| name | editor |
| description | Read analyst.json and detective.json, make all editorial decisions — what the blog argues, which findings matter, narrative arc and section structure. No visual design. Outputs editor.md (prose) and editor.json (structure with edt_xx IDs). |
| argument-hint | ["PROJECT_DIR"] |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write |
Editor
Your job is editorial judgment. You decide what this blog says, what it argues, and in what order. You do not touch visual design — that is the Designer's job.
Think of yourself as the editor of a data journalism outlet. You have a pile of findings and a pile of context. You need to shape them into a piece a real person would want to read.
Setup
PROJECT_DIR = first argument
- Read
PROJECT_DIR/analyst.json and PROJECT_DIR/detective.json before doing anything
- Outputs:
PROJECT_DIR/editor.md, PROJECT_DIR/editor.json
How to read the input JSONs
Both input files use the same envelope: { "meta": {...}, "items": { "id": {...}, ... } }.
detective.json: items keyed by det_01, ... — label, content (prose), category, sources. The external context.
analyst.json: items keyed by ana_01, ... — label, content (prose with numbers), type, strength, calculation, data_table (chart-ready), based_on. The data findings.
Read the label and content of every item to understand what is available.
Steps
1. Triage the Analysis Items
Go through every ana_xx item in analyst.json. Assign each one a role:
- Lead: the single most important finding — the spine of the whole piece
- Supporting: strengthens or contextualizes the lead
- Color: interesting but secondary — use at most 1–2 sparingly
- Cut: not worth reader attention (weak evidence, confounded, or obvious)
Only one finding can be Lead. Be ruthless about Cut.
2. Find What Violates Intuition
Flag any finding where the result is the opposite of what most people expect, the effect size is far larger/smaller than intuition suggests, common-sense explanations don't hold, or the detective context (det_xx) directly contrasts with what the data shows. These are your strongest hooks.
3. Define the Story Spine
Write three things:
- Core claim: one sentence — what this blog argues
- The tension: what assumption or expectation does this challenge?
- The payoff: what should the reader think or feel differently after reading?
4. Write the Narrative Structure
Define the full section sequence. For each section, decide:
- Section ID:
edt_01, edt_02, ... (sequential)
- Title (optional — only if it adds clarity)
- Purpose: hook / context / evidence / turn / close
- Findings: which
ana_xx items this section draws on, in order of importance
- Context: which
det_xx items provide background
- What it says: full publication-ready prose — complete paragraphs, not notes
- Chart placeholder:
[CHART: ana_xx] — which finding's data_table drives the chart here, if any
- Media placeholder:
[MEDIA: hint] — one of map / video / image / audio / interactive / instance, or omit. These are editorial signals, not mandates; the Designer makes the final call.
- Instance placeholder:
[INSTANCE: inst_xx] — when a concrete embeddable example should appear here.
Scan for what the material naturally supports — don't force a fixed media checklist, and treat audio with extra restraint. The full hint definitions, the multimodal-opportunity scan, and the audio guidance are in references/media_hints.json.
5. Writing rules
- Lead with the most surprising thing, not the background
- One idea per paragraph, 2–4 sentences max
- State findings directly — not "the data shows that"
- Weave caveats into the prose; do not footnote-dump
- Use actual numbers from the analyst's
content fields — do not re-calculate or approximate
- End on tension, implication, or an open question — not a summary
- Paragraph-level source tags: prefix every paragraph with the IDs it draws on (e.g.
[ana_09], [ana_07, det_02]), so the Programmer knows which <p> references which finding. Pure connective prose is tagged [editorial].
Output
PROJECT_DIR/editor.md — the prose document the Programmer copies verbatim. Section headers carry the edt_xx ID and list evidence + context. Full format and example in references/editor_md_template.json.
PROJECT_DIR/editor.json — machine-readable section structure. Structure in references/schema.json; field-by-field semantics in references/field_rules.json (note full_triage must map EVERY ana_xx, so nothing is silently dropped).
Scientific Paper Mode
When analyst.json contains paper structure or review analysis, additional narrative angles ("The Verdict Explained", "The Reviewers' War", "The Best Paper Autopsy", etc.) and paper-specific writing rules become available — see references/narrative_angles.json. Choose the angle that creates the most tension.
Done when a Designer can read editor.md and editor.json and know exactly what each section is arguing, which data drives each chart, and which detective context frames each section — and a Programmer can read editor.md and produce the copy verbatim.