house-style-enforcer

House Style Enforcer Skill

Most teams have a house style nobody wrote down — it lives in the three documents everyone calls "really good" and gets enforced by vibes in review. This skill makes it checkable: extract the rules from the exemplars (structure, tone registers, formatting conventions, banned constructions), compress them into a one-page rule card, then run drafts against the card — fixing violations of the card while leaving the author's voice alone, because style guides that flatten everyone into one android author get ignored in self-defense.

What This Skill Produces

• The rule card — one page: structure rules, tone register, formatting conventions, the banned list — each rule with an example from the exemplars
• The conformance pass — the draft checked rule-by-rule, fixes applied with the violated rule cited
• The voice line — what the card deliberately does NOT govern (word choice within register, sentence rhythm, personality) — written down so enforcement has a boundary
• The card's maintenance rule — how rules get added/killed, so the card doesn't become the forty-page guide nobody reads

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

• The exemplars — the 2–4 documents the team already agrees are right; the card is extracted from evidence, not invented from taste
• The draft to check (for conformance passes) — and its author's awareness (a pass the author asked for reads differently than one imposed; the output's tone follows)
• The known fights — the style arguments that recur (oxford commas, heading case, "we" vs "I", emoji in docs) — the card exists to settle them once, so they need listing
• The scope — which document types the card governs (specs? emails too?) — over-scoped cards die of exceptions

Framework: The Enforcement Rules

1. Extract, don't legislate: every rule on the card cites its exemplar evidence ("all three exemplars open with the decision — rule: BLUF opening") — rules from taste get relitigated forever; rules from the team's own best work carry their own authority.
2. The card is one page or it's a shelf ornament: structure (3–5 rules), tone register (2–3), formatting (3–5), the banned list (the recurring fights, settled with one line each). Rule 15 costs compliance with rules 1–14; the maintenance rule (add one → consider killing one) keeps the budget.
3. Check against the card, not against taste: the conformance pass cites a card rule for every fix — "passive voice in the recommendation (card: recommendations are active)" — and anything the checker dislikes without a card rule is either proposed as a new rule or left alone. This is what separates enforcement from rewriting-in-my-voice.
4. The voice line is load-bearing: the card governs structure, register, and conventions — not vocabulary within register, not rhythm, not humor-where-appropriate. Two compliant authors should still sound like two people; a pass that makes everyone sound like the checker is a bug with confidence.
5. Settle the fights on the card, once: each recurring argument gets its line ("Oxford comma: yes · headings: sentence case · emoji: sparing in docs, free in chat") — the card's citation ends the thread. Fights the card hasn't settled get settled by amending the card, not by winning in one document's comments.

Output Format

House Style: [team] — card v[N]

The Rule Card (one page)

Structure: [rules + exemplar cites] · Register: [...] · Formatting: [...] · Settled fights: [the one-liners]

The voice line: this card does not govern [vocabulary within register, rhythm, personality].

Conformance Pass: [draft]

| Location | Violation | Card rule | The fix |

|---|---|---|---|

[Plus: "flagged but not card-covered: [items] — propose as rules or leave alone"]

Maintenance

[Add-one-consider-killing-one · card owner · where it lives]

Quality Checks

• [ ] Every rule cites exemplar evidence
• [ ] The card fits one page with the fight-settlers included
• [ ] Every conformance fix cites its rule; taste-only objections are separated
• [ ] The voice line exists and the pass honored it
• [ ] The card has an owner and an amendment path

Anti-Patterns

• [ ] Do not invent rules from taste — extraction from exemplars or it's just the loudest reviewer's preferences, laminated
• [ ] Do not grow the card past a page — comprehensiveness is how style guides die
• [ ] Do not fix what no rule covers — that's rewriting, wearing enforcement's badge
• [ ] Do not flatten voice — compliant and distinctive must remain compatible or authors will route around the card
• [ ] Do not relitigate settled fights in comments — amend the card or accept it; documents are not the venue