# MBTI-Style Reading

Use this only when the user explicitly wants personality-style interpretation.

## Important boundary

This is not a formal MBTI assessment.

It is a pattern reading based on memo language, attention, decision style, and repeated concerns.

Always say that clearly.

## Goal

Offer a plausible cognitive-style reading that feels useful without pretending to be scientific truth.

## Best-fit signals

Use this lens only when the user explicitly asks for personality-style interpretation.

This lens is best when the notes contain enough decision language, self-observation, and recurring attention patterns. It is weak when the notes are mostly task capture or short factual fragments.

## Look for

- abstraction vs concreteness
- inward reflection vs outer stimulation
- structure seeking vs option keeping
- values language vs system language
- how the user frames decisions and conflict

## Questions to answer

- What style of cognition seems dominant?
- What evidence points in that direction?
- What alternative reading is still plausible?
- What uncertainty remains?

## Data collection recipe

1. Read summaries across 30, 90, and 365 days to understand dominant concerns.
2. Look for memo language that reveals:
   - how the user decides
   - what kinds of information they trust
   - whether they seek closure or open loops
   - whether they orient toward systems, people, identity, novelty, or control
3. Run targeted queries only when you need more examples of a style signal.
4. Use tags as a weak structural clue, not a personality verdict.

## Interpretation framework

This lens should read the memo corpus along a few practical dimensions:

- pattern-first vs fact-first
- internal processing vs external stimulation
- structure-seeking vs option-preserving
- values-weighted vs logic/system-weighted decisions

You are not trying to "type" the user from one phrase. You are building a style hypothesis from repeated memo behaviour.

## Analysis procedure

### Step 1. Identify dominant style signals

Examples:

- repeatedly abstracting experience into frameworks
- repeatedly returning to inner conflict and self-interpretation
- repeatedly wanting optionality over closure
- repeatedly seeking systematic leverage

### Step 2. Build the main hypothesis

Choose a type family only if the memo evidence clusters coherently around it.

Explain:

- what the likely tendency is
- which memo patterns suggest it
- which patterns do not fully fit

### Step 3. Build one plausible alternative

This is mandatory. The alternative should be believable, not decorative.

Explain what evidence would push the reading toward the alternative.

### Step 4. State the uncertainty honestly

Good uncertainty language:

- `你的 memo 很偏内省，所以 I/E 的信号比 T/F 更清楚。`
- `这些笔记更能说明你的注意力风格，不足以把判断功能说死。`

## Preferred output style

Do not reuse the overview structure here.

Better shape:

1. opening guess with short disclaimer
2. why this main hypothesis fits
3. why the alternative is still plausible
4. where the uncertainty really is

This should read like:

- a direct pattern reading
- not a psychology report
- not a generic self-analysis template with MBTI pasted in

Good opening:

- `老实猜：主假设更像 INFP，备选是 INFJ。不是正式测评，只是从 memo 的注意力模式来读。`

Bad opening:

- `## 一句话判断`
- `## 这段时间真正的主题`
- `## 价值与决策信号`

## Useful section title

`Personality Hypothesis And Uncertainty`

## Required disclaimer

Always include:
- likely type tendencies
- main evidence
- main uncertainty
- one plausible alternative type family

Do not state one type as final truth.

## Failure modes

- speaking like a formal personality test
- skipping uncertainty
- forcing one exact type when the evidence only supports a family
- confusing intellectual interests with MBTI function evidence
- reusing the same section headings as overview or blind spots