issue-identification

name	issue-identification
description	Find translation issues in ULT/Hebrew/Greek texts. Covers 94 issue types across 7 categories. Use when asked to identify issues, find what needs notes, or analyze a passage for translation concerns.
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob, mcp__workspace-tools__*

MCP-First Execution

Prefer workspace MCP tools in restricted runs:

• mcp__workspace-tools__fetch_door43
• mcp__workspace-tools__compare_ult_ust
• mcp__workspace-tools__detect_abstract_nouns
• mcp__workspace-tools__check_tw_headwords
• mcp__workspace-tools__build_tn_index

Issue Identification

Purpose

Identify translation issues in biblical text that require translation notes. This skill focuses on recognition and classification - note writing is handled separately.

Arguments

When invoked with arguments like 2sam 1 or psa 58 local:

• First argument: Book abbreviation (2sa, gen, psa, 1jn, etc.)
• Second argument: Chapter number (optional, defaults to all)
• Third argument: Source mode (optional) - local or fetch (default: fetch)
• If no arguments: Expect text to be provided or prompt for book/chapter

Source modes:

• fetch (default): Grab editor-approved ULT/UST from unfoldingWord master
• local: Look for local files in data/published_ult/ and data/published_ust/

Examples:

/issue-identification psa 58           # Fetch from master (default)
/issue-identification psa 58 fetch     # Same as above, explicit
/issue-identification psa 58 local     # Use local files

Book abbreviations follow standard 3-letter codes or common variants:

• 2sam, 2sa -> 2SA (Second Samuel)
• gen -> GEN
• psa, ps -> PSA
• 1jn -> 1JN

Workflow

There are two ways to use this skill:

1. Full workflow - Fetch aligned USFM, parse with proskomma, run detection with morphology data
2. Quick workflow - Just provide English text directly, run detection without source language checks

Option A: Full Workflow (with aligned USFM)

Step 1: Fetch/Locate USFM Text

Fetch mode (default) - Use mcp__workspace-tools__fetch_door43 for ULT and UST.

Local mode - Use local files:

# Copy local files (NN is book number, e.g., 19 for PSA)
cp data/published_ult/<NN>-<BOOK>.usfm /tmp/book_ult.usfm
cp data/published_ust/<NN>-<BOOK>.usfm /tmp/book_ust.usfm 2>/dev/null || true

If UST is missing, continue without it (first pass, UST not generated yet). If ULT is missing, error (need at least ULT to identify issues).

Step 2: Parse into Alignment JSON and Plain Text

Extract alignment data and plain text using usfm-js:

# Parse ULT - get alignments and plain text
node .claude/skills/utilities/scripts/usfm/parse_usfm.js /tmp/book_ult.usfm \
  --chapter <N> \
  --output-json /tmp/alignments.json \
  --output-plain /tmp/ult_plain.usfm

# Parse UST - get plain text only (if UST exists)
node .claude/skills/utilities/scripts/usfm/parse_usfm.js /tmp/book_ust.usfm \
  --plain-only > /tmp/ust_plain.usfm 2>/dev/null || true

Step 2b: Check Editor Notes

EDITOR_NOTES="data/editor-notes/<BOOK>.md"
if [ -f "$EDITOR_NOTES" ]; then
  cat "$EDITOR_NOTES"
fi

If editor notes exist for this book, read them carefully. These are observations from human editors who have already been working through the text. They may flag:

• Patterns to watch for (e.g., "heavy implicit information around covenant context")
• Specific chapter concerns
• Issue types they expect to be prevalent

Incorporate these observations into your analysis — they should heighten your attention to the flagged patterns, not replace your systematic review.

Step 3: Compare ULT/UST (if UST available)

Where UST diverges from ULT (beyond synonym/clarity changes), there may be a translation issue:

Use mcp__workspace-tools__compare_ult_ust with ultFile, ustFile, and chapter.

Output shows verses where UST made significant changes, with suggested issue types:

Pattern	Suggested Issue
UST adds clarifying words	figs-explicit
UST removes repetition	figs-doublet, figs-parallelism
UST restructures clause order	figs-infostructure
UST replaces figurative language	figs-metaphor
UST unpacks abstract noun	figs-abstractnouns
UST changes passive to active	figs-activepassive
UST expands/explains phrase	figs-idiom

Skip this step if UST file doesn't exist.

Step 4: Run Automated Detection and Identify Passives

Abstract nouns -- run the detection script:

Use mcp__workspace-tools__detect_abstract_nouns (alignmentJson, format: "tsv").

Passive voice -- identify ALL passive constructions during your verse-by-verse analysis (no script needed). Read the detection instructions in figs-activepassive.md for the passive voice pattern (auxiliary "be" + past participle), stative adjective exclusions, and worked examples. Every passive construction needs a note.

Merge detected issues into final output.

Option B: Quick Workflow (plain English text)

When you just have English text (no USFM, no alignments), use --text to run detection directly. This skips source language morphology checks but still finds abstract nouns. Passive voice is identified by Claude during analysis (see figs-activepassive.md).

Use mcp__workspace-tools__detect_abstract_nouns with text and format: "tsv" for quick plain-text checks.

Output uses "text" as the reference since there's no verse structure. Source language fields (morph, lemma) will be empty.

Step 5: Check Names/Unknowns Against Translation Words

IMPORTANT: Before flagging any name or unknown concept for translate-names or translate-unknown, check if it has a tW article. If a tW article exists, generally NO note is needed.

Use mcp__workspace-tools__check_tw_headwords with a terms array (single or multiple terms).

The script returns JSON with matches (have tW articles) and no_match (may need notes):

• matches in "names" category: NO translate-names note needed (tW covers it)
• matches in "kt" or "other" category: NO translate-unknown note needed (tW covers it)
• no_match: Likely needs translate-names or translate-unknown note

Exception: If a term with a tW article is used FIGURATIVELY, use the appropriate figurative note (figs-metaphor, figs-metonymy, etc.) instead of translate-names/translate-unknown.

Step 6: Manual Analysis - Four-Pass Workflow

After running detection scripts, analyze the text systematically using this four-pass approach. This ensures thorough coverage while managing cognitive load.

Pass 0: Review ULT/UST Differences (if UST available)

If Step 3 produced /tmp/ult_ust_diff.tsv, review it first to prime your attention on verses where UST diverged:

1. Read each row noting the diff_type and suggested_issue
2. Mark divergent verses for closer inspection in later passes
3. Note patterns - if UST consistently adds words, there may be implicit information throughout

This gives you a head start on where translation issues likely exist.

Pass 1: Chapter Overview

Read through the entire chapter to understand the big picture:

• Structural elements: Note discourse markers (and it came to pass, behold, therefore), participant introductions, quotation blocks
• Segment boundaries: Identify natural paragraph or pericope breaks
• Unusual constructions: Flag any phrases that seem distinctive or potentially challenging
• Genre indicators: Note poetry sections, dialogue patterns, narrative vs. instruction

For any unusual phrases noticed, check the published TN index first, then fall back to raw grep:

Use mcp__workspace-tools__build_tn_index with lookup="phrase" for keyword classification precedent. Fallback: raw grep data/published-tns/tn_*.tsv.

Pass 2: Segment-Level Grammar Focus

For each paragraph or segment identified in Pass 1:

• Connectors: Focus on grammar-connect issues - how do clauses relate? (time, logic, condition)
• Discourse markers: Check writing-* markers (newevent, background, participants, endofstory)
• Quotation structure: Note quote margins, nested quotes, indirect speech
• Pronoun chains: Track who "he/they/you" refer to through the segment

When uncertain about a construction, use mcp__workspace-tools__build_tn_index with lookup="keyword" or issue="figs-metonymy" for fast precedent lookups. Check prior decisions with grep "keyword" data/quick-ref/issue_decisions.csv. Fallback: raw grep data/published-tns/tn_*.tsv.

Pass 3: Verse-by-Verse Analysis with Task Checklist

For each verse (or small verse group), systematically check all issue types using the TaskCreate tool.

Creating the checklist: Use TaskCreate to generate one task per issue type from data/translation-issues.csv (all ~93 types). Example: "Check figs-metaphor in v.3", "Check figs-simile in v.3", etc.

Working through the checklist:

1. Read the verse carefully
2. For each task, consider whether that issue type applies
3. Use TaskUpdate to mark completed with findings: "figs-metaphor: 'shield' as protection - yes" or "figs-metaphor: none"
4. When uncertain, search published notes before deciding

Integrating detection script output:

• Check abstract noun detection script output first - abstract nouns are pre-identified
• Identify all passive constructions yourself using the patterns in figs-activepassive.md
• Mark those tasks as completed with the findings
• For names/unknowns, run check_tw_headwords.py before flagging

Systematic Review Principles

1. Detection first - integrate abstract nouns from scripts and passives from your own analysis
2. tW check for names - run check_tw_headwords.py before flagging translate-names/translate-unknown
3. Search when uncertain - check the published TN index first (build_tn_index.py --lookup), then data/published-tns/ for similar phrases
4. Consult Issues Resolved and Note Templates - when classifications conflict, data/issues_resolved.txt and data/templates.csv have final authority on how issues are classified
5. Check implicit info - would modern readers miss cultural practices, theological concepts, or covenant language?
6. Record non-trivial decisions - after resolving a classification that required checking published precedent or where multiple issue types were plausible, append to data/quick-ref/issue_decisions.csv

The goal is coverage: it's easier for reviewers to delete a suggested issue than to identify one from scratch. When in doubt, include it.

Genre-Specific Checks

For Psalms/Prayers: Make an extra pass for:

• figs-imperative: Imperatives addressed to God are requests, not commands
• figs-explicit: Covenant concepts (hesed, name, way) may need explanation
• figs-parallelism vs figs-doublet: If synonymous expressions fall on different poetic lines, classify as parallelism not doublet. For 3-line parallel verses, one parallelism note covers all lines. Quote the full parallel lines, not just key words.
• figs-ellipsis with parallelism: Check parallel lines for omitted words, but skip if ULT already supplies them in {}.
• figs-rquestion across poetic lines: When a rhetorical question spans multiple \q lines, quote the full question through the ?. Do not stop at the first poetic line.
• figs-123person for "your servant": When the psalmist addresses God using "your servant" to refer to himself, flag as figs-123person (Type 1: self-reference for humility). This is common in Psalms (e.g., PSA 19:11, 19:13, 119:17, 119:49, 119:65, 119:122, 119:125, 119:135, 119:176) and needs its own note even when the verse also has another issue like figs-imperative or figs-metaphor. Do not use writing-politeness for this pattern in Psalms.

For Proverbs: Check:

• figs-imperative: Imperative + result = conditional ("Do X, and Y" = "If X, then Y")

Grammar-Connect Context Guidelines

When identifying grammar-connect issues, capture sufficient context:

Too Narrow (Avoid):

• "for...for" - unclear what relationship is
• "because" alone - missing the clauses

Appropriate Context:

• "Please stand over me and kill me, for agony has seized me, for my life is still whole in me"
• "Your blood is on your head, for your mouth answered against you"

Rule: Include enough text that a reader can see the logical relationship being identified.

Quotations

Make an extra pass looking for quotation marks, quotes-in-quotes, and indirect quotations that should be marked.

Verification and Quality Checks

After completing issue identification, run these verification steps to catch misclassifications.

Keyword Triggers

When you encounter these words, ALWAYS check the specific issue listed:

Keyword	Always Check
singular "a/an" + noun in a general statement (e.g. "a man who...")	figs-genericnoun
man, men, brothers, sons, fathers	figs-gendernotations (generic masculine?)
like, as, than	figs-simile before figs-metaphor
hand, hands, eyes, face	figs-metonymy or figs-synecdoche (body part for action/person?)
heart	figs-metaphor (heart = thoughts/feelings/will; see template)
all, every, never, always	figs-hyperbole (exaggeration for emphasis?)
the righteous, the wicked, the poor	figs-nominaladj (adjective as noun?)

Commonly Confused Issue Pairs

Before finalizing a tag, check if a related issue fits better:

If considering...	Also check...	Key distinction
writing-pronouns	figs-gendernotations	Unclear referent vs. generic masculine
figs-metaphor	figs-simile	No comparison word vs. explicit "like/as"
figs-metonymy	figs-synecdoche	Associated thing vs. part/whole relationship
figs-idiom	figs-metonymy / figs-synecdoche	Fixed cultural expression vs. live figure (body-part triple)
figs-doublet	figs-parallelism	Word-level pair vs. clause-level repetition
figs-doublet	figs-hendiadys	Synonyms for emphasis vs. one modifies other
figs-idiom	figs-metaphor	Fixed expression vs. live comparison
figs-hyperbole	figs-merism	General exaggeration vs. two extremes = whole
figs-rquestion	figs-exclamations	Question form vs. exclamation form
figs-explicit	figs-ellipsis	Adding background info vs. supplying omitted words
grammar-connect-logic-goal	grammar-connect-logic-result	Intended outcome vs. unintended consequence

Competing Figurative Analyses (Pick One)

When the same phrase could be classified under multiple figurative issue types (e.g., synecdoche, metonymy, and idiom for "a lip of falsehood"), these represent competing analyses of the same feature, not complementary layers. Pick the single best fit.

Decision hierarchy for body-part and cultural expressions:

1. Is it a fixed cultural expression where the literal meaning has faded? -> figs-idiom
2. Is it association-based (thing for related thing, organ for its function)? -> figs-metonymy
3. Is it part-for-whole (can the whole person be substituted)? -> figs-synecdoche

This hierarchy reflects content team decisions in data/issues_resolved.txt. Grammar-layer issues (figs-abstractnouns, figs-activepassive, figs-possession) remain independent and always coexist alongside a figurative tag on the same phrase.

Biblical Imagery Classification

When classifying body parts, nature imagery, or cultural concepts as metonymy vs metaphor, consult the authoritative lists in figs-metonymy.md and figs-metaphor.md (under "Authoritative Biblical Imagery" sections).

Final Review Pass

After completing all identification, review your output:

1. Tag verification: For each issue tagged, can you point to specific criteria in the skill definition it meets? If unsure, re-read the skill file.

2. Cross-verse interpretive consistency: Scan the full issue list for explanations that reference or depend on adjacent verses. Specifically check:

   • Pronoun resolution: When a writing-pronouns issue resolves a referent from another verse (e.g., "it refers to X in the previous verse"), verify that your explanation of X in that other verse is compatible. If v9 says "inheritance" is a metaphor for people, v10 cannot say "it" refers to the land.
   • Carried figures: When a metaphor, metonymy, or other figure in one verse is referenced by an issue in a nearby verse, ensure the interpretations agree on what the figure represents.
   • Ambiguous terms: When the same Hebrew word or phrase is discussed in multiple verses, check that your explanations don't silently adopt different interpretations. If the interpretation is genuinely debatable, use a TCM note in the originating verse rather than letting different verses assume different answers.

3. Duplicate check: Did you tag the same phrase twice for issues that are really one? (e.g., tagging both figs-doublet and figs-parallelism for the same word pair) Also check for competing figurative analyses: if the same phrase has two or more figurative tags (e.g., figs-synecdoche + figs-metonymy + figs-idiom), keep only the single best fit using the decision hierarchy in "Competing Figurative Analyses" above.

4. Missing overlap check: Are there phrases that genuinely need two tags? (e.g., a simile that also contains an abstract noun - both figs-simile AND figs-abstractnouns may apply) Abstract nouns, passives (figs-abstractnouns, figs-activepassive) are script-detected and exist at a different analytical layer than figures of speech. They always coexist -- a figurative issue on the same phrase does not replace a grammar issue. Other grammar-level issues (figs-possession, figs-ellipsis, figs-nominaladj) should also generally not be dropped or merged with figurative issues. But multiple figurative issue types on the same phrase (figurative+figurative, not grammar+figurative) represent competing analyses -- see "Competing Figurative Analyses."

5. Keyword sweep: Scan output for any keyword triggers above that you may have tagged incorrectly.

Authoritative Sources

Final Authority: Issues Resolved

Consult data/issues_resolved.txt before finalizing issue classifications. This document contains content team decisions that override other guidance.

# Search for relevant decisions
cat data/issues_resolved.txt | grep -i "[search term]"

Note Templates (Classification Reference)

The note templates in data/templates.csv reflect confirmed team decisions on how issues are classified and described. When a template exists for an expression (e.g., "heart" under figs-metaphor), that classification is authoritative. Issue identification should tag issues consistently with how templates classify them.

Note: issue-identification produces explanations, not notes. But the template classifications indicate which support reference to use.

# Check how a term is classified in templates
grep -i "heart" data/templates.csv

Published TN Index

Pre-built index of all published translation notes by issue type and keyword. Use for fast precedent lookups instead of raw grep.

Use mcp__workspace-tools__build_tn_index with lookup="hand" for keyword lookups or issue="figs-metaphor" for issue type examples.

Source: data/cache/tn_index.json (built from data/published-tns/)

Precedent evidence is positive-only. Finding examples in the index supports a classification. Finding none is only meaningful if the chapter you searched actually has published TNs. Psalms is partially published — many chapters have no published TNs because AI drafting was adopted before they were completed. Do not cite "no results in this chapter" as evidence against a classification.

Issue Decisions

Accumulated classification decisions from prior runs. Check before re-deriving:

grep "hand of" data/quick-ref/issue_decisions.csv 2>/dev/null

Source: data/quick-ref/issue_decisions.csv (append-only)

Reference Examples: Published Notes

When the index doesn't have what you need, search data/published-tns/ directly:

# Search for issue type patterns
grep -i "figs-metonymy" data/published-tns/tn_1SA.tsv | head -20
grep -i "fallen\|sword" data/published-tns/tn_*.tsv

Available Tools

Tool	Purpose
mcp__workspace-tools__fetch_door43	Fetch USFM from Door43 (supports type="ust" for UST)
parse_usfm.js (node)	Parse USFM, extract alignments and plain text (usfm-js)
mcp__workspace-tools__compare_ult_ust	Compare ULT/UST plain text to identify divergences suggesting issues
mcp__workspace-tools__detect_abstract_nouns	Find abstract nouns (591 word list). Use text="..." for plain English
mcp__workspace-tools__check_tw_headwords	Check names/unknowns against tW headwords - filters translate-names/translate-unknown
mcp__workspace-tools__build_tn_index	Published TN index lookup. lookup="hand" for keyword, issue="figs-metaphor" for issue type

Ambiguity Detection (Cross-Cutting Check)

During verse-by-verse analysis, watch for passages where meaning is genuinely unclear:

Pronoun Reference Ambiguity (tag: writing-pronouns)

• Multiple possible antecedents for he/she/it/they
• Possessive pronouns with unclear referent
• "This/that" pointing to multiple possibilities
• Be conservative: only flag when a translator would genuinely struggle. If only one person is active, or the referent was just named, skip it. Target ~2–5 per chapter.

Lexical Polysemy (tag: figs-explicit or existing figure type)

• Words with established multiple meanings:
  • "world" (kosmos) - earth, people, value system
  • "love" (agape) - God's love, human love, both
  • "know" - cognitive, relational, experiential
• Hebrew words spanning multiple semantic domains

Idiomatic Uncertainty (tag: figs-idiom)

• Fixed expressions where meaning is disputed among scholars
• Cultural phrases with uncertain referent

Ellipsis with Multiple Resolutions (tag: figs-ellipsis or figs-explicit)

• Missing subjects/objects fillable multiple ways
• Implied information with more than one valid interpretation

Detection signals:

• English versions differ significantly on translation
• Commentaries acknowledge uncertainty ("interpreters disagree")
• The natural note format would be "This could mean: (1)... (2)..."

Explanation field format for TCM notes: When flagging ambiguity that requires a "this could mean" note, use TCM keyword plus i: prefix with numbered options:

Format: TCM i:(1) [option A] (2) [option B]

Examples:

job	9:35	figs-idiom	I am not so with myself			TCM i:(1) I do not consider myself guilty (2) I am not in my right mind from fear
job	9:3	writing-pronouns	he wished to contend			TCM i:(1) God (2) a person who wanted to contend with God
1jn	4:3	figs-explicit	is not from God			TCM i:(1) sent by God (2) having God as its source

The TCM trigger tells the note writer to format using "This could mean (1)... or (2)..." structure while still using the issue type's template for context.

Web search as fallback: When internal resources (Issues Resolved, published TNs, Translation Academy) don't clarify a potentially ambiguous passage:

1. Search: "[book] [chapter]:[verse] interpretation" or "[Greek/Hebrew term] meaning"
2. Look for scholarly disagreement as confirmation of genuine ambiguity
3. If sources differ, include a "this could mean" note with options found

Fallback tag: When ambiguity doesn't fit existing categories, use figs-explicit with note explaining the interpretive options.

See reference/ambiguity_patterns.md for detailed examples from published notes.

Troubleshooting

• fetch_door43 fails: Check network connectivity and that the book/chapter exists on Door43. The tool retries 3 times with backoff. If the resource was recently published, allow a few minutes for CDN propagation.
• detect_abstract_nouns returns empty: The detection tool found no abstract nouns in the passage. This is normal for short or concrete passages. Verify the input USFM has content and is not a header-only file.
• Too many issues flagged: If a passage generates more than ~30 issues, review for duplicates and low-confidence entries. Use the confidence threshold filter (0.7 default) and check that the same verse span is not being flagged by overlapping issue types.
• Too few issues flagged: Ensure all 7 category modules ran. Check the log for skipped categories (usually caused by missing input files). Re-run with --categories all to force all categories.

Output Format

After identifying issues, output a tab-separated file to output/issues/:

output/issues/[BOOK]/[BOOK]-[CHAPTER].tsv

Examples:

• output/issues/PSA/PSA-063.tsv - Psalm 63
• output/issues/GEN/GEN-01.tsv - Genesis 1
• output/issues/2SA/2SA-01.tsv - 2 Samuel 1

Use three-letter book codes and three-digit chapter numbers (zero-padded).

Format:

[book]\t[chapter:verse]\t[supportreference]\t[ULT text]\t\t\t[explanation if needed]

Column	Description
book	3-letter abbreviation (psa, gen, mat, etc.)
chapter:verse	Single-verse reference (78:17). Never use verse ranges — see rules below.
supportreference	Issue type (figs-metaphor, writing-pronouns, etc.)
ULT text	English phrase copied verbatim from the ULT — exact words, exact inflections, from one verse only
(empty)	Reserved
(empty)	Reserved
explanation	Brief note if issue not obvious from text (optional)

Reference and quote rules:

• References must be single-verse. If a literary device (parallelism, repetition) spans verses, put the issue on the first verse and mention the surrounding verses in the explanation column. The only exception is translate-versebridge, which spans two verses by definition.
• The ULT text column must be copied verbatim from the ULT verse — use the exact words and inflections that appear in the ULT. Do not paraphrase, change verb forms (e.g. "stumbled" when ULT says "stumbling"), or substitute synonyms (e.g. "ashamed" when ULT says "shame"). Downstream tooling matches these words mechanically against alignment data; mismatches cause failures.
• Prefer a single continuous span of ULT text. Use & to join only genuinely discontinuous phrases — where unrelated text separates the relevant words in the verse. If the phrases are adjacent or separated only by punctuation/conjunctions, expand the quote to include the connecting text instead. Good & use: two different referents for "these" separated by a clause. Bad & use: "oppose my opponents & fight those fighting me" when the ULT reads "oppose my opponents; fight those fighting me" — just quote the full span.

Ordering: Within each verse, output issues in ULT reading order:

1. First to last by start position of the quoted phrase in the ULT verse
2. Longest to shortest when phrases overlap or nest (the containing phrase comes before its sub-phrases)

Example for "For you are a refuge to me, a strong tower from the face of the enemy":

psa	61:3	figs-metaphor	For you are a refuge to me, a strong tower from the face of the enemy
psa	61:3	figs-metaphor	For you are a refuge to me
psa	61:3	figs-metaphor	a refuge
psa	61:3	figs-metonymy	from the face of the enemy
psa	61:3	figs-possession	of the enemy

General example:

psa	78:17	writing-pronouns	And they added			ancestors/israelites
psa	78:19	figs-rquestion	Is God able			rhetorical - asserting doubt
gen	1:5	figs-infostructure	evening and morning			time phrase order

Available Issue Types

94 issue types organized into 7 categories: Discourse Structure, Grammar, Clause Relations, Figures of Speech, Speech Acts, Information Management, Cultural/Reference.

For the full catalog with links to each issue skill, see reference/issue-types-catalog.md.

Recognition Flow

For detailed recognition guidance, consult the individual issue skill files.

Adding New Issue Types

To create a skill for a new translation issue:

1. See ../utilities/create-issue-skill.md
2. Check data/translation-issues.csv for issue list and tracking