| name | book-review |
| description | Run the review team over drafted chapters — proofreading, voice-drift audit and continuity audit. Use after drafting and before publication. Skippable by explicit user choice; the mechanical gates are not. |
Review
Three reviewers, each with a narrow remit and a small working set. All three
write findings; none of them edits prose.
| Agent | Remit | Reads |
|---|
proofreader | Mechanical correctness, per chapter | One chapter, style guide |
voice-auditor | Drift from the style guide | Samples across chapters |
continuity-auditor | Repetition, contradiction, unpaid promises | Lint output, ledger, summaries |
Reviewers do not edit
A reviewer that edits prose is a second author with no brief, and its changes are
invisible in a way an author's are not — they appear in no report, and nobody
knows the chapter now says something different. Findings go to
review/reports/; the chapter's writer applies them.
Running it
proofreader runs per chapter and parallelises freely — separate chapters,
separate reports, no shared state.
voice-auditor and continuity-auditor run once over the drafted set. Run them
after several chapters exist, not after all of them: voice drift found at chapter
four is a style guide correction, and found at chapter thirty it is thirty
rewrites.
This stage is skippable
By explicit user choice, not by default. Skipping is a decision about what the
book is for — a personal reference printed for one shelf and a book sold to
strangers do not warrant the same scrutiny. What matters is that the choice was
made rather than defaulted into. Ask, and record the answer.
The mechanical gates are not skippable
python3 scripts/book.py lint --strict
Runs before production regardless. An unresolved [VERIFY:] marker in a printed
reference work is not a style question, and print is not editable.
What review cannot do
lint checks that a source is cited, never that it says what the chapter claims.
No reviewer here verifies facts. A chapter can pass every check while making a
confident, specific, invented claim about a system that does not behave that way.
Someone has to read the book against reality. Say so plainly rather than letting
a clean set of reports imply otherwise.
