joy-check

name	joy-check
description	Validate content framing on joy-grievance spectrum.
user-invocable	false
argument-hint	[--fix] [--strict] [--mode writing|instruction] <file>
command	/joy-check
allowed-tools	["Read","Write","Edit","Bash","Grep","Glob"]
routing	{"triggers":["joy check","check framing","tone check","negative framing","joy validation","too negative","reframe positively","positive framing check","instruction framing"],"pairs_with":["voice-writer","voice-validator","skill-creator"],"complexity":"Simple","category":"content"}

Joy Check

Validate content framing using mode-specific rubrics. Two modes:

• writing — Joy-grievance spectrum for human-facing content (blog posts, emails, articles). Evaluates whether content frames experiences through curiosity and generosity rather than grievance and accusation.
• instruction — Positive framing validation for LLM-facing content (agents, skills, pipelines). Evaluates whether instructions tell the reader what to do rather than what to avoid (ADR-127).

By default the skill evaluates each paragraph/instruction independently, produces a score (0-100), and suggests reframes without modifying content. Optional flags: --fix rewrites flagged items in place and re-verifies; --strict fails on any item below 60; --mode writing|instruction overrides auto-detection.

This skill checks framing, not topic and not voice. Voice fidelity belongs to voice-validator, AI pattern detection belongs to the private de-AI editor skill.

Reference Loading Table

Signal	Load These Files	Why
scoring instruction files (agents, skills, pipelines): positive-framing rubric	instruction-rubric.md	Loads detailed guidance from instruction-rubric.md.
scoring human-facing prose (blog posts, emails, docs): joy-grievance rubric	writing-rubric.md	Loads detailed guidance from writing-rubric.md.

Instructions

Phase 0: DETECT MODE

Goal: Determine which rubric to apply based on file location or explicit flag.

Auto-detection rules (in priority order):

1. Explicit --mode writing|instruction flag → use that mode
2. File in agents/*.md → instruction
3. File in skills/*/SKILL.md → instruction
4. File in skills/workflow/references/*.md → instruction
5. File is CLAUDE.md or README.md → instruction
6. Everything else → writing

Load the rubric: Read references/{mode}-rubric.md for the scoring criteria, patterns, and examples relevant to this mode.

GATE: Mode determined, rubric loaded. Proceed to Phase 1.

Phase 1: PRE-FILTER

Goal: Use regex scanning as a fast gate to catch obvious patterns before spending LLM tokens on semantic analysis.

For writing mode: Run the regex-based scanner for grievance patterns:

python3 ~/.claude/scripts/scan-negative-framing.py [file]

For instruction mode: Run a grep scan for prohibition patterns:

grep -nE 'NEVER|do NOT|must NOT|FORBIDDEN' [file]
grep -nE "^-?\s*Don't|^-?\s*Avoid|^#+.*Anti-[Pp]attern|^#+.*Avoid" [file]

Handle hits: Report findings with suggested reframes from the loaded rubric. If --fix mode is active, apply reframes and re-run to confirm clean.

GATE: Regex/grep scan returns zero hits. Resolve obvious patterns before proceeding to Phase 2 — mechanical fixes come first.

Phase 2: ANALYZE

Goal: Read the content and evaluate each item against the loaded rubric using LLM semantic understanding.

Step 1: Read the content

Read the full file. Skip frontmatter (YAML between --- markers) and code blocks.

• Writing mode: Identify paragraph boundaries (blank-line separated blocks). Skip blockquotes.
• Instruction mode: Identify each instructional statement — bullet points, table cells, imperative sentences, section headings. Skip examples, code blocks, quoted user dialogue, and file path references.

Step 2: Evaluate against the rubric

Apply the scoring dimensions from the loaded rubric (references/{mode}-rubric.md). Each rubric defines its own PASS/FAIL dimensions, subtle patterns to detect, and contextual exceptions.

For writing mode: Evaluate through the joy-grievance lens. Watch for the subtle patterns described in references/writing-rubric.md (defensive disclaimers, accumulative grievance, passive-aggressive factuality, reluctant generosity).

For instruction mode: Evaluate through the positive-negative lens. Check each instruction against the patterns table in references/instruction-rubric.md. Apply contextual exceptions — subordinate negatives attached to positive instructions are PASS, as are negatives in code examples, writing samples, and technical terms.

Step 3: Score each item

Apply the scoring scale from the loaded rubric. For any item scoring in the lower tiers (CAUTION/GRIEVANCE for writing, NEGATIVE-LEANING/PROHIBITION-HEAVY for instruction), draft a specific reframe suggestion that preserves the substance while shifting the framing.

When an item seems subtle enough to question flagging — that is precisely when flagging matters most. Subtle patterns are what the regex/grep pre-filter misses, making them the primary purpose of this LLM analysis phase.

GATE: All items analyzed and scored. Reframe suggestions drafted for all flagged items. Proceed to Phase 3.

Phase 3: REPORT

Goal: Produce a structured report with scores, findings, and reframe suggestions.

Step 1: Calculate overall score

Average all item scores. Pass criteria come from the loaded rubric:

• Writing mode: Score >= 60 AND no GRIEVANCE paragraphs
• Instruction mode: Score = 100 AND zero primary negative patterns in instructional context

Step 2: Output the report

JOY CHECK: [file]
Mode: [writing|instruction]
Score: [0-100]
Status: PASS / FAIL

Items:
  [writing mode]
  P1 (L10-12): JOY [85] -- explorer framing, curiosity
  P3 (L18-22): CAUTION [40] -- "confused" leans defensive
    -> Reframe: Focus on what you learned from the confusion

  [instruction mode]
  L33: NEGATIVE [20] -- "NEVER edit code directly"
    -> Rewrite: "Route all code modifications to domain agents"
  L45: PASS [90] -- "Create feature branches for all changes"
  L78: PASS [85] -- "Credentials stay in .env files, never in code" (subordinate negative OK)

Overall: [summary of framing arc]

Step 3: Handle fix mode

If --fix mode is active:

1. Rewrite flagged items using the drafted reframe suggestions
2. Preserve the substance — change only the framing
3. Re-run Phase 2 analysis on rewritten items to verify fixes landed
4. If fixes introduce new flagged items, iterate (maximum 3 attempts)

GATE: Report produced. If --fix, all rewrites applied and re-verified. Joy check complete.

---

Integration

This skill integrates with content and toolkit pipelines:

Writing pipeline (human-facing content):

CONTENT --> voice-validator --> scan-ai-patterns --> joy-check --mode writing --> de-AI edit (private skill)

Instruction pipeline (agent/skill/pipeline creation and modification):

SKILL.md --> joy-check --mode instruction --> fix flagged patterns --> re-verify

Auto-invocation points:

• skill-creator pipeline: Run joy-check --mode instruction after generating a new skill
• agent-upgrade pipeline: Run joy-check --mode instruction after modifying an agent
• voice-writer: Run joy-check --mode writing during validation
• doc-pipeline: Run joy-check --mode instruction for toolkit documentation

The joy-check can be invoked standalone via /joy-check [file] (auto-detects mode) or with explicit --mode writing|instruction.

---

Error Handling

Error: "File Not Found"

Cause: Path incorrect or file does not exist Solution:

1. Verify path with ls -la [path]
2. Use glob pattern to search: Glob **/*.md
3. Confirm correct working directory

Error: "Regex Scanner Fails or Not Found"

Cause: scan-negative-framing.py script missing or Python error Solution:

1. Verify script exists: ls scripts/scan-negative-framing.py
2. Check Python version: python3 --version (requires 3.10+)
3. If script unavailable, skip Phase 1 and proceed directly to Phase 2 LLM analysis -- the regex pre-filter is an optimization, not a requirement

Error: "All Paragraphs Score GRIEVANCE"

Cause: Content is fundamentally framed through grievance -- not recoverable with paragraph-level reframes Solution:

1. Report the scores honestly
2. Suggest the content needs a full rewrite with a different framing premise, not paragraph-level fixes
3. Point the user to the Joy Principle section and Examples for guidance on the target framing

Error: "Fix Mode Fails After 3 Iterations"

Cause: Rewritten paragraphs keep introducing new CAUTION/GRIEVANCE patterns, often because the underlying premise is grievance-based Solution:

1. Output the best version achieved with flagged remaining concerns
2. Explain which specific rubric dimensions resist correction
3. Suggest the framing premise itself may need rethinking, not just the language

---

References

Rubric Files

• references/writing-rubric.md — Joy-grievance spectrum, subtle patterns, scoring, examples (writing mode)
• references/instruction-rubric.md — Positive framing rules, patterns to flag, rewrite strategies, examples (instruction mode)

Scripts

• scan-negative-framing.py — Regex pre-filter for grievance patterns (writing mode, Phase 1)

Complementary Skills

• voice-validator — Voice fidelity validation (different concern)
• private de-AI editor skill — AI pattern detection and removal (different concern; installed from ~/private-skills)
• voice-writer — Content pipeline that invokes joy-check as a validation phase
• skill-creator — Skill creation pipeline that invokes joy-check in instruction mode