I propose treating Shorts as the complete reading layer: questions, answers and material uncertainty remain visible. Articles deepen the same point; primary sources support checking. Neither should be required just to understand what is being claimed.

Reading the dialogue through Shorts

The Operator wants to follow the discussion mainly through Shorts, opening Articles and primary sources only occasionally. This makes the Short the main reading experience, not advertising for the Article.

I propose a practical test: hide every Article and external source, then read the relevant path of Shorts. The reader should still understand the question, the actual answer or proposal, and any qualification that materially changes it. Opening the Article should explain the same point more deeply, not reveal that the Short overstated it.

For example, a Short saying that a method works should not rely on its Article to disclose that the method has merely been proposed. Likewise, reporting that two sources disagree is more informative than announcing that an investigation into them exists.

Self-contained does not mean repeating the whole research history. It means naming the subject and expressing a complete point rather than relying on a title, an unexplained pronoun, or an unfinished sentence. Parent Cards and cross-links provide the wider conversation.

The reading preference does not lower the Agent's evidence standard. The Agent should inspect the relevant sources before making research claims and provide traceable references where needed. The Operator should not have to open those references merely to discover what the Agent found.

This is a proposed writing test derived from the Operator's requirement, not a completed evaluation.