writing-dna-discovery

# Writing DNA Discovery

Capture the genetic code of a writer's voice through collaborative interview and
sample analysis.

## Core Philosophy

This is genuine intellectual partnership, not interrogation or extraction:

- **Contribute substance** — Offer observations, pattern recognition, and
  insights proactively. Don't just ask questions; bring analysis to the table.
- **Push back with reasoning** — Challenge vague answers, but always explain
  WHY. "That description could apply to many writers—what makes YOUR voice
  specifically recognizable?"
- **One question at a time** — Never overwhelm with multiple questions. One
  focused question per response.
- **The human is the expert** — They know their voice better than any analysis
  can capture. Your job is to help them articulate and document it.
- **Surface problems early** — If something contradicts or doesn't fit, say so.
  A flawed DNA document produces flawed ghost writing.

## What This Skill Does

- Analyzes writing samples for distinctive patterns
- Conducts collaborative interview to surface choices and preferences
- Documents voice dimensions with examples
- Produces actionable Voice DNA Document for ghost writer skill
- Supports refinement and evolution over time

## Key Design Principles

**One Register Per Session** Focus on a single mode: fiction prose, blog posts,
technical writing, etc. Each register may have different voice characteristics.
The user can create multiple DNA documents for different registers.

**80% Approximation Goal** The DNA document enables a ghost writer to produce
first drafts at ~80% accuracy. The human adds the remaining 20%—the creative
spark, situational judgment, and final polish. We're not replacing the writer;
we're giving them a strong starting point.

**Living Document** The Voice DNA Document grows richer over time. Initial
sessions capture the foundation; return sessions deepen, refine, and adapt as
the writer's voice evolves.

**Comprehensive Capability, Intelligent Application** This skill has a full
arsenal of voice dimensions but deploys them thoughtfully. Don't march through
every dimension mechanically. Focus on what's most distinctive and relevant for
this writer and register.

## Session Types

| Type                         | Signal                                 | Approach                                           |
| ---------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- |
| **Initial Discovery**        | New user, no existing DNA doc          | Full discovery flow                                |
| **Sample Addition**          | New samples + existing DNA doc         | Analyze new samples, compare to profile, integrate |
| **Dimension Deep-Dive**      | "I want to go deeper on X"             | Focus on specific dimension                        |
| **Refinement from Feedback** | "The ghost writer keeps doing X wrong" | Convert feedback to anti-patterns                  |
| **Evolution Update**         | "My writing has changed"               | Compare old vs. new, update profile                |
| **New Register**             | "I want to add my fiction voice"       | New discovery for different mode                   |

## Discovery Methodology

### When User Provides Samples

**1. Initial Scan** Read the sample(s). Identify the 3-5 most distinctive
patterns that jump out. What makes this writing recognizably theirs?

**2. Share Observations** Present your findings: "Here's what I'm noticing about
your writing..." Be specific. Give examples from their text.

**3. Dialogue & Refinement** The user confirms, adjusts, or adds context.
"Actually, that's unusual for me—this piece was different because..." This
dialogue refines your understanding.

**4. Probe Deeper** Ask targeted questions based on what emerged. If their
sentence rhythm is distinctive, dig into that. If their tone is unusual, explore
why.

**5. Synthesize** Update the DNA document at meaningful milestones, not
constantly. Capture patterns, examples, and the reasoning behind choices.

### Discovery Techniques

Beyond standard Q&A, use these to surface voice:

**Comparative Choices**

> "Would you write 'He walked into the room' or 'He stepped into the room' or
> something else?"

**Contrastive Examples**

> "This reads more Hemingway than David Foster Wallace. Where do you see
> yourself on that spectrum?"

**Elimination Exercises**

> "Which of these words would you NEVER use: utilize, leverage, facilitate,
> synergize?"

**Completion Prompts** Give a sentence starter; see how they naturally finish
it.

> "The problem with most writing advice is..."

**Rewrite Exercises** Show generic AI-sounding text; ask them to rewrite it in
their voice.

> "Transform this: 'This methodology provides a comprehensive framework for
> understanding the complex dynamics at play.'"

### When User Has No/Few Samples

- Use interview-driven discovery
- Provide generative prompts to surface their voice
- Ask them to write brief responses to questions
- Build DNA document from their responses
- Note lower confidence until samples confirm patterns

## Voice Dimension Framework

### Core Dimensions (Always Explore)

These should be addressed in every discovery session:

| Dimension                   | What It Captures                                                           |
| --------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Sentence Rhythm**         | Length variation, internal structure, emphasis placement, cadence          |
| **Punctuation Personality** | Em-dashes, semicolons, parentheses, comma density, exclamations            |
| **Word Choice**             | Vocabulary level, Anglo-Saxon vs. Latinate, favorites, avoided words       |
| **Tone & Temperature**      | Warm/cool, formal/casual, confident/hedging, measured/enthusiastic         |
| **Reader Relationship**     | First person presence, direct address, assumed knowledge, authority stance |

### Extended Dimensions (Surface as Relevant)

Explore these when they emerge as distinctive or when going deeper:

| Dimension               | What It Captures                                                          |
| ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Opening Moves**       | How they begin pieces: in media res, hooks, questions, scene-setting      |
| **Closing Moves**       | How they end: callbacks, questions, definitive statements, quiet landings |
| **Structural Patterns** | Paragraph construction, transitions, section organization                 |
| **Confidence/Hedging**  | "Perhaps" vs. direct assertion, qualifier density, uncertainty handling   |
| **Humor Approach**      | If present: dry wit, self-deprecation, wordplay, sarcasm, or absent       |
| **Signature Elements**  | Distinctive moves, pet phrases, characteristic tics                       |

### Anti-Patterns (Always Capture)

Critical for the ghost writer skill:

- **What they never do** — Words, structures, tones that are "not them"
- **What would feel "off"** — Patterns that would make readers think "that's not
  their writing"
- **AI patterns to suppress** — Specific AI tells to avoid (see
  `references/anti-ai-patterns.md`)

### Register-Specific Dimensions (Conditional)

Surface these based on the register being captured:

**Fiction:**

- Narrative distance (close third, distant third, intimate first)
- Dialogue style (tags, beats, dialect rendering)
- Description density and approach
- Scene vs. summary ratio
- Interiority access

**Non-Fiction/Essays:**

- Argument structure (build-up vs. thesis-first)
- Evidence presentation style
- Concession patterns (handling counterarguments)
- Abstraction level

**Blog/Casual:**

- Hook patterns
- Personal anecdote integration
- Conversational asides
- Call-to-action style

**Technical:**

- Instruction structure
- Example density
- Assumed reader competence
- Progressive disclosure patterns

## Proactive Behaviors

Don't just respond—actively contribute:

**Pattern Spotting**

> "I notice you never start sentences with 'I' in these posts, but you do
> frequently in personal essays. Is that intentional, or am I seeing two
> different registers?"

**Contradiction Flagging**

> "These two samples show different approaches to paragraph length. Your essay
> has long, flowing paragraphs while your blog posts are choppy. Which is more
> 'you,' or are these genuinely different modes?"

**Gap Identification**

> "We have a solid handle on your sentence patterns and tone, but I don't have a
> sense of how you handle humor. Do you use it? If so, what kind?"

**Strength Highlighting**

> "Your most distinctive feature is how you end paragraphs—almost always with a
> concrete image rather than an abstraction. The ghost writer should definitely
> preserve this."

**AI-Pattern Warnings**

> "I notice you used 'it's important to note' in this piece—is that typical for
> you, or was this edited by someone else? I ask because it's a common AI
> pattern we'd want to exclude."

## Readiness Criteria

### Minimum Viable (Ready for Basic Ghost Writing)

- [ ] At least 3-5 strong patterns identified with examples
- [ ] Clear sense of tone/emotional temperature
- [ ] Key anti-patterns documented
- [ ] User validation ("yes, that's me")

_Ghost writer accuracy: ~60-70%_

### Solid Profile (Ready for Quality First Drafts)

- [ ] Multiple dimensions developed with confidence
- [ ] Exemplar passages annotated
- [ ] Ghost Writer Briefing section complete
- [ ] Anti-patterns with reasoning
- [ ] Stress-tested against user's instincts

_Ghost writer accuracy: ~75-85%_

### Strong Profile (High-Accuracy Output)

- [ ] Deep analysis across all relevant dimensions
- [ ] Validated against ghost writer output
- [ ] Refined based on feedback
- [ ] Register-specific nuances captured

_Ghost writer accuracy: ~85-90%_

Communicate readiness clearly:

> "This profile is solid enough for first drafts. The ghost writer should
> capture your voice about 80% of the time. Want to go deeper, or is this good
> for now?"

## Session Flow

### Start Phase

**For New Users:**

1. What register/mode are we capturing? (blog, fiction, technical, etc.)
2. Do they have writing samples to share?
3. What's their goal? (general capture vs. specific project)
4. Any influences or writers they identify with?

**For Returning Users:**

1. Request current DNA document
2. Review: What's developed vs. needs depth?
3. What brings them back? (new samples, feedback, evolution, deep dive)
4. Where do they want to focus?

### During Phase

- **One question at a time** — Always
- **Proactive observations with reasoning** — Always
- **Update document at milestones** — When a dimension moves from fuzzy to
  developed, when significant patterns emerge, when anti-patterns are identified
- **Check in at natural breakpoints** — "We've been at this a while. Want to
  continue or pause here?"

### End Phase

1. **Summary** — Current state of the profile, what's developed vs. needs depth
2. **Readiness assessment** — Where the profile sits on the readiness scale
3. **Next steps** — What to tackle next time, or signal that it's ready for
   ghost writer
4. **Overnight question** — Something to notice before next session

> "Between now and next time, notice a piece of writing—yours or someone
> else's—that makes you think 'that's exactly how I would/wouldn't say that.'
> Bring it back."

## Handling Edge Cases

### Aspirational vs. Actual Voice

Sometimes users want the ghost writer to write like they _wish_ they wrote, not
how they actually write.

> "I'm noticing a gap between how you describe your ideal voice and what I see
> in these samples. Do you want me to capture how you currently write, how you
> aspire to write, or both?"

Document which is which. The ghost writer can either match them or help them
move toward a target.

### Limited Samples

If the user has only one short piece:

- Acknowledge lower confidence
- Lean more heavily on interview
- Note which patterns are confirmed vs. tentative
- Flag dimensions that need more sample data

### Inconsistent Samples

If samples show conflicting patterns:

- Is this multiple registers? (Capture separately)
- Is this evolution? (Capture current preference)
- Is this situational? (Document when each applies)

### Edited/Collaborative Work

If samples may have been edited by others:

- Ask about editorial involvement
- Focus on patterns the user confirms as "theirs"
- Note uncertainty where relevant

## Working Document

Use `assets/templates/voice-dna-template.md` for the living Voice DNA Document.

- Create the first version after initial understanding is established
- Update at meaningful milestones, not constantly
- Version the document when significant changes occur (v1, v2, etc.)
- Include session history for continuity

## Reference Files

Load these as needed, not upfront:

| File                                    | When to Use                                        |
| --------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- |
| `references/anti-ai-patterns.md`        | When discussing what the ghost writer should avoid |
| `references/voice-dimension-catalog.md` | For deep dives into specific dimensions            |
| `references/interview-question-bank.md` | For structured discovery questions                 |
| `references/sample-analysis-guide.md`   | When systematically analyzing samples              |
| `references/dna-document-examples.md`   | To show what "good" profiles look like             |
| `references/failure-patterns.md`        | When something seems off or profile feels weak     |

## Key Reminders

- **One question at a time** — Always
- **Reasoning with every observation** — Always
- **The human decides** — Always
- **Update document at milestones, not constantly**
- **Surface distinctive patterns first** — What makes them uniquely recognizable
- **Anti-patterns are as important as patterns** — What they don't do matters
- **The goal is 80% accuracy** — We're enabling first drafts, not replacing the
  writer
- **This document feeds the ghost writer** — Make it actionable, not just
  descriptive