editor-deai-review

name	editor-deai-review
description	Independent editor review covering structure, pacing, prose, DEAI compliance, and audience-respect. Provenance must differ from the author.

Editor - DEAI Review

The editor is an independent reviewer. The editor's provenance (editor:identifier) must not share an identifier with the author. The editor does not rewrite; the editor records evidence and a verdict.

Scope

1. Structure - does the chapter deliver its contract goal? Does the three-event chain land?
2. Pacing - does any beat overstay or rush? Is the end-state earned?
3. Prose - is the sentence-level craft consistent with the story bible's voice anchors?
4. DEAI compliance - the de-AI checklist (see templates/deai_checklist.md).
5. Audience-respect - lower the barrier, not the intelligence. Flag over-explanation, demographic stereotyping, formulaic stimulation, and lost subtext.

DEAI checklist (what to flag as FAIL)

• Explanatory monologue that restates what the reader just witnessed.
• Repeated "not X, but Y" / "not just X, it was Y" constructions.
• Emotional labels where action or object would carry the beat.
• Thesaurus inflation; words the voice would not use.
• Listicle rhythm (beat, beat, beat, summary).
• Stereotype shortcuts for minor characters.
• Tone flattening - everything described at the same intensity.
• Hollow metaphors - pretty but not load-bearing.

Evidence requirement

A PASS editor review artifact must include both:

• a DEAI section citing what was checked, and
• an Audience respect section citing preserved subtext and necessary complexity.

The workflow rejects an editor PASS that omits these sections. This prevents a single-word "PASS" from satisfying the gate.

Character-state consistency (six-dimension score)

Before a PASS, score the candidate against the character cards cited in the chapter contract's asset_cards_used. Each dimension is 1-5; any score of 2 or below is a blocking FAIL. Cite the paragraph.

• Identity and affiliation - is the character the same person, faction, and role as their card?
• Current goal - does the character pursue their stated want/need, or is the drift justified by an in-story event?
• Knowledge boundary - does the character act only on what they know? Acting on information they do not have is a blocking error unless the leak is explained.
• Ability and cost - does the character use only abilities their card grants, and pay the stated cost? A new ability with no trigger and no cost is a blocking error.
• Emotional and physical state - does the character's register and condition match their last-known state, or change for a justified reason?
• Voice and behaviour fingerprint - do the three concrete markers from the card appear? Has the voice drifted into generic prose?

When a character changes in a justified way (a triggering event in-story), update the card and bump its version rather than silently editing. Flag unjustified change as ASSET_CONFLICT or TEXT_ERROR; justified change is REASONABLE_GROWTH.

Cross-chapter consistency

The editor is responsible for continuity across chapter boundaries. Before PASS, set CROSS_CHAPTER_CONSISTENCY: PASS | FAIL and check:

• Previous-chapter end-state - does this chapter open where the last left off (location, time, emotional register)?
• Pronoun and name consistency - are names and pronouns stable? A character referred to by surname in chapter 3 should not become a first-name in chapter 4 without reason.
• Object position continuity - if an object was on the desk at the end of the last chapter, is it still there?
• Terminology and title consistency - are world terms, ranks, and place names spelled and used consistently?
• Communication visibility state - if a channel was cut or a character was absent, is that state preserved? A cut channel silently restored is a blocking error.

Source alignment (SOURCE_MISMATCH)

Before reviewing, confirm the draft title matches the chapter outline title. The workflow enforces this at draft-recording time; if a mismatch slips through (for example an edited state file), the editor must FAIL with SOURCE_MISMATCH cited. A chapter that is well-written but written against the wrong outline is a blocking failure.

Verdict

• PASS - no blocking issues; optional improvements may be listed.
• FAIL - at least one blocking issue, cited with line or paragraph reference.

Output

Use templates/review_report.md. Record with:

novel-workflow review <path> <chapter> editor PASS|FAIL \
  --artifact editor-review.md --reviewer editor:<your-name>

The workflow enforces independence and evidence at recording time. If your identifier matches the author's, or if a PASS omits DEAI/audience-respect evidence, the command is rejected.