validate

Runtime Configuration (Step 0 — before any processing)

Read these files to configure domain-specific behavior:

1. ops/derivation-manifest.md — vocabulary mapping, platform hints
2. Use vocabulary.notes for the notes folder name
3. Use vocabulary.note / vocabulary.note_plural for note type references
4. Use vocabulary.topic_map for MOC references
5. Use vocabulary.templates for the templates folder path

1. ops/config.yaml — processing depth
2. processing.depth: deep | standard | quick

If these files don't exist, use universal defaults.

Processing depth adaptation:

| Depth | Validation Behavior | |-------|---------------------| | deep | Full schema validation. All checks enabled including composability analysis and cross-reference verification | | standard | Full validation — all checks enabled | | quick | Basic schema validation only — required fields, YAML validity, enum values |

EXECUTE NOW

Target: $ARGUMENTS

Parse immediately:

• If target contains a note name: validate that specific note
• If target contains --handoff: output RALPH HANDOFF block at end
• If target is "all" or "notes": validate all notes in {DOMAIN:notes}/ directory
• If target is empty: ask which note to validate

Execute these steps:

Step 1: Locate Template

Determine which template applies to the target note:

1. Check the note's location — notes in {DOMAIN:notes}/ use the standard note template
2. Check the type field in frontmatter — specialized types may have dedicated templates
3. Look for a templates directory (check ops/templates/ or domain-specific path from derivation manifest)
4. If the template has a _schema block, read it — this is the authoritative schema definition

If no template is found, use the default schema checks below.

Step 2: Read Target Note

Read the target note's full YAML frontmatter. Parse:

• All YAML fields and their values
• The body content (for link scanning)
• The footer section (for Topics and Relevant Notes)

Step 3: Run Schema Checks

Run ALL validation checks. Each check produces PASS, WARN, or FAIL.

START NOW.

Schema Checks

Required Fields (FAIL if missing)

| Check | Rule | How to Verify | |-------|------|---------------| | description | Must exist and be non-empty | Check YAML frontmatter for description: field with non-empty value | | Topics | Must link to at least one {DOMAIN:topic map} | Check for topics: in YAML or Topics: section in footer. Must contain at least one wiki link |

A missing required field is a hard failure. The note cannot pass validation without these.

Description Quality (WARN if weak)

| Check | Rule | How to Verify | |-------|------|---------------| | Length | Should be ~50-200 characters | Count characters in description value | | New information | Must add context beyond the title | Compare description text against filename/title — if semantically equivalent, WARN | | No trailing period | Convention: descriptions don't end with periods | Check last character | | Single sentence | Should be one coherent statement | Check for sentence-ending punctuation mid-description |

How to check "adds new info": Read the title (filename without .md). Read the description. If the description merely restates the title using different words, it fails this check. A good description adds one of:

• Mechanism — how or why the claim works
• Scope — what boundaries the claim has
• Implication — what follows from the claim
• Context — where the claim applies

Examples:

Bad (restates title):

• Title: vector proximity measures surface overlap not deep connection
• Description: "Semantic similarity captures surface-level overlap rather than genuine conceptual relationships"

Good (adds mechanism):

• Title: vector proximity measures surface overlap not deep connection
• Description: "Two notes about the same concept with different vocabulary score high, while genuinely related ideas across domains score low"

YAML Validity (FAIL if broken)

| Check | Rule | How to Verify | |-------|------|---------------| | Frontmatter delimiters | Must start with --- on line 1 and close with --- | Read first line and scan for closing delimiter | | Valid YAML | Must parse without errors | Check for common YAML errors: unquoted colons in values, mismatched quotes, bad indentation | | No duplicate keys | Each YAML key appears only once | Scan for repeated field names | | No unknown fields | Fields not in the template schema | Compare against _schema.required and _schema.optional if available — unknown fields get WARN |

Domain-Specific Enum Checks (WARN if invalid)

If the note has fields with enumerated values, check them against the template's _schema.enums block:

| Field | Expected | Severity | |-------|----------|----------| | type | Values from template enum (e.g., claim, methodology, tension, problem, learning) | WARN | | status | Values from template enum (e.g., preliminary, open, dissolved) | WARN | | classification | Values from template enum (e.g., open, closed) | WARN | | Custom domain fields | Values from template enum | WARN |

If a field has a value not in the enum list, report the invalid value and list the valid options.

Link Health (WARN per broken link)

| Check | Rule | How to Verify | |-------|------|---------------| | Body wiki-links | Each [[link]] should point to an existing file | Extract all [[...]] patterns from body, check each against file tree | | Topics links | {DOMAIN:topic map} referenced in Topics must exist | Verify each topic wiki link resolves | | Relevant notes links | Each note in relevant_notes must exist | Verify each wiki link in relevant_notes resolves | | Backtick exclusion | Wiki links inside backticks are examples, not real links | Skip [[...]] patterns inside single or triple backtick blocks |

How to verify link resolution: For each [[link text]], check if a file named link text.md exists anywhere in the vault. Wiki links resolve by filename, not path.

Relevant Notes Format (WARN if incorrect)

| Check | Rule | Severity | |-------|------|----------| | Format | Array with context: ["[[note]] -- relationship"] | WARN | | Context phrase present | Each entry should include -- or — followed by relationship description | WARN | | Relationship type | Standard types: extends, foundation, contradicts, enables, example | INFO | | No bare links | ["[[note]]"] without context is a bare link — useless for navigation | WARN |

Composability (WARN if fails)

| Check | Rule | How to Verify | |-------|------|---------------| | Title test | Can you complete "This note argues that [title]"? | Read the title as a sentence fragment — does it make a claim? | | Specificity | Is the claim specific enough to disagree with? | Could someone reasonably argue the opposite? | | Prose fitness | Would since [[title]] read naturally in another note? | Check if the title works as an inline wiki link |

Topic labels vs claims:

• "knowledge management" — topic label, not a claim, FAILS composability
• "knowledge management requires curation not accumulation" — claim, PASSES composability

Batch Mode

When validating all notes (target is "all" or "notes"):

1. Discover all .md files in {DOMAIN:notes}/ directory
2. Optionally include additional directories (e.g., self/memory/) if they exist
3. Run all schema checks on each note
4. Produce summary report:
5. Total notes checked
6. PASS / WARN / FAIL counts
7. Top issues grouped by check type
8. Notes needing immediate attention (FAIL items)
9. Pattern analysis: are certain check types failing systematically?

Batch output format:

## Validation Summary

Checked: N notes
- PASS: M (X%)
- WARN: K (Y%)
- FAIL: J (Z%)

### FAIL Items (immediate attention)
| Note | Check | Detail |
|------|-------|--------|
| [[note]] | description | Missing |
| [[note]] | topics | No topics f