articulation

Diagnose and fix clarity barriers in prose, code, data models, and requirements.

Updated Feb 17, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/semantic-praxis/barwise --skill articulation-semantic-praxis
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: articulation
Source: https://github.com/semantic-praxis/barwise/tree/main/.claude/skills/articulation
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/semantic-praxis/barwise --skill articulation-semantic-praxis

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Artifacts like design docs, functions, data models, and commit messages often fail to transfer ideas to their audience even when every sentence is technically correct. This Skill provides a systematic method to create clear artifacts, review existing ones for communication barriers, and turn vague stakeholder requests into precise requirements. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Creation mode: Apply the audience contract, verbalization test, and six-barrier taxonomy (buried lede, undefined term, ambiguous reference, missing bridge, wall of detail, fuzzy abstraction) as a silent quality lens while writing documents, code, and models. - Critique mode: Run a structured articulation review on an existing artifact, producing findings ordered by severity with concrete fixes and a verdict distinguishing wording, boundary, and thinking problems. - Elicitation mode: Convert vague stakeholder requests into precise requirements using critical-incident questions, barrier-matched probes, and atomic fact verbalization. - Use Case: A stakeholder says "we need a Customer type." Use elicitation mode to recover the underlying need, verbalize atomic facts like "Each Order is placed by at most one Customer," and surface undecided business decisions before modeling. ## Quick Start Ask the AI to run an articulation review on your design doc, function, or data model to identify clarity barriers and get concrete fixes.

Frequently Asked Questions about articulation

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review a document or code for clarity problems?▼

Use critique mode to run an articulation review. It reconstructs the audience contract and one-sentence verbalization, then lists each barrier found (buried lede, undefined term, ambiguous reference, missing bridge, wall of detail, fuzzy abstraction) ordered by severity with concrete suggested fixes.

How to turn a vague stakeholder request into precise requirements?▼

Use elicitation mode: start with a critical-incident question about a specific recent failure, reconstruct who experiences the problem and what they cannot do, probe using barrier-matched questions, then verbalize the requirement back as atomic sentences the stakeholder can affirm or correct.

What are the most common clarity barriers in technical writing?▼

The six barriers are buried lede, undefined term, ambiguous reference, missing bridge, wall of detail, and fuzzy abstraction. Each has a specific symptom and fix, such as stating the conclusion first or replacing fuzzy words like "flexible" with the concrete fact that motivated them.

Can this method apply to code and data models, not just prose?▼

Yes. Names act as one-word verbalizations, interfaces should be simpler than implementations, and model facts should verbalize as atomic natural-language sentences. Commit messages and PR descriptions are treated as prose artifacts subject to the full barrier taxonomy.

When should I not use an articulation review?▼

If the core idea cannot be verbalized as one plain sentence, the problem is unformed thinking, not wording. The review stops at that point because barrier-level fixes cannot rescue an artifact whose underlying idea or boundary decisions are not yet made.