From b4ffc52cbd340b950a98950a2f0ec58e64d14a6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Corry Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 12:25:01 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Two review-chain voice-tells promoted from the game's one-time triage The game's session-745 voice overhaul triaged its 746 machine-grown phrase entries one at a time. Two survivors are generic review-chain speak that belongs on the public list: "lens-rotation has converged" and "chain has converged", both with plain rewrites. Verified against this repo's prose (no collisions) and the list's validity tests (no shadows, no duplicate). --- scripts/phrase-list.json | 463 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 372 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-) diff --git a/scripts/phrase-list.json b/scripts/phrase-list.json index e081469..600b102 100644 --- a/scripts/phrase-list.json +++ b/scripts/phrase-list.json @@ -1,93 +1,374 @@ [ - {"bad":"producer↔consumer","good":"two pieces of code talking to each other"}, - {"bad":"caller↔callee","good":"a function and its caller"}, - {"bad":"contract gap","good":"where two pieces of code don't agree on what to expect"}, - {"bad":"shape mismatch","good":"the shape one piece returns doesn't match what the other expects"}, - {"bad":"contract drift","good":"two places that used to agree have fallen out of sync"}, - {"bad":"validator drift","good":"sender and receiver disagree on what counts as valid"}, - {"bad":"side-effect contracts","good":"one piece writes something the other piece reads"}, - {"bad":"adjacent-system","good":"neighbouring"}, - {"bad":"external-service contract","good":"how this code talks to outside services"}, - {"bad":"producer-consumer drift","good":"two parts of the code that used to agree have got out of step"}, - {"bad":"import contract","good":"what one file shares with another"}, - {"bad":"detector class","good":"one kind of check the scanner does"}, - {"bad":"coverage gap","good":"something the tests don't cover"}, - {"bad":"structural backstop","good":"the safety net that catches what the first check misses"}, - {"bad":"fallback shape","good":"what comes back when the normal path fails"}, - {"bad":"function-and-caller mismatch","good":"a function and the code calling it disagree"}, - {"bad":"consumer contract","good":"what the code that reads this expects"}, - {"bad":"delve into","good":"look at"}, - {"bad":"delve deeper","good":"look closer"}, - {"bad":"testament to","good":"evidence of"}, - {"bad":"holistic approach","good":"whole-picture approach"}, - {"bad":"synergy between","good":"how X and Y work together"}, - {"bad":"moreover,","good":"also,"}, - {"bad":"comprehensive guide","good":"full guide"}, - {"bad":"comprehensive overview","good":"overview"}, - {"bad":"comprehensive solution","good":"full solution"}, - {"bad":"leverage the","good":"use the"}, - {"bad":"leverage our","good":"use our"}, - {"bad":"leverage existing","good":"use what we have"}, - {"bad":"paradigm shift","good":"a fundamental change"}, - {"bad":"utilize the","good":"use the"}, - {"bad":"utilize our","good":"use our"}, - {"bad":"initiate the","good":"start the"}, - {"bad":"initiate a","good":"start a"}, - {"bad":"robust solution","good":"solid solution"}, - {"bad":"robust and scalable","good":"solid"}, - {"bad":"streamline the","good":"simplify the"}, - {"bad":"streamline your","good":"simplify your"}, - {"bad":"seamless integration","good":"works together without extra steps"}, - {"bad":"seamlessly integrates","good":"works together without extra steps"}, - {"bad":"it's important to note","good":"note"}, - {"bad":"it is important to note","good":"note"}, - {"bad":"it's worth noting","good":"note"}, - {"bad":"in today's fast-paced","good":"(cut the phrase; say the specific thing)"}, - {"bad":"embark on","good":"start"}, - {"bad":"elevate your","good":"improve your"}, - {"bad":"unlock the power","good":"(cut the phrase; say what it does)"}, - {"bad":"dive deep into","good":"look closely at"}, - {"bad":"a deep dive","good":"a close look"}, - {"bad":"game-changer","good":"a big improvement"}, - {"bad":"best practices","good":"what works"}, - {"bad":"cutting-edge","good":"new"}, - {"bad":"state-of-the-art","good":"current"}, - {"bad":"furthermore,","good":"also,"}, - {"bad":"additionally,","good":"also,"}, - {"bad":"in conclusion,","good":"(cut the phrase; just conclude)"}, - {"bad":"overall, this","good":"this"}, - {"bad":"mechanistic","good":"step-by-step or rule-based"}, - {"bad":"superseded by","good":"replaced by"}, - {"bad":"steelmanning","good":"arguing the strongest version of the other side"}, - {"bad":"producer/consumer drift","good":"data going in and out of sync"}, - {"bad":"graceful-degradation pattern","good":"keeping things working even when something fails"}, - {"bad":"idempotent","good":"safe to run twice"}, - {"bad":"fail-soft posture","good":"logging and carrying on instead of crashing"}, - {"bad":"belt-and-suspenders","good":"two safety checks where one would do"}, - {"bad":"invariant violation","good":"a rule the code expected to always hold got broken"}, - {"bad":"silent-drift surface","good":"a place where things can fall out of sync with no warning"}, - {"bad":"cross-reference coupling","good":"two places that must change together"}, - {"bad":"copy-paste vector","good":"a mistake that spreads by copying"}, - {"bad":"silent no-ops","good":"commands that fail without saying so"}, - {"bad":"fire-and-forget","good":"started without waiting for the result"}, - {"bad":"silent degradation","good":"failing without telling anyone"}, - {"bad":"resumability","good":"picking up where you left off"}, - {"bad":"ghost-polling","good":"repeatedly checking for something that is gone"}, - {"bad":"isolation break","good":"data leaking between environments"}, - {"bad":"wall-clock budget","good":"the actual elapsed-time limit"}, - {"bad":"\u2014","good":"use a period, comma, semicolon, or parentheses instead of an em dash"}, - {"bad":"polling loop","good":"checking repeatedly until something is ready"}, - {"bad":"state explosion","good":"too many separate states to manage"}, - {"bad":"confabulated citations","good":"false or invented source references"}, - {"bad":"prompt-injection surface","good":"places where untrusted input could break the prompt structure"}, - {"bad":"token-budget implications","good":"how much extra AI processing cost this adds"}, - {"bad":"pub/sub system","good":"a system where parts announce events and others listen for them"}, - {"bad":"synchronous semantics","good":"immediate execution without waiting"}, - {"bad":"atomic write mechanism","good":"writing a file in a way that prevents corruption if the process crashes"}, - {"bad":"heredoc strings","good":"multiline text blocks embedded directly in a script"}, - {"bad":"multi-subscriber fan-out","good":"sending one message to multiple listeners"}, - {"bad":"cascading gate","good":"a series of checks where each must pass before the next"}, - {"bad":"structural protection by construction","good":"making something impossible to break by the way the code is written"}, - {"bad":"glob auto-discovery","good":"automatically finding files by pattern instead of a hardcoded list"}, - {"bad":"async dispatch or buffering","good":"delayed or queued message delivery"} + { + "bad": "producer↔consumer", + "good": "two pieces of code talking to each other" + }, + { + "bad": "caller↔callee", + "good": "a function and its caller" + }, + { + "bad": "contract gap", + "good": "where two pieces of code don't agree on what to expect" + }, + { + "bad": "shape mismatch", + "good": "the shape one piece returns doesn't match what the other expects" + }, + { + "bad": "contract drift", + "good": "two places that used to agree have fallen out of sync" + }, + { + "bad": "validator drift", + "good": "sender and receiver disagree on what counts as valid" + }, + { + "bad": "side-effect contracts", + "good": "one piece writes something the other piece reads" + }, + { + "bad": "adjacent-system", + "good": "neighbouring" + }, + { + "bad": "external-service contract", + "good": "how this code talks to outside services" + }, + { + "bad": "producer-consumer drift", + "good": "two parts of the code that used to agree have got out of step" + }, + { + "bad": "import contract", + "good": "what one file shares with another" + }, + { + "bad": "detector class", + "good": "one kind of check the scanner does" + }, + { + "bad": "coverage gap", + "good": "something the tests don't cover" + }, + { + "bad": "structural backstop", + "good": "the safety net that catches what the first check misses" + }, + { + "bad": "fallback shape", + "good": "what comes back when the normal path fails" + }, + { + "bad": "function-and-caller mismatch", + "good": "a function and the code calling it disagree" + }, + { + "bad": "consumer contract", + "good": "what the code that reads this expects" + }, + { + "bad": "delve into", + "good": "look at" + }, + { + "bad": "delve deeper", + "good": "look closer" + }, + { + "bad": "testament to", + "good": "evidence of" + }, + { + "bad": "holistic approach", + "good": "whole-picture approach" + }, + { + "bad": "synergy between", + "good": "how X and Y work together" + }, + { + "bad": "moreover,", + "good": "also," + }, + { + "bad": "comprehensive guide", + "good": "full guide" + }, + { + "bad": "comprehensive overview", + "good": "overview" + }, + { + "bad": "comprehensive solution", + "good": "full solution" + }, + { + "bad": "leverage the", + "good": "use the" + }, + { + "bad": "leverage our", + "good": "use our" + }, + { + "bad": "leverage existing", + "good": "use what we have" + }, + { + "bad": "paradigm shift", + "good": "a fundamental change" + }, + { + "bad": "utilize the", + "good": "use the" + }, + { + "bad": "utilize our", + "good": "use our" + }, + { + "bad": "initiate the", + "good": "start the" + }, + { + "bad": "initiate a", + "good": "start a" + }, + { + "bad": "robust solution", + "good": "solid solution" + }, + { + "bad": "robust and scalable", + "good": "solid" + }, + { + "bad": "streamline the", + "good": "simplify the" + }, + { + "bad": "streamline your", + "good": "simplify your" + }, + { + "bad": "seamless integration", + "good": "works together without extra steps" + }, + { + "bad": "seamlessly integrates", + "good": "works together without extra steps" + }, + { + "bad": "it's important to note", + "good": "note" + }, + { + "bad": "it is important to note", + "good": "note" + }, + { + "bad": "it's worth noting", + "good": "note" + }, + { + "bad": "in today's fast-paced", + "good": "(cut the phrase; say the specific thing)" + }, + { + "bad": "embark on", + "good": "start" + }, + { + "bad": "elevate your", + "good": "improve your" + }, + { + "bad": "unlock the power", + "good": "(cut the phrase; say what it does)" + }, + { + "bad": "dive deep into", + "good": "look closely at" + }, + { + "bad": "a deep dive", + "good": "a close look" + }, + { + "bad": "game-changer", + "good": "a big improvement" + }, + { + "bad": "best practices", + "good": "what works" + }, + { + "bad": "cutting-edge", + "good": "new" + }, + { + "bad": "state-of-the-art", + "good": "current" + }, + { + "bad": "furthermore,", + "good": "also," + }, + { + "bad": "additionally,", + "good": "also," + }, + { + "bad": "in conclusion,", + "good": "(cut the phrase; just conclude)" + }, + { + "bad": "overall, this", + "good": "this" + }, + { + "bad": "mechanistic", + "good": "step-by-step or rule-based" + }, + { + "bad": "superseded by", + "good": "replaced by" + }, + { + "bad": "steelmanning", + "good": "arguing the strongest version of the other side" + }, + { + "bad": "producer/consumer drift", + "good": "data going in and out of sync" + }, + { + "bad": "graceful-degradation pattern", + "good": "keeping things working even when something fails" + }, + { + "bad": "idempotent", + "good": "safe to run twice" + }, + { + "bad": "fail-soft posture", + "good": "logging and carrying on instead of crashing" + }, + { + "bad": "belt-and-suspenders", + "good": "two safety checks where one would do" + }, + { + "bad": "invariant violation", + "good": "a rule the code expected to always hold got broken" + }, + { + "bad": "silent-drift surface", + "good": "a place where things can fall out of sync with no warning" + }, + { + "bad": "cross-reference coupling", + "good": "two places that must change together" + }, + { + "bad": "copy-paste vector", + "good": "a mistake that spreads by copying" + }, + { + "bad": "silent no-ops", + "good": "commands that fail without saying so" + }, + { + "bad": "fire-and-forget", + "good": "started without waiting for the result" + }, + { + "bad": "silent degradation", + "good": "failing without telling anyone" + }, + { + "bad": "resumability", + "good": "picking up where you left off" + }, + { + "bad": "ghost-polling", + "good": "repeatedly checking for something that is gone" + }, + { + "bad": "isolation break", + "good": "data leaking between environments" + }, + { + "bad": "wall-clock budget", + "good": "the actual elapsed-time limit" + }, + { + "bad": "—", + "good": "use a period, comma, semicolon, or parentheses instead of an em dash" + }, + { + "bad": "polling loop", + "good": "checking repeatedly until something is ready" + }, + { + "bad": "state explosion", + "good": "too many separate states to manage" + }, + { + "bad": "confabulated citations", + "good": "false or invented source references" + }, + { + "bad": "prompt-injection surface", + "good": "places where untrusted input could break the prompt structure" + }, + { + "bad": "token-budget implications", + "good": "how much extra AI processing cost this adds" + }, + { + "bad": "pub/sub system", + "good": "a system where parts announce events and others listen for them" + }, + { + "bad": "synchronous semantics", + "good": "immediate execution without waiting" + }, + { + "bad": "atomic write mechanism", + "good": "writing a file in a way that prevents corruption if the process crashes" + }, + { + "bad": "heredoc strings", + "good": "multiline text blocks embedded directly in a script" + }, + { + "bad": "multi-subscriber fan-out", + "good": "sending one message to multiple listeners" + }, + { + "bad": "cascading gate", + "good": "a series of checks where each must pass before the next" + }, + { + "bad": "structural protection by construction", + "good": "making something impossible to break by the way the code is written" + }, + { + "bad": "glob auto-discovery", + "good": "automatically finding files by pattern instead of a hardcoded list" + }, + { + "bad": "async dispatch or buffering", + "good": "delayed or queued message delivery" + }, + { + "bad": "lens-rotation has converged", + "good": "checking from different angles hasn't found new problems" + }, + { + "bad": "chain has converged", + "good": "the review rounds aren't finding new issues anymore" + } ]