My AI writing setup's first rule is: don't write
I'm drafting a very old sci-fi novel of mine with Claude Code. Four scenes in. More excited about a creative project than I've been in years โ and the reason isn't the speed. It's that the workspace is built to refuse. Setup: a folder called `writing-room`. Eight stages, from premise to compilation, each one a markdown directory the AI loads only when it's relevant. Compass, world, characters, structure, voice, writing, revision, compilation. The first rule, hardcoded in `CLAUDE.md`: > Before generating prose, always load `voz.md` and `padroes-prosa.md`. Without these two, refuse the writing task and ask the author to do Stage 05 first. Translation: the AI cannot draft a scene until I've locked in the voice. And `voz.md` was reverse-engineered from scenes I wrote by hand. The voice is mine. The AI only gets to extend it. There's also a file called `padroes-prosa.md` โ 9 anti-AI-slope techniques. Verbalized sampling. Fragmentation. Character voice. Rare vocabulary. Every generated scene must apply at least 3, and the reviser uses the same file as a checklist. What this changes in practice: - I don't fight AI prose. I gate it. - Each stage loads minimum context. The AI doesn't drown in 200k tokens of worldbuilding to draft one scene. - After every scene, a `cronista` skill updates a canon file. Continuity stays cheap. - I'm the bottleneck on voice. I'm fine with that. The transferable bit, if you build with AI: The most useful thing your workflow can do is sometimes say no. Refusing to act without the right inputs forces you to produce those inputs โ and that's where your taste enters the system. Without that gate, the AI averages you out. Toward the median sentence. The median plot beat. The median version of you. A friend of mine said that "in order to have a second brain, you need to have a primary working brain". I laughed: true enough. I wanted to build the gate first. Then let it write. And I'm loving it.