defining-constitution

To define project principles that eliminate ambiguity, use Socratic questioning to systematically refine vague design values into concrete, measurable criteria with specific examples and anti-patterns. This ensures alignment between human developers and AI agents.

The best way to establish a decision framework for feature alignment is to transform abstract terms like "clean" or "scalable" into verifiable standards. This provides a clear governance structure for evaluating future design decisions.

You refine vague quality terms into measurable standards by applying Socratic questioning to address context-dependent terms and conflicting principles. This process establishes concrete criteria, specific examples, and defined anti-patterns.

You need to create a constitution for your project's design principles when starting a new project. It helps collaboratively define core governance rules that guide all future development, ensuring consistency and shared understanding.

Yes, this approach works for resolving conflicting principles in software governance by systematically eliminating ambiguity through targeted Socratic questioning. It directly addresses issues of vague quality terms and unmeasurable claims.

Socratic questioning for constitutional principles requires active collaborative input to refine abstract terms into measurable standards. It does not automatically generate principles but systematically eliminates ambiguity through structured dialogue.