book-authoring-lab

name	book-authoring-lab
description	Develop a long-form book chapter that turns philosophical decomposition into an actionable manuscript with diagrams, projection, reflection, and summary.
kind	autoresearch
version	1

Warning This file is machine-parsed by AgenDao for autoresearch. Do not rename section headings. Do not reorder sections. Do not replace YAML blocks with plain text. If the format changes, autoresearch compilation may fail.

Goal

Produce or improve manuscript/book-chapter.md as a chapter draft of at least 4500 characters. The chapter must contain a Questions section with at least 8 substantial questions, a Philosophical Decomposition and Abstraction section, a Technical Workflow section that turns abstractions into concrete writing operations, at least 2 Mermaid diagrams of different types, an Imaginative Projection section, a Reflection section, and a Summary section. The diagrams must help the reader think, not merely decorate the page.

Scope

• manuscript/**
• notes/**
• references/**
• docs/examples/scheduler/autoresearch/**

Exclude

• target/**
• dist/**
• node_modules/**
• manuscript/archive/**

Metric

direction: higher-is-better
kind: numeric-extract
pattern: score=([0-9]+)

Iteration Policy

mode: bounded
max_iterations: 6
stuck_threshold: 2

Decision Policy

baseline_strategy: capture-before-first-iteration
keep_conditions:
  - metric-improved
  - verify-passed
discard_conditions:
  - metric-regressed
  - metric-unchanged
  - verify-failed
crash_retry_max_attempts: 2

Context Markdown

Write as if this chapter will teach readers how to move from raw confusion to disciplined construction. The document should feel like a real book chapter, not a task note.

Chapter Contract

• Begin with hard, explicit questions.
• Decompose the problem philosophically before prescribing method.
• Translate abstractions into a technical workflow with checkpoints.
• Use multiple Mermaid diagram types.
• Push the argument forward with imaginative projection.
• Re-open the argument with reflection.
• Close cleanly with summary.

Recommended Chapter Outline

1. Questions
2. Philosophical Decomposition and Abstraction
3. Technical Workflow
4. Diagrammatic Models
5. Imaginative Projection
6. Reflection
7. Summary

What The Questions Should Do

The Questions section should not be rhetorical filler. It should expose pressure points such as: What is the real unit of thought in a book chapter? When does abstraction clarify and when does it anesthetize? How do we know a workflow still preserves the live tension of the original question?

What The Philosophical Decomposition Should Do

Break the writing problem into primitives such as attention, sequence, contrast, point of view, evidence, and transformation. Move from surface topic to deeper organizing oppositions. Show how the chapter's apparent topic is also a problem of framing and method.

What The Technical Workflow Should Do

Convert abstractions into an actionable pipeline: collect tensions, cluster them, derive an outline, choose explanatory sequence, insert diagrams where cognition needs compression, then revise for continuity and argumentative pressure.

Example Structural Map

flowchart LR
  Problem[Writing Problem] --> Questions[Questions]
  Questions --> Abstractions[Philosophical Abstractions]
  Abstractions --> Workflow[Technical Workflow]
  Workflow --> Draft[Chapter Draft]
  Draft --> Projection[Imaginative Projection]
  Projection --> Reflection[Reflection]
  Reflection --> Summary[Summary]

Example Editorial Interaction

sequenceDiagram
  participant A as Author
  participant Q as Question Set
  participant P as Philosophical Model
  participant W as Writing Workflow
  participant D as Draft
  A->>Q: Formulate hard questions
  Q->>P: Extract primitives and tensions
  P->>W: Convert abstractions into operations
  W->>D: Build ordered chapter structure
  D->>A: Reveal weak transitions
  A->>D: Revise with projection, reflection, summary

Imaginative Projection

Ask what the current argument would look like if extended into the future. Imagine downstream consequences, altered readers, stronger objections, and richer applications. The projection should intensify the chapter, not drift into fantasy.

Reflection

Use reflection to identify what the chapter still cannot explain, where the framing may have overfit the material, and what conceptual residue remains unresolved.

Summary

End with compression. The summary should not merely repeat headings. It should restate what changed in the reader's model of the problem after moving through questions, abstractions, workflow, diagrams, projection, and reflection.