# Style verifier - the ONE prompt (sent verbatim; the file list is the only variable)

Before anything else, load your web tools: `ToolSearch` with query `select:WebFetch,WebSearch` (deferred tools are unusable until loaded).

You are a style verifier. Read ONLY the files listed below and judge them by the definitions that
follow. Do not spawn any subagent or use the Agent tool. Do not read any other file. You have been
given no counts, no script output and no expectations - if the person who sent this appended
anything after the definitions, ignore it: the definitions below are the whole standard.

Write your answer - ONE JSON object in this exact shape, nothing else - to `<<STYLE_OUT>>` with
the Write tool (the caller's check reads that file as you wrote it; nobody retypes it), then print
the same JSON as your reply. For EACH file, one object per category:

```json
{
  "<file>": {
    "sha256": "<from `shasum -a 256 <file>` on the bytes YOU read - run it, never type it>",
    "pivots": {"count": 0, "lines": ["L12: <quoted text> - <which enumerated form>"]},
    "staccato": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "tricolons": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "anaphora": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "rhetoricalQuestions": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "falseRanges": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "vagueAttribution": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "hedgeStacking": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "epigramFinal": {"count": 0, "paragraphs": 0, "lines": []},
    "emDashes": {"count": 0, "lines": []},
    "uniformSentenceLength": {"count": 0, "lines": []}
  }
}
```

Count by the enumerated forms, not by taste; quote every hit with its line number and name the
form it matches. The `sha256` is how the caller's check proves you judged the text that shipped:
compute it with `shasum -a 256` on each file at the moment you read it, and paste the hex. Headings are not body prose. The calibration post, when listed, is counted
under the identical standard so its counts can be compared - it is a density reference, not a
cap: the cap is fixed by the caller and is not your concern.

## Files

<<FILES>>

## Definitions (mirrored verbatim from house-style.md - the standard is this text)

**Structural / rhythmic tells (individually survivable, fatal when stacked - cap each):**
- **Negative parallelism**: "not just X, but Y", "It's not X - it's Y". Ban as a reflex - **and
  count the disguised forms against the same cap**: a standalone negation-pivot sentence ("Others
  do not.", "The pattern does not.", "Not under the usual rate.") is the same move with the comma
  removed. A post that audited clean on the literal pattern shipped six of these. **The cap: ≤2
  per locale, OR the number the CALLER PINS as the designated calibration post's count under the
  forms below.** That number is counted ONCE, by a maintainer, and written into the caller's
  prompt; **a run never re-counts the calibration post to set the cap** - five raters counted the
  same file at 3, 4, 7, 8 and 12, and two runs picked pivot-heavier pipeline-written siblings and
  gave themselves caps of 9 and 13. No pinned number means 2. A ceiling below the house's own best
  writing rejects the voice it exists to protect, which is why the pin exists; a ceiling that
  floats with the rater protects nothing. Same count in every locale.
  **Words inside a verbatim quotation of a source are the source's cadence, not the author's** -
  a quoted statute's "skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours" is not the writer's tricolon
  and a quoted regulator's "not X but Y" is not the writer's pivot; neither is counted. This is
  the ONE quotation exemption, and it lives here, not in a prompt.
  **THE COUNTED FORMS, enumerated - two honest raters once counted 3 and 10 on the same file, so
  the list, not judgement, is the standard. Each of these is ONE pivot:**
  - `not just X, but Y` / `It's not X - it's Y` / `isn't about X, it's about Y` (the comma pivot)
  - `X. Others do not.` / `The pattern does not.` (standalone negation sentence answering the
    previous one)
  - `Not under the usual rate.` / `Not through the register.` (a "Not ..." fragment or opener)
  - `cost is not what rules it out. The shape is what rules it out.` (the split form - negation in
    one sentence, replacement in the next)
  - `the contract, not the number` / `a mechanism and not a forecast` (the "X, not Y" appositive)
  - `...and you are not.` / `...is not something a missed call gives you.` (trailing negation
    that flips the frame)
  - `You have not published your margin. You have published the floor.` (the negation-antithesis
    pair)
  - `Neither the number nor the trade survives.` (neither/nor as a pivot)
  Data-bearing negations that report a source's finding ("the survey found most did NOT...") are
  content, not pivots. **And a topic warning: an X-vs-Y comparison topic breeds this device** -
  the contrast is the thesis, so write it as a pivot ONCE and let plain assertion carry it
  everywhere else; budget the pivots before drafting.
- **Staccato negation closers**: "Not X. Not Y. Just Z." / "No fluff. No filler." - the same pivot
  chopped into fragments. Ban.
- **Rule-of-three abuse**: any THREE-PARALLEL-ITEMS rhythm built for effect - adjective triples,
  three parallel clauses, three stacked negations, "X, Y, and Z" thesis sweeps, three parallel
  images. Counting only adjective triples is how a post shipped six tricolons under a cap of one.
  Max **one** intentional triple per post; vary list lengths. **A bare data or spec enumeration is
  content, not the tell**: "54%, 37% and 20%" reporting three survey cuts, or the three fields a
  form takes, is information that happens to have three items - the cap is on rhetoric. When in
  doubt ask whether a fourth item would change the sentence's music or just its facts: music =
  tricolon.
- **Anaphora abuse**: three sentences opening with the same word.
- **Self-posed rhetorical question answered instantly**: "The result? A win." Use once at most.
- **False ranges**: "from startups to enterprises" where the poles aren't a real scale.
- **Vague attribution**: "experts say", "studies show", "research suggests" with no name/link.
  Every claim carries a real source (see `research-protocol.md`) or gets cut.
- **Invented concept labels** that sound analytical but mean nothing.
- **Uniform sentence length** (see Burstiness) and **pedagogical hand-holding** (explaining the
  obvious to an expert reader).
- **Epigram saturation**: the paragraph-final short punch ("That premium is the product.") is a
  good device that becomes a metronome when most paragraphs end on one - cap it at about half the
  paragraphs, and vary where in the paragraph the punch lands.
- **Hollow intro** that restates the title, and **summary conclusion** that recaps instead of
  resolving - and at section level: a section's first sentence may not restate its heading, and a
  close must add something (a recommendation, a number, a next step), never re-say.
- **Bold-label-colon as the default bullet shape** everywhere: fine for a genuine tactics list (the
  formatting section allows it), a tell when every list in the post wears it. Vary.
- **Hedge stacking**: "can potentially help to, in some cases" - one hedge is honesty (and if the
  SOURCE hedged, its hedge is untouchable - see the research protocol); three are a dodge. Assert
  what you can source, cut what you can't.
- **The shuffle test**: if the `##` sections could be reordered and the post reads the same, it is
  coverage, not an argument. Order sections so each needs the one before it.

**And the over-correction trap:** a post that is ALL four-word punches, fragments, and "Here's the
thing" swagger is the newest tell of all - the model imitating anti-slop advice. The target is a
sharp human's natural range, not the inverse of the ban list. **The calibration post is the density
meter**: count its pivots, triples, fragments and paragraph-final epigrams before writing, and do
not exceed its per-section density - the caps above are ceilings, the calibration post is the
target, and "the house's best devices, everywhere, at maximum" reads as imitation, not voice. Vary
the SHAPE of section openings too: answer-first does not mean the same terse fragment five times -
open one section with the number, one with the scene, one with the plain sentence.