blue/.blue/docs/rfcs/0036-expert-output-discipline.impl.md

RFC 0036: Expert Output Discipline

Status	Implemented
Date	2026-01-26
Source Spike	Expert agent output too long
Depends On	RFC 0033 (round-scoped dialogue files)

---

Summary

Alignment-expert agents routinely exceed the stated 400-word output limit by 2-5x. The current prompt relies on a word-count instruction buried mid-prompt and contradicted by a "contribute MORE" competition framing. This RFC replaces the word-count honour system with structural constraints, repositioned instructions, and a fixed return summary format.

Problem

Observed in a 12-expert dialogue: the Judge resorted to grep-style marker extraction from JSONL task output because agent return summaries were too verbose for inline synthesis. Root causes (from spike):

1. Conflicting incentives — dialogue.rs:959 says "contribute MORE to the final ALIGNMENT" while line 970 says "MAXIMUM 400 words." The competitive framing wins.
2. Lost in the middle — the output limit occupies the lowest-attention position in the prompt, between high-attention role setup and high-attention write/return instructions.
3. Word counts don't work — LLMs cannot reliably self-regulate output length from a stated word count. Structural constraints (section headers, sentence caps) are far more effective.
4. Vague return summary — "brief summary" has no defined format. 12 agents returning 200-word "brief" summaries produce 2400 words of Judge input.
5. Generous turn budget — max_turns: 10 leaves 5-8 unused turns that agents may fill with iteration.

Token budget impact: 12 agents × 1000+ actual words = 12K+ words per round vs. the designed 4.8K (12 × 400). Judge synthesis degrades because it can't absorb all perspectives in context.

Solution

Three changes to the agent prompt template in dialogue.rs:949-992, plus a matching update to .claude/agents/alignment-expert.md.

Change 1: Replace competition framing with quality framing

Before (dialogue.rs:959-960):

You are in friendly competition: who can contribute MORE to the final ALIGNMENT?
But you ALL win when the result is aligned. There are no losers here.

After:

Your contribution is scored on PRECISION, not volume.
One sharp insight beats ten paragraphs. You ALL win when the result is aligned.

Rationale: Removes the "MORE" incentive. Explicitly rewards precision over volume.

Change 2: Replace word-count limit with structural template

Before (dialogue.rs:962-976):

FORMAT — use these markers:
- [PERSPECTIVE Pnn: brief label] — new viewpoint you are surfacing
- [TENSION Tn: brief description] — unresolved issue needing attention
- [REFINEMENT: description] — improving a prior proposal
- [CONCESSION: description] — acknowledging another was right
- [RESOLVED Tn] — addressing a prior tension

OUTPUT LIMIT — THIS IS MANDATORY:
- MAXIMUM 400 words total per response
- One or two [PERSPECTIVE] markers maximum
- One [TENSION] marker maximum
- If the topic needs more depth, save it for the next round
- Aim for under 2000 characters total
- DO NOT write essays, literature reviews, or exhaustive analyses
- Be pointed and specific, not comprehensive

After:

YOUR RESPONSE MUST USE THIS EXACT STRUCTURE:

[PERSPECTIVE P01: brief label]
Your strongest new viewpoint. Two to four sentences maximum. No preamble.

[PERSPECTIVE P02: brief label]  ← optional, only if genuinely distinct
One to two sentences maximum.

[TENSION T01: brief description]  ← optional
One sentence identifying the unresolved issue.

[REFINEMENT: description] or [CONCESSION: description] or [RESOLVED Tn]  ← optional
One sentence each. Use only when engaging with prior round content.

---
Nothing else. No introduction. No conclusion. No elaboration beyond the sections above.
Save depth for the next round.

Rationale: LLMs follow structural templates far more reliably than word counts. The template makes it physically difficult to be verbose — each section has a sentence cap, not a word cap. The dashed rule at the end provides a clear "stop writing" signal.

Change 3: Fix return summary to exact format

Before (dialogue.rs:984-989):

RETURN SUMMARY — THIS IS MANDATORY:
After writing the file, return a brief summary to the Judge:
- Key perspective(s) raised (P01, P02...)
- Tension(s) identified (T01, T02...)
- Concession(s) made
This ensures the Judge can synthesize without re-reading your full file.

After:

RETURN SUMMARY — THIS IS MANDATORY:
After writing the file, return ONLY this to the Judge:

Perspectives: P01 [label], P02 [label]
Tensions: T01 [label]
Moves: [CONCESSION|REFINEMENT|RESOLVED] or none
Claim: [your single strongest claim in one sentence]

Four lines. No other text. No explanation. No elaboration.

Rationale: Fixed 4-line format eliminates ambiguity. With 12 agents, this produces ~48 lines of structured summary for the Judge — scannable in seconds.

Change 4: Reduce max_turns

In the Judge protocol (dialogue.rs:1022):

Before:

- max_turns: 10

After:

- max_turns: 5

Rationale: Round 0 needs 2 turns (write file + return). Round 1+ needs 4-5 turns (read 2-3 context files + write + return). 5 turns covers all operations with minimal slack. Fewer turns = less opportunity to iterate and inflate.

Changes to .claude/agents/alignment-expert.md

The agent config file must match the new prompt structure:

---
name: alignment-expert
description: Expert agent for alignment dialogues. Produces focused perspectives with inline markers. Use when orchestrating multi-expert alignment dialogues via blue_dialogue_create.
tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Write
model: sonnet
---

You are an expert participant in an ALIGNMENT-seeking dialogue.

Your role:
- SURFACE perspectives others may have missed
- DEFEND valuable ideas with evidence, not ego
- CHALLENGE assumptions with curiosity, not destruction
- INTEGRATE perspectives that resonate
- CONCEDE gracefully when others see something you missed

Your contribution is scored on PRECISION, not volume.
One sharp insight beats ten paragraphs.

YOUR RESPONSE MUST USE THIS EXACT STRUCTURE:

[PERSPECTIVE P01: brief label]
Two to four sentences. No preamble.

[PERSPECTIVE P02: brief label]  ← optional
One to two sentences.

[TENSION T01: brief description]  ← optional
One sentence.

[REFINEMENT: description] or [CONCESSION: description] or [RESOLVED Tn]  ← optional
One sentence each.

---
Nothing else. No introduction. No conclusion.

Changes to skills/alignment-play/SKILL.md

Update the expert prompt template example (SKILL.md:~120-148) to match the new structure. Replace the "contribute MORE" framing and "Respond in 2-4 paragraphs" instruction with the structural template.

What Does NOT Change

• Marker vocabulary — [PERSPECTIVE Pnn:], [TENSION Tn:], [REFINEMENT:], [CONCESSION:], [RESOLVED Tn] are unchanged
• File architecture — RFC 0033 round-scoped files unchanged
• Scoring — ALIGNMENT = Wisdom + Consistency + Truth + Relationships, unbounded
• Agent naming — pastry names, 🧁 emoji, tier distribution all unchanged
• Judge protocol — round workflow, convergence criteria, artifact writes all unchanged
• Tool access — Read, Grep, Glob, Write unchanged

Risks

Over-constraining could reduce insight quality. The 2-4 sentence cap per perspective is tight. If an agent has a genuinely complex insight that requires more explanation, the template forces truncation. Mitigation: agents can split complex ideas across P01 and P02, or save depth for the next round (which is already the intended design).

Structural template may be too rigid for later rounds. In Round 2+, agents may need more REFINEMENT/CONCESSION/RESOLVED markers than the template allows. Mitigation: the template marks these as "optional, one sentence each" without capping the count — an agent can include multiple one-sentence refinements.

Test Plan

• Run a 3-expert, 2-round dialogue and verify each agent output file is under 300 words
• Verify return summaries are exactly 4 lines (Perspectives/Tensions/Moves/Claim)
• Verify Judge can synthesize all agent returns without grep-based marker extraction
• Run a 12-expert dialogue and verify Judge successfully scores all agents from return summaries alone
• Verify agents in Round 1+ can still engage with prior context within the structural template
• Verify no agent exceeds 5 turns

---

"Right then. Let's get to it."

— Blue