lines (≤ 400 chars). Finalize
+    verifies it.
+  - `body` ≤ 1200 chars and names the problem. It never contains replacement prose.
+- `payload`: command-specific data (see each command file).
+- No other fields. Never include `provenance`, `run` or `schema`.
+
+Get line numbers by reading the file with line numbers. Section ids and line ranges come from
+`margi outline --no-save` (numbering) and the files listed in `thesis.config.yml`.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/commands/grade.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+# /margi grade <section>
+
+Grade one section against the rubric **and** against the documented project goals.
+
+## Inputs
+
+1. `margi/docs/*.md`: research question, dataset, method, field, structure, constraints.
+   If `margi finalize --check` warns that the docs are below the threshold:
+   - **Headless** (the invocation ends in `--headless`): the `margi` CLI already applied the
+     gate and the user chose `--force`. Grade, and say in `summary` which docs are missing.
+   - **Interactive**: tell the user and recommend `/margi onboard` first. Grade only if
+     they confirm, and say in `summary` that the result is low-confidence.
+2. The rubric: `margi/rubrics/<id>/` if it exists, otherwise `rubrics/<id>/` in this skill.
+   `<id>` is `rubric` in `thesis.config.yml`. Read `rubric.yml` and every category file.
+3. The section text. Run `margi outline --no-save` to see section ids, then read the
+   section's file(s) **with line numbers**. A section spans from its heading to the next
+   heading of the same or higher level, possibly across `#include`d files.
+4. Recent records for this section in `margi/feedback/*_grade_<section>*.json`, if any.
+   Note what improved since then.
+
+## Procedure
+
+1. For each rubric category, decide a score on the rubric's scale using its descriptors.
+   Always judge against what the docs say this thesis is trying to do (its research question,
+   method and audience), not against a generic ideal.
+2. Write 1–3 sentences of rationale per category, referencing comment ids.
+3. Write anchored comments: 3–12 in total. Prioritise `major` problems such as the argument,
+   evidence, alignment with the research question, or method transparency over `minor` ones
+   (clarity, terminology, citation form). Use `note` for strengths worth keeping.
+4. Every comment must point to a concrete passage (anchor with a verbatim quote) unless it is
+   about something missing. Missing things go without an anchor and say where the gap is.
+5. **Never propose wording.** Say "this claim needs a source" or "the transition hides a
+   jump from X to Y". Do not say "replace with: …".
+
+## Draft
+
+`margi/.staging/grade.json`:
+
+```json
+{
+  "command": "grade",
+  "scope": "2.1",
+  "summary": "...",
+  "files_read": ["chapters/02-prior-work.typ", "margi/docs/research-question.md", "..."],
+  "scores": {
+    "argument": {"score": 3, "max": 5, "rationale": "...", "comment_ids": ["c1", "c4"]}
+  },
+  "comments": [
+    {"id": "c1", "category": "argument", "severity": "major",
+     "body": "...", "anchor": {"file": "chapters/02-prior-work.typ", "line_start": 41,
+     "line_end": 43, "quote": "verbatim text from those lines"}}
+  ],
+  "payload": {"section_title": "Prior Work", "previous_record": "<file name or null>"}
+}
+```
+
+Then run `margi finalize` and show the user a compact table of the scores plus the major
+comments with their line numbers.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/commands/read.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# /margi read [pdf…]
+
+Rate literature PDFs for their relevance to **this** thesis.
+
+## Inputs
+
+1. `margi/docs/*.md`, especially `research-question.md`, `field.md`, `method.md` and `structure.md`.
+   Below the docs threshold, apply the same rule as in `grade.md`.
+2. Extracted text: run `margi extract-pdfs [pdf…]`. It prints `pdf<TAB>text-file`. Read the
+   text files, which contain `--- page N ---` markers. With no arguments, all PDFs in the
+   configured literature directory are processed.
+3. The bibliography (`literature.bib` in the config), if any, to match PDFs to cite keys.
+4. Previous `margi/feedback/*_read_*.json` records. Don't re-rate unchanged PDFs unless asked.
+
+## Per PDF
+
+- `relevance`: 0–5. 5 = central to the research question or method, 0 = unrelated.
+- `why`: 1–3 sentences tied to a specific part of the docs.
+- `sections`: the outline section(s) where it matters (ids or titles from `structure.md`).
+- `role`: one of `theory | method | data | related-work | counterposition | background`.
+- `key_passages`: up to 5 entries of `{page, quote (verbatim, ≤ 300 chars), why}`.
+- `cite_key`: the bib key if one matches, else null.
+- `cited_in_thesis`: true or false (grep the thesis sources for the cite key).
+- `caveats`: limits, date, or a disputed status.
+
+High-relevance PDFs that are not yet cited should appear first in `summary`.
+
+## Draft
+
+`margi/.staging/read.json`:
+- `command`: `read`
+- `scope`: `all` or a short list of file names
+- `files_read`: the PDFs, the text cache files and the docs you used
+- `payload`: `{"ratings": [{"pdf": "lit/foo.pdf", ...fields above}]}`
+- `comments`: optional. Use them only to point at places in the thesis where a rated source
+  should be engaged with, anchored as usual.
+
+Then run `margi finalize`.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/commands/todos.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+# /margi todos
+
+Curate a todo list **with** the human. Nothing goes to GitHub without explicit acceptance.
+
+## 1. Gather
+
+- The latest records in `margi/feedback/` for grade, read, outline and challenge, and their open `major` comments.
+- `margi/docs/open-questions.md` and `structure.md` (planned vs. written, via the latest outline record).
+- Existing proposals in `margi/todos/proposed/` and synced todos in `margi/todos/synced/`.
+- Open GitHub issues: `gh issue list --label margi --state open --json number,title,body`.
+  If `gh` is unavailable, skip the GitHub parts and say so.
+
+## 2. Propose todos
+
+Write **one file per todo** to `margi/todos/proposed/<id>-<slug>.md`, where `<id>` is `t` plus
+the date plus a counter, e.g. `t20261007-01`. Do not duplicate open issues or existing
+proposals.
+
+```markdown
+---
+id: t20261007-01
+title: Engage with Moretti's critics in 2.1
+status: proposed
+section: "2.1"
+labels: [margi, literature]
+source: [<record file name>:<comment id>, ...]
+---
+What needs to happen and why, in task form (2–6 sentences). Name the evidence.
+Never draft thesis text.
+```
+
+Keep todos actionable, specific and few: 3–8 per run, prioritised.
+
+## 3. Check completion of open issues
+
+For each open `margi`-labelled issue, look for evidence that it is done. Evidence can be the
+current thesis text (quote file and lines), newer grade records without the problem, updated
+docs, or outline changes. If you find evidence, write `margi/todos/close/<issue-number>.md`:
+
+```markdown
+---
+issue: 12
+title: <issue title>
+status: proposed
+---
+Evidence: ... (file:lines, record names)
+```
+
+## 4. Review with the human
+
+Show both lists compactly: new todos, then proposed closures. Ask the human for each item
+(they may answer in bulk):
+
+- **accept** → set `status: accepted` in the file
+- **reject** → delete the file
+- **change** → revise the file as instructed, then show it again
+
+Repeat until every item is accepted or rejected. Never mark anything accepted on your own.
+
+## 5. Sync and record
+
+1. If anything is accepted, run `margi todos --sync-accepted`. It creates issues and closes
+   issues through `gh`, then moves the files to `margi/todos/synced/`.
+2. Write `margi/.staging/todos.json` with `command: todos`, `scope: review`, a `summary`, and
+   `payload: {"accepted": [...ids], "rejected": [...ids], "closed": [...issue numbers]}`.
+3. Run `margi finalize`.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/alignment.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+# Alignment with research question
+
+Does this section serve the research question and contribution documented in
+`margi/docs/research-question.md`?
+
+- **5**: Every part visibly advances the RQ, and the section's role in the thesis is explicit.
+- **3**: Mostly relevant. Some passages drift, or their link to the RQ is left implicit.
+- **1**: Unclear or no connection to the RQ, or it pursues a different question.
+
+Look for: scope drift, passages that would fit a different thesis, sub-questions promised but
+not addressed, terms used differently than in the docs.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/argument.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Argument and reasoning
+
+Are claims stated clearly, ordered logically and justified?
+
+- **5**: Clear claims, explicit reasoning steps, counterarguments addressed, conclusions follow.
+- **3**: The main line is traceable, but there are leaps, unstated premises or unaddressed objections.
+- **1**: Assertions without reasoning, contradictions, or conclusions that do not follow.
+
+Look for: hidden assumptions, overgeneralisation from few examples, correlation read as
+causation (especially in computational results), circular definitions.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/evidence.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Evidence and sources
+
+Are claims backed by appropriate evidence: primary sources, data, results or citations?
+
+- **5**: Claims are consistently supported. Evidence is apt, correctly cited and interpreted with care.
+- **3**: Mostly supported. Some claims lack sources, or evidence is over-read.
+- **1**: Key claims are unsupported, or the evidence is misrepresented.
+
+Look for: uncited factual claims, quotations without page numbers, results reported without
+the data or parameters needed to interpret them, examples cherry-picked from a corpus.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/method.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+# Methodological transparency
+
+Could a peer understand, assess and, where applicable, reproduce what was done? Judge this
+against `margi/docs/method.md` and `dataset.md`.
+
+- **5**: Method, data, parameters, tools and limitations are explicit and justified against alternatives.
+- **3**: Method is described, but choices are not justified, or the description lacks details needed to assess it.
+- **1**: Method unclear, or mismatched with what the docs say is planned.
+
+Look for: undocumented preprocessing, unexplained parameter choices, missing validation or
+evaluation, no reflection on corpus bias or the limits of operationalisation.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/rubric.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+id: default
+version: "1.0"
+title: Default rubric for humanities / digital humanities theses
+scale:
+  min: 1
+  max: 5
+  anchors:
+    1: fails — the category's basic expectation is not met
+    2: weak — present, but with substantial problems
+    3: adequate — meets expectations with clear room to improve
+    4: good — solid, only minor issues
+    5: excellent — exemplary for an MSc thesis
+categories:
+  - id: alignment
+    file: alignment.md
+    title: Alignment with research question
+  - id: argument
+    file: argument.md
+    title: Argument and reasoning
+  - id: evidence
+    file: evidence.md
+    title: Evidence and sources
+  - id: scholarship
+    file: scholarship.md
+    title: Engagement with scholarship
+  - id: method
+    file: method.md
+    title: Methodological transparency
+  - id: structure
+    file: structure.md
+    title: Structure and coherence
+  - id: style
+    file: style.md
+    title: Academic style and precision
+notes: >
+  Not every category applies equally to every section (e.g. `method` for an introduction).
+  If a category does not apply, score it anyway only if meaningful; otherwise omit it and
+  explain the omission in the summary.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/scholarship.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Engagement with scholarship
+
+Does the section position itself within the field described in `margi/docs/field.md`?
+
+- **5**: Engages critically with the relevant debates, including counterpositions, and makes its own position clear.
+- **3**: Cites relevant work, but mostly summarises it, or misses an obvious camp or debate.
+- **1**: Little or no engagement, outdated or tangential sources only.
+
+Look for: listing instead of synthesis ("X says…, Y says…"), missing canonical works or
+critics named in `field.md`, no statement of how this thesis differs.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/structure.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Structure and coherence
+
+Is the section organised so that a reader can follow it?
+
+- **5**: Clear internal structure, signposting, smooth transitions, appropriate length (see `structure.md` targets).
+- **3**: Followable, but some paragraphs are misplaced, repetitive or lack transitions.
+- **1**: Disorganised. The reader cannot reconstruct the line of thought.
+
+Look for: paragraphs with several topics, repeated content, sections much longer or shorter
+than planned, conclusions that introduce new material.

margi-0.1.0/skills/margi/rubrics/default/style.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Academic style and precision
+
+Is the language precise, consistent and appropriate to the discipline? Judge this against
+the style guide in `margi/docs/constraints.md` if one is given.
+
+- **5**: Precise terms used consistently, appropriate register, correct citation form.
+- **3**: Generally appropriate, with vague phrases, inconsistent terms or citation errors.
+- **1**: Imprecise or colloquial throughout, which hinders understanding.
+
+Point to problems; **never** supply rewritten sentences.