Skip to content

draft-augmenter

Augment an existing draft post-hoc on instruction — "add more quotes for this case", "beef up Part 6", "find authority for X", "deepen the application" — by re-opening the matter corpora, inserting verbatim pinpointed passages, respecting the [UNVERIFIED] discipline, and re-running the register audit. Use when the user asks to add quotes, authorities, examples or depth to a draft after it is written.

Source: .opencode/skills/draft-augmenter/SKILL.md — site rebuilt 2026-09-05.

draft-augmenter

Post-draft augmentation loop. Takes the user's instruction, the draft and the matter corpora; inserts verbatim passages with confirmed pinpoints; preserves the draft's structure and register; re-audits register and sources afterwards. It AUGMENTS — it never rewrites the draft's argument wholesale, and it never edits source documents.

Workflow

  1. Parse the instruction. Target (section / case / proposition) and intent:
  2. "more quotes for case X" → verbatim extracts from X's own judgment/determination text;
  3. "beef up section Y" → expand Y with supporting authority and application;
  4. "find authority for Z" → locate authority for the stated proposition (case-law skill standards apply: confirmed paragraph + context);

  5. "deepen the comparison" → pair authorities already cited with close analogues from the corpora. If the instruction is ambiguous (target or intent unclear), ASK before touching the draft.

  6. Locate the source. Matter folder corpora, Research_Notes corpora (e.g. SSDT_Full_Catalog — pages/ html, 01_Text/ txt, pdfs/), case-law outputs, scotcourts downloads. For a case, prefer the judgment/determination text itself, not summaries or catalog snippets.

  7. Select. Candidate passages must be:

  8. VERBATIM (quote exactly; ellipses only where the verbatim-ocr standards allow; never paraphrase inside quotation marks);
  9. PINPOINTED (paragraph/page confirmed in the source);
  10. on-point for the target section's proposition. If a passage cannot be pinpointed, insert it with the [UNVERIFIED] marker and log it — never silently.

3.5 Proposition-fit audit (before insertion). A verbatim quote from the right paragraph can still mis-state the case. Before inserting, check what the passage IS: a holding, a recorded submission, or counsel's argument? Recorded submissions quoted verbatim in judgments are not holdings (YSL 85 was a strike-out ground — the holding sits at [234]/[238]; Camden [44] was counsel's submission and the point was rejected). Check the case's outcome and which limbs succeeded (AB v BTP [90]–[94]: award upheld on the Art 8 ground, the accuracy limb having failed). If the passage does not carry the proposition as stated in the draft, re-point it or re-frame the draft — do not force the quote. Case-law skill, lesson 2026-08-12.

  1. Insert surgically. Edit only the target section; match the draft's existing structure (hanging paragraphs, numbering, footnote conventions); keep the passage in the section's register (FACT vs ARGUMENT — never mix); add the footnote reference if the draft uses footnotes. Do not renumber or reorder anything outside the target.

  2. Post-audit.

  3. Run the fact-checker subagent (.opencode/agent/fact-checker.md) on every inserted passage and on the target section: who said it, which document and date, verbatim text, context/status (concession vs characterization vs submission vs holding), and whether the proposition follows. Nothing is shown with a FAIL verdict. Worked example (2026-08-12): "records as a narrative fact" was drafted as a defender concession; it is the pursuer's own characterization in his 15 January 2026 letter.
  4. Update the Sources line: what was added, from where, verification date.
  5. Re-run the register scorer on the changed sections (python .opencode/skills/bieber-scale/tools/bieber_scorer.py --file <draft> with the bieber venv at C:\Users\antho\AppData\Local\Temp\opencode\bieber_venv\Scripts\python.exe); update the register self-check table if sentence counts changed.
  6. Report: what was added, verbatim from where, and what remains [UNVERIFIED].

Hard rules

  • Never fabricate quotes, pinpoints or citations; every inserted quote must exist in the source text.
  • Never edit source documents — the draft is the only file that changes.
  • Never reorder or delete existing sections unless instructed.
  • Never upgrade an [UNVERIFIED] marker without verification; the marker convention is the draft's only protection against unverified reliance.

Self-learning

Append lessons (which augmentation requests worked, common failure modes, corpus pitfalls) to learnings.md.