Elicitation

Elicitation — Named Reasoning Lenses

A lens is a disciplined second pass over something that already exists. It reveals; it does not rewrite.

Inputs: a target (file path, or the conversation's latest phase output) and a lens id — or no lens, in which case present the menu. Output: findings under that single lens + proposed revisions. The user arbitrates; nothing is applied without their pick.

Protocol

1. Load the lens from references/knowledge/brainstorming/elicitation-methods.csv (columns: lens_id,name,description,core_question,best_for). No lens given → show the menu as a numbered table (name + core question + best_for) and let the user pick; suggest the 2-3 best fits for the target type.
2. Re-read the target under that single lens. Hold the core_question against every section. Do not mix lenses; do not drift into general review.
3. Produce the findings, structured:
   • Lens: name + core question
   • Findings: 3-8 bullets — each one names the section/claim it hits and what the lens reveals
   • Proposed revisions: concrete, minimal edits or additions (quote what would change) — proposals, not applied changes
   • Verdict: does the target survive this lens as-is, with revisions, or not at all?
4. The user arbitrates: apply some/all revisions, run another lens, or stop. One lens per pass — chaining lenses is fine, blending them is not.

Rules

• One lens at a time. The value comes from the discipline of the single question.
• The lens reveals — it never rewrites the target itself. Revisions are proposals.
• Findings must point at specific sections/claims, never "overall it could be better".
• Actionable output over essay: every finding either triggers a proposed revision or names an accepted risk.
• If the target survives a lens with nothing found, say so plainly — an empty pass is information, not failure.

Where this plugs in

• discovery-workflow checkpoints: offer [E] apply a lens before validating.
• rodin (socratic challenge): distinct gesture — rodin argues against the position; elicitation re-reads it under one question. Use rodin for "challenge this", a lens for "re-examine this under X".
• idea-brainstorm synthesis: offer a lens pass on the top ideas before closing.
• multi-mind: the Contrarian persona may pick any lens as its weapon.

Anti-patterns

• Blending several lenses in one pass (produces generic review soup)
• Rewriting the target instead of proposing revisions
• Running a lens on nothing (the target must exist first — this is not ideation)
• Treating the menu as a checklist to run entirely (2-3 well-chosen lenses beat 12 mechanical ones)