Briefing
Parent: HL-TFW-25
Goal: Consolidate TFW’s 14 principles and 33 decisions into a clean hierarchy — README Values (beliefs), KNOWLEDGE §0 (design rules), conventions (implementation patterns) — eliminating duplication and pruning self-evident knowledge/ facts.
Research Plan
Gather
- Search externally: how do mature AI/dev frameworks (LangChain, CrewAI, Cursor rules, Anthropic’s prompt engineering docs) structure their principles/values sections?
- Count items, tiers, and placement patterns in 3-5 external frameworks
- Compare: narrative vs. list vs. table formats for values
- Full cross-reference: each P1-P14 and each knowledge/ fact — is it already expressed in conventions.md, workflows, or templates?
- Classify self-evident facts (the code IS the documentation) vs. strategic facts (only humans know this)
- Produce exact lists: what to remove, what to promote, what to compress
Challenge
- Stress-test the 3-tier taxonomy (values / design principles / implementation rules) — is it the right split?
- Check if 8-value cap is too few or too many by comparing with external examples
- Test whether pruning any knowledge/ fact would actually cause information loss
Hypotheses (from HL §10)
| # |
Hypothesis |
HL Status |
| H1 |
P10-P13 are implementation rules, not principles — they belong in conventions.md |
open |
| H2 |
≥5 knowledge/ facts are now self-evident from code and can be safely removed |
open |
| H3 |
README Values section should stay under 8 items to maintain narrative impact |
open |
Scope Intent
- In scope: README §Values structure, KNOWLEDGE.md §0/§3/§4 pruning, knowledge/ topic file audit, external framework comparison
- Out of scope: rewriting conventions.md content, adapter sync, template changes, any code changes
Guiding Questions
- Are there any knowledge/ facts that you consider strategically important despite being derivable from code? (I’ll assume “no” unless you flag specific ones.)
- Do you want the README Values section to remain pure narrative (paragraph per value), or would a table format be acceptable?
- Is there a principle you feel is missing from the current P1-P14 that should be added during consolidation?
User Direction
- Philosophy facts = keep. Implementation-specific facts in convention/process/constraint = prunable if self-evident from code.
- Narrative format stays. README Values = heading + paragraph per value (P3: narrative > DRY).
- No missing principles to add during consolidation.
Stage complete: YES