Grounded Writing
Core principle
Make the reasoning visible at the scale the artifact supports. Build clear,
evidence-led writing in a conversational tone, then remove anything invented,
generic, or included only to imitate a personality.
Procedure
- Confirm that the text is for the user to publish or send. Apply this style at
any length, including one-sentence review comments and replies. Do not apply
it to an ordinary assistant reply, quoted source text, or prose attributed to
someone else.
- Read the style profile before drafting or
revising.
- Establish the audience, purpose, requested format, supplied facts, and
the user's actual position. Preserve the requested artifact shape rather than
turning every deliverable into a blog post.
- In public developer documentation, explain observable behaviour, setting
choices, trade-offs, and relevant limitations. Keep implementation and
test or diagnostic detail in internal references unless needed to use the
API correctly or explicitly requested. Retain public contracts and the
context needed to interpret claims. This does not apply to internal design
documents or technical reports.
- Resolve missing material before writing:
- Look up discoverable public facts when the task calls for research.
- If a missing personal opinion or experience would materially change the
text, ask the user and stop drafting that part.
- If the gap is minor, use a conspicuous placeholder or state the uncertainty
honestly. Never invent a first-person claim, result, preference, or memory.
- Choose the register from the style profile. Match the length and formality to
the destination; short working comments should remain short.
- Shape the reasoning before polishing sentences. Prefer a concrete problem or
observation, explain the mechanism, support it with evidence or an example,
acknowledge the important limit, state the practical consequence, and end on
the clearest remaining point. Omit any stage the artifact does not need. For
a short comment, this may be only the actionable point and one supporting
fact.
- Use the user's default language and regional conventions unless the request
specifies otherwise. Keep paragraphs focused, mix sentence lengths, use first
person only when grounded, and make headings earn their place.
- Edit once for style and once for truth. Remove generic scene-setting,
marketing language, repeated conclusions, decorative catchphrases, and
unsupported certainty. Treat the headline and opening claim as substantive:
remove or qualify promotional framing that the supplied evidence does not
directly support.
- For a no-change review, name the material facts, mechanism, and qualification
that make the existing text publishable. A bare “no edit needed” does not
show that the truth and clarity checks were completed.
Finish gate
Finish only when all of these are true:
- The result still satisfies the requested format and purpose.
- Every personal claim and substantive fact is supplied, verified, qualified,
or clearly marked as missing.
- The argument is concrete enough to follow without promotional filler.
- Any caveat included changes the reader's understanding rather than acting as
a disclaimer.
- Spelling and grammar follow the user's default language and regional
conventions.
- The ending lands once and does not recap the whole piece.
- The prose sounds natural when read aloud, without an accumulation of borrowed
phrases, rhetorical questions, asides, or emoji.
If a check fails, revise the draft. If the failure depends on an unknown personal
position, ask the user rather than smoothing over the gap.
1---2name: grounded-writing3description: Use when drafting or revising text for the user to publish or send, including short review comments, replies, and evidence-led technical prose.4---56# Grounded Writing78## Core principle910Make the reasoning visible at the scale the artifact supports. Build clear,11evidence-led writing in a conversational tone, then remove anything invented,12generic, or included only to imitate a personality.1314## Procedure15161. Confirm that the text is for the user to publish or send. Apply this style at17 any length, including one-sentence review comments and replies. Do not apply18 it to an ordinary assistant reply, quoted source text, or prose attributed to19 someone else.202. Read [the style profile](references/style-profile.md) before drafting or21 revising.223. Establish the audience, purpose, requested format, supplied facts, and23 the user's actual position. Preserve the requested artifact shape rather than24 turning every deliverable into a blog post.254. In public developer documentation, explain observable behaviour, setting26 choices, trade-offs, and relevant limitations. Keep implementation and27 test or diagnostic detail in internal references unless needed to use the28 API correctly or explicitly requested. Retain public contracts and the29 context needed to interpret claims. This does not apply to internal design30 documents or technical reports.315. Resolve missing material before writing:32 - Look up discoverable public facts when the task calls for research.33 - If a missing personal opinion or experience would materially change the34 text, ask the user and stop drafting that part.35 - If the gap is minor, use a conspicuous placeholder or state the uncertainty36 honestly. Never invent a first-person claim, result, preference, or memory.376. Choose the register from the style profile. Match the length and formality to38 the destination; short working comments should remain short.397. Shape the reasoning before polishing sentences. Prefer a concrete problem or40 observation, explain the mechanism, support it with evidence or an example,41 acknowledge the important limit, state the practical consequence, and end on42 the clearest remaining point. Omit any stage the artifact does not need. For43 a short comment, this may be only the actionable point and one supporting44 fact.458. Use the user's default language and regional conventions unless the request46 specifies otherwise. Keep paragraphs focused, mix sentence lengths, use first47 person only when grounded, and make headings earn their place.489. Edit once for style and once for truth. Remove generic scene-setting,49 marketing language, repeated conclusions, decorative catchphrases, and50 unsupported certainty. Treat the headline and opening claim as substantive:51 remove or qualify promotional framing that the supplied evidence does not52 directly support.5310. For a no-change review, name the material facts, mechanism, and qualification54 that make the existing text publishable. A bare “no edit needed” does not55 show that the truth and clarity checks were completed.5657## Finish gate5859Finish only when all of these are true:6061- The result still satisfies the requested format and purpose.62- Every personal claim and substantive fact is supplied, verified, qualified,63 or clearly marked as missing.64- The argument is concrete enough to follow without promotional filler.65- Any caveat included changes the reader's understanding rather than acting as66 a disclaimer.67- Spelling and grammar follow the user's default language and regional68 conventions.69- The ending lands once and does not recap the whole piece.70- The prose sounds natural when read aloud, without an accumulation of borrowed71 phrases, rhetorical questions, asides, or emoji.7273If a check fails, revise the draft. If the failure depends on an unknown personal74position, ask the user rather than smoothing over the gap.