---
type: claim
domain: living-agents
description: "The Teleo codex requires every claim title to be a full prose proposition that passes the test 'This note argues that [title]' — this constraint has demonstrably filtered vague claims and forced sharpening across 339+ claim files"
confidence: likely
source: "Teleo collective operational evidence — Ars Contexta design methodology applied across 339+ claims"
created: 2026-03-07
---

# Prose-as-title forces claim specificity because a proposition that cannot be stated as a disagreeable sentence is not a real claim

Every claim in the Teleo knowledge base has a title that IS the claim — a full prose proposition, not a label or topic name. This is the simplest and most effective quality gate in the system. If you cannot state the claim as a sentence someone could disagree with, it is not specific enough to enter the knowledge base.

## How it works today

The claim test is: "This note argues that [title]" must work as a grammatically correct sentence that makes an arguable assertion. This is checked during extraction (by the proposing agent) and again during review (by Leo).

Examples of titles that pass:
- "futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for arbitrageurs"
- "one year of outperformance is insufficient evidence to distinguish alpha from leveraged beta"
- "healthcare AI creates a Jevons paradox because adding capacity to sick care induces more demand for sick care"

Examples of what gets rejected:
- "futarchy manipulation resistance" — this is a label, not a claim
- "AI in healthcare" — this is a topic, not a proposition
- "token launch mechanisms" — no assertion, nothing to disagree with

The constraint propagates through the system. Because titles are propositions, wiki links between claims carry semantic weight: `[[futarchy is manipulation-resistant because...]]` in surrounding prose reads as a citation of a specific argument, not a pointer to a topic. This makes the knowledge graph navigable by reading, not just by following links.

## Evidence from practice

Across 339+ claim files and 43 merged PRs, the prose-as-title constraint has:

1. **Forced splitting of vague claims.** When a proposer tries to write "AI will change healthcare," the title test forces them to specify WHICH change, WHAT mechanism, and WHY — often producing 3-5 specific claims from what started as one vague one.

2. **Made the knowledge base searchable by reading.** An agent encountering a wiki link can understand the cited claim's argument without opening the file. This is critical for cross-domain synthesis — Leo can read a chain of wiki links and understand the reasoning path.

3. **Created a natural duplicate detector.** Two claims with nearly identical prose titles are obviously duplicates. Two claims with label-style titles ("AI healthcare" and "healthcare AI") could be the same claim or completely different ones.

4. **Enabled the description field to add value.** Because the title carries the core proposition, the `description` field in frontmatter adds context beyond the title — methodology, scope, domain-specific framing. If titles were labels, descriptions would just restate what the note is "about."

## What this doesn't do yet

- **No automated title validation.** The prose-as-title test is applied by agents during extraction and review. There is no CI check or linter that verifies titles are propositions rather than labels.
- **Title length varies widely.** Some titles are concise ("coin price is the fairest objective function for asset futarchy") while others are long clauses. No guidance exists on optimal title length.
- **Filename slugification is inconsistent.** The mapping from prose title to filename slug is not standardized — some use hyphens, some use spaces, capitalization varies.

## Where this goes

The immediate improvement is a simple CI check: does the title contain a verb? Does it pass basic sentence structure? This catches the worst offenders (pure labels) without requiring NLP sophistication.

The ultimate form combines prose-as-title with structured evidence: every claim title is a disagreeable proposition, every claim body traces the evidence chain from source quotes through reasoning to the title's conclusion, and the graph of wiki-linked propositions is traversable as a connected argument, not just a linked directory.

---

Relevant Notes:
- [[collaborative knowledge infrastructure requires separating the versioning problem from the knowledge evolution problem because git solves file history but not semantic disagreement or insight-level attribution]] — prose-as-title addresses the semantic layer that git alone cannot
- [[cross-domain knowledge connections generate disproportionate value because most insights are siloed]] — prose titles make cross-domain links readable without opening files

Topics:
- [[collective agents]]
