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:

Check	How
Same concept, different claims	Compare Key Findings sections across articles that share wikilinks
Method disagreements	Check if two articles recommend different approaches for the same problem
Factual conflicts	Cross-reference dates, numbers, definitions across articles

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:

Check	How
Missing citations	Findings that don't reference a paper, session log, or decision
Vague citations	"Some studies show..." without specific references
Self-referential	Citing another knowledge article instead of a primary source

3. Missing Connections

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

Check	How
Shared keywords	Two articles mention the same method/dataset/author but don't cross-reference
Atlas connections	Atlas topic has connected_topics that don't have corresponding knowledge articles
Orphaned articles	Articles with zero incoming wikilinks from other articles

4. Staleness

Check	How
Stale articles	Last updated > 90 days ago AND project has had session activity since
Source drift	New papers in docs/literature-review/ not compiled into any article
Memory drift	New [LEARN] entries in MEMORY.md not reflected in knowledge articles
Session drift	Recent session logs mention findings not in any knowledge article

5. Coverage Gaps

Check	How
Key paper not compiled	Papers cited in paper-*/paper/*.tex but not in any knowledge article
Method not documented	Estimators/methods used in code but not explained in knowledge
Concepts mentioned but not defined	Terms used across multiple articles without a dedicated article

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/atlas-vault/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

Skill	Relationship
compile-knowledge	Run this first to build/update the wiki
store-insight	Use to fix individual gaps found by lint
atlas-coherence	Complementary — checks topic-level connections, not article-level
wiki-curate	Downstream — audits the vault concepts these articles promote into (anatomy, lifecycle, overlap)