| name | glossary-alignment-check |
| description | For each technical term in a substacker draft's claims, checks shared-context/glossary.md for a writer-specific definition and compares to field-standard. Emits a note for terms where the two diverge (aligned / diverged-safe / diverged-risky). Feeds into classify-claim (which definition governs) and write-review-artifact's Glossary Alignment section. Use on every claim. Trigger keywords — glossary alignment, term definition, writer vs field, load-bearing term. |
Glossary Alignment Check
Workflow
Per claim:
- [ ] Step 1: Tokenize claim for candidate terms (named concepts, TLAs, math)
- [ ] Step 2: Grep shared-context/glossary.md for each term
- [ ] Step 3: If found, pull writer's definition
- [ ] Step 4: Compare to field-standard (prior knowledge + optional WebSearch)
- [ ] Step 5: Emit: aligned | diverged-safe | diverged-risky
Three outcomes
- aligned: writer's definition matches field-standard. No note.
- diverged-safe: definitions differ but the post's argument doesn't depend on the difference. Note but don't block.
- diverged-risky: definitions differ AND the post's argument hinges on which definition is in force. Tier-2 note for the writer.
Worked example
Term: "attention"
Writer's glossary: "the mechanism that lets tokens exchange information, including the residual bypass."
Field-standard: "the weighted sum softmax(QK^T/√d)V, excluding the residual."
Status: diverged-risky if post asserts "attention is O(n²)" — true under field definition, false-or-unclear under the writer's.
Output note: "Writer's glossary includes residual in 'attention'; field-standard excludes. Post's claim 'attention is O(n²) in memory' is true under field but misleading under writer's glossary. Consider disambiguating in-post or tightening the glossary."
Guardrails
- Never rewrite the glossary. Only flag.
- Never mark
aligned without actually checking the glossary file this run.
- If glossary is missing or empty, emit
no-glossary and treat field definition as governing.
- When disagreement is strictly semantic (not functional), prefer
diverged-safe over diverged-risky — err toward non-blocking.
- Diverged-risky notes appear in the Glossary Alignment section of the review artifact; don't bury in claim table.
