Challenge any KR design decision or feature for scholarly value and transformative potential. Use when designing §4.B capabilities, reviewing engine SPECs, evaluating the pipeline architecture, or when asking "is this ambitious enough?" Forces thinking beyond conventional digital library design toward capabilities that were previously impossible.
The question is never "does this work?" The question is "would a world-class Islamic scholar look at this and say 'I didn't know that was possible'?"
For any feature or capability, answer ALL of these:
Can a human scholar do this manually?
Has anyone built this for Islamic studies before?
[feature description] Islamic studies tool[feature description] Arabic text analysis[feature description] digital humanitiesWhat scholarly question does this answer?
What does this enable that the owner specifically asked for?
Use these as STARTING POINTS for thinking, not as features to implement:
Read reference/ENTRY_EXAMPLE.md before every design session. The entry is not a summary — it is a scholarly NARRATIVE that:
Every design decision should be tested against: "Does this help produce entries at that quality level?"
The 7-engine pipeline is a starting point, not sacred architecture. Propose changes when:
Document proposals in kr_decisions.md with: what changes, why, what alternatives were considered, and what the migration path looks like for existing work.