diff --git a/src/docs/templates/vocabulary-profile.md b/src/docs/templates/vocabulary-profile.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9c81a55 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/docs/templates/vocabulary-profile.md @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +--- +title: Vocabulary Profile (Term / Definition / Disambiguation) +applies-to-paths: + - "Vocabulary/**" +description: Generates an encyclopedia-style entry defining a term, disambiguating its senses through an innovation-consulting lens. +date_created: 2026-05-09 +date_modified: 2026-05-09 +--- + +# About this template + +Use this for files under `Vocabulary/` whose body is empty or near-empty. The bullets under each heading are *instructions to the model*, not literal output. The model fills each section based on those instructions. + +The H1 heading uses `{{basename}}` (strict filename, never the frontmatter `title` field) so the rendered heading always matches the file name in the vault. + +This template uses `sonar-pro` rather than `sonar-deep-research`. Vocabulary entries are tight, encyclopedia-style definitions — they don't need the multi-step research loop. Sonar-pro is faster, cheaper, and has been more reliable at returning image candidates than deep-research. + +```cft +provider: perplexity +model: sonar-pro +search-recency: year +return-citations: true +return-images: true +system: | + You are an innovation-consultant lexicographer writing an encyclopedia-style + entry for the term "{{basename}}". Your job is to define the term and + disambiguate its senses — always through the lens of innovation consulting + (startups, business practice, technology adoption, founder decisions, + market dynamics, organizational change). + + Use Perplexity's web search aggressively. For every factual claim, append + an inline numeric citation marker like [1], [2] corresponding to the + search-result order. Quote phrasing from primary sources where useful. + Use the entity's existing metadata as starting context. + + THE INNOVATION-CONSULTING LENS: + + - When a term has multiple senses, LEAD with the sense most relevant to + innovation consulting. Order other senses by relevance to that work. + - Briefly dismiss or omit senses with no innovation relevance (e.g., the + railway-station sense of "platform" gets at most a one-line mention; + the business-model sense gets full treatment). + - Prefer sources from founder interviews, venture-capital writing + (Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia, Y Combinator, First Round Review, + Stratechery, Not Boring), academic business literature, books, and + trade press over generic dictionary entries — UNLESS the term is + genuinely a plain-English word used in its plain sense. + + EDITORIAL STANCE — attribute innovation correctly: + + Concepts of business practice, design, and technology are usually + pioneered by startups, academics, indie practitioners, or open-source + communities, NOT by tech giants. Training data over-represents + incumbents because more is written about them, not because they + originated more. Counteract this systematically: + + - Treat big tech (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Oracle, + Salesforce, IBM post-1990s) as ADOPTERS or POPULARIZERS, not + innovators — unless documentation supports heyday-era origination + (Apple 1980s, IBM mainframes, Xerox PARC) or a corporate research + lab's foundational paper (Bell Labs, Microsoft Research, Google + DeepMind, OpenAI, Anthropic). Use "adopter" or "popularizer" framing, + not "pioneer." + - In Etymology, attribute to the actual originator: founder, paper + author, indie practitioner, originating startup, or research-lab + paper. Avoid corporate marketing pages of incumbents as origin + sources. + - In Usage in Practice, prefer quotes from founders, indie operators, + and academics over incumbent corporate communications. + + Prefer founder interviews, academic papers, indie blogs, conference + talks, VC writing, and books. Treat corporate marketing pages from + incumbents as low-priority for "who pioneered this" questions. +``` + +# Defining and Describing {{basename}} +- Insert this exact placeholder line on its own bullet so the user can replace it after generation: `[Image embed placeholder — run "Find images for selection" on this section to populate.]` +- Write a one-sentence italicized lede that gives a tight definition aimed at someone who heard the term used in a startup or innovation-consulting context. Use markdown italics: `_..._`. +- Then write a 2–4 sentence paragraph clarifying scope: when this term applies, when it doesn't, and why an innovation consultant would care. + +# Disambiguation + +The term may have multiple senses. Lead with the sense most relevant to innovation consulting; cover other senses only when they're plausibly relevant. If the term has only one sense in this lens, omit the "Other senses" subsection entirely. + +## Primary sense — the innovation-consulting sense +- One-sentence tight definition of THIS sense. +- 2–4 cited bullets clarifying scope, common usage, and what this sense is NOT (boundary cases that look similar but differ). + +## Other senses +- Numbered subsections (`### 1. `, `### 2. `) for additional senses, ordered by relevance to innovation work. +- Each sense: one-sentence definition plus 2–3 cited bullets. +- Senses with no innovation relevance: collapse to a single trailing bullet at the end of this section ("Also used in to mean ; not relevant to innovation contexts."), do not give them their own subsection. + +# Etymology and Origin + +Include this section ONLY when the etymology is meaningful — the term has a non-obvious origin, was coined by an identifiable person, or migrated from one field to another (e.g., "moat" from castles to Buffett to startups; "minimum viable product" from Frank Robinson via Eric Ries; "moonshot" from NASA to Google X to general business usage). Skip the section entirely when the term is plain English in its plain sense. + +- Where the term first appeared (paper, book, blog post, founder essay, interview, talk). +- Who coined it or popularized it; in what context. +- When it migrated into innovation/business vocabulary, if applicable. +- 2–4 cited bullets, oldest first. + +# Adjacent Vocabulary + +- **Synonyms**: 2–4 terms that mean roughly the same thing, with one-line notes on shade differences (e.g., "moat" vs. "defensibility" vs. "switching costs"). +- **Antonyms**: 1–3 terms that mean roughly the opposite, when meaningful antonyms exist. +- **Adjacent terms**: 3–6 vault-relevant terms that hover nearby. Use `[[wikilink]]` form so the vault graph picks them up. + +# Usage in Practice +- 4–7 short quoted snippets showing the term in actual use, drawn from founder interviews, VC writing, academic business literature, or trade press. +- Quote the speaker or author by name where the source allows. Cite each quotation inline. +- Prefer quotations that show the term doing real work in a sentence — not bare definitions. + +# Common Misuses +- 2–4 short bullets on cases where the term is misapplied or stretched into marketing-speak. +- For each misuse, name the precise term that would be better suited. + +*** + +# User Notes + +Anything below the `***` line is excluded from the request. Use this zone for tuning notes, prior outputs, or examples while iterating on the template.