flonat/flonat-research/knowledge-lint

Knowledge Lint

Substantive consistency checks on the compiled knowledge wiki. Produces correspondence/internal-reviews/KNOWLEDGE-LINT-REPORT.md.

Output Path

Per rules/review-artefact-routing.md (auto-loads in research projects (path-scoped to paper-*/ and paper/)):

• Source slug: knowledge-lint
• Write reports to: reviews/_project/knowledge-lint/YYYY-MM-DD-HHMM.md inside the project. Path is relative to the research project root, not the Task-Management repo.
• Never at project root (./CRITIC-REPORT.md-style filenames are forbidden — pre-rule layout).
• Idempotency: if today's file exists, append a same-day descriptor ({date}-revision.md, {date}-r2.md, {date}-pre-submission.md) — never overwrite.
• Index update: if reviews/INDEX.md exists, write a one-line entry under "Latest per source" pointing at the new file. Otherwise review-recap will rebuild the index next time it runs.
• Infrastructure repos (Task-Management, atlas-workspace, etc.): this section does not apply — the path-scoped rule won't load there.

When to Use

• After running compile-knowledge to verify integrity
• Before writing a paper section to check the knowledge base is solid
• Periodically (monthly) to catch drift
• When switching between projects to verify knowledge is current

When NOT to Use

• If no knowledge/ directory exists — run compile-knowledge first
• For structural project audits — use an installed research-project audit workflow
• For bibliography validation — use the configured bibliography validator

Pre-Check

1. Verify knowledge/ exists and has at least 2 articles (linting a single article is pointless)
2. If missing: "No knowledge directory found. Run compile-knowledge first."

Checks

1. Contradictions

Scan all articles for claims about the same concept that disagree:

Report format:

CONTRADICTION: concept-a.md says "X increases Y" but concept-b.md says "X has no effect on Y"
  Source A: Author (2023) — concept-a.md line 15
  Source B: Author (2024) — concept-b.md line 22
  Resolution needed: check which paper's context applies

2. Uncited Claims

Scan Key Findings sections for assertions without source attribution:

3. Missing Connections

Check for concepts that should link to each other but don't:

4. Staleness

5. Coverage Gaps

6. Promotion readiness (advisory)

Project knowledge articles are the upstream source that wiki-grow promotes into vault concepts (~/vault/concepts/). Articles that escape their origin project (mentioned in ≥3 corpus docs) get auto-promoted as status: draft and later curated to the concept anatomy (packages/research-atlas-schema/schema.md → "Concept File Schema"): a lead ## In one line definition, encyclopedia-voice body, and a ## In my portfolio section for project-specific prose.

This is advisory, not a hard check — project knowledge lives in the project's own voice and needn't conform. But flagging an article that leads with a crisp, project-agnostic definition as "promotion-ready" (vs. one that opens mid-analysis) helps: the cleaner the lead, the cheaper the eventual draft→curated pass. Note such articles in Recommendations; don't rewrite them here.

Report

Write correspondence/internal-reviews/KNOWLEDGE-LINT-REPORT.md (create directory with mkdir -p if needed):

# Knowledge Lint Report
 
**Project:** [name]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Articles scanned:** N
**Total words:** ~X
 
## Summary
 
| Check | Issues | Severity |
|-------|--------|----------|
| Contradictions | N | High |
| Uncited claims | N | Medium |
| Missing connections | N | Low |
| Staleness | N | Medium |
| Coverage gaps | N | Medium |
 
## Contradictions (High)
 
[List each with source references and suggested resolution]
 
## Uncited Claims (Medium)
 
[List each with article and line]
 
## Missing Connections (Low)
 
[List pairs that should link]
 
## Staleness (Medium)
 
[List stale articles with last-updated date and evidence of new activity]
 
## Coverage Gaps (Medium)
 
[List uncompiled sources and undocumented concepts]
 
## Recommendations
 
1.[Most impactful fix]
2.[Second]
3.[Third]

Cross-References