hd-lens-bg5

/home/avalon/.hermes/skills/astrology/hd-lens-bg5/SKILL.md · raw

HD Lens — BG5

Overview

hd-lens-bg5 is the first Human Design lens skill for the Astral Hermes lens architecture. It mirrors the astrology lens pattern: the lens does not write a full reading. It takes chart facts from HD Prism, retrieves BG5/Penta/OC16 source pages from the local Human Design wiki, and emits structured claims that a compose layer can weave into prose.

Use this lens to add a career, business, material-capacity, small-team, Penta, or organization angle to a Human Design reading. It should stay grounded in two sources of truth:

  1. HD Prism bodygraph JSON for chart mechanics: type, strategy, authority, profile, centers, channels, gates, definition, variables/environment.
  2. /home/avalon/wiki-human-design for BG5/Penta/OC16 interpretive source grounding.

Current source spine created on 2026-05-30:

/home/avalon/wiki-human-design/concepts/bg5.md
/home/avalon/wiki-human-design/concepts/penta.md
/home/avalon/wiki-human-design/concepts/oc16.md
/home/avalon/wiki-human-design/queries/bg5-research-deep-dive-report.md
/home/avalon/wiki-human-design/raw/articles/bg5-research-2026-05-30/*.md

When to Use

Use this lens when the user asks for Human Design through any of these frames:

Do not use this lens for:

Layer Position

Recommended Human Design architecture:

DATA      hd-prism-tenant-api
SOURCES   wiki-human-design
LENSES    hd-lens-bg5
COMPOSE   hd-deep-dive now; future hd-reading-compose
MEMORY    astral-tenant-kb / tenant KB

This skill is the lens layer only. It should be called from hd-deep-dive for now, and later from a dedicated hd-reading-compose if more HD lenses are added.

Required Inputs

Minimum input:

{
  "bodygraph": { "...HD Prism bodygraph JSON...": true },
  "summary": {
    "type": "Projector",
    "authority": "Emotional",
    "profile": "6/2",
    "definition": "Split Definition",
    "channels": ["10-57"],
    "definedCenters": ["G", "Spleen"]
  },
  "context": {
    "mode": "individual-career",
    "question": "What is this person's BG5/work lens?"
  }
}

Optional multi-person/team input:

{
  "subject": { "name": "Person A", "bodygraph": {} },
  "others": [
    { "name": "Person B", "bodygraph": {} },
    { "name": "Person C", "bodygraph": {} }
  ],
  "context": {
    "mode": "team-penta",
    "teamPurpose": "studio operations"
  }
}

Retrieval Requirements

Always read or search these source pages before emitting claims:

  1. concepts/bg5.md
  2. concepts/penta.md
  3. concepts/oc16.md
  4. queries/bg5-research-deep-dive-report.md

When the chart contains specific work-relevant mechanics, also retrieve relevant existing wiki pages:

Do not rely on model memory for BG5 doctrine when the wiki has source-grounded pages.

Output Contract

Emit structured data, not prose reading. The compose/deep-dive layer will turn it into prose.

Recommended object:

{
  "lens": "hd-lens-bg5",
  "version": "0.1.0",
  "mode": "individual-career | team-penta | organization-oc16",
  "claims": [
    {
      "kind": "material-capacity",
      "chart_facts": ["type", "authority", "definedCenters", "channels"],
      "claim": "Short source-grounded claim.",
      "confidence": "medium",
      "citations": [
        {"base": "wiki-human-design", "page": "concepts/bg5"}
      ]
    }
  ],
  "gaps": [
    {
      "kind": "missing-team-data",
      "message": "Full Penta analysis requires at least 3 charts; this is an individual BG5/work lens only."
    }
  ]
}

Claim Kinds

Use these kind values so a future compose layer can weave predictably:

Individual BG5 Reading Pattern

For one chart, do not claim to have analyzed a full Penta. Instead, emit:

  1. BG5 frame: this is about work/material/career, not a separate spiritual system.
  2. Authority at work: what the person must not use for work decisions; what their authority requires.
  3. Material capacity: how defined centers/channels/type describe consistent work force.
  4. Group/Penta caution: whether the current input is one-person only; explain that actual Penta analysis requires 3+ charts.
  5. Work environment: use Environment/Variable only if returned by HD Prism.
  6. Source limits: detailed BG5 consulting procedure is not yet fully ingested; keep claims medium-confidence.

Team/Penta Reading Pattern

For a team question:

  1. Verify there are at least 3 charts before calling it a Penta analysis.
  2. Compute or load each chart through hd-prism-tenant-api; never infer chart facts.
  3. Identify individual Strategy/Authority guardrails before group mechanics.
  4. Retrieve concepts/penta.md and concepts/bg5.md.
  5. Emit claims about: - what the group field may emphasize - what each person brings consistently - where open centers may amplify the group - whether one person is being pulled into an incorrect role - what data is missing for a stronger Penta/OC16 read
  6. Avoid “perfect team” formulas. Frame as mechanics + guardrails.

Cohort Search / Team Selection Pattern

Use this when Alex asks variants of “from my saved charts, find the best team,” “who would work well together,” “build a Penta,” or “search the admin chart list.” This is a higher-order selection problem over many saved HD Prism charts.

Current HD Prism data shape supports this because saved bodygraphs live in SQLite saved_charts.chart_json under /home/avalon/apps/hd-prism/apps/api/descriptions.sqlite, keyed by user_id. The main admin account can have hundreds of saved charts. The existing app has saved charts and pair comparisons, but not a full team-search/Penta optimizer unless implemented separately.

Selection workflow:

  1. Load candidate charts from HD Prism saved_charts for the requested user/admin, parsing chart_json into normalized features.
  2. Require an explicit or inferred team purpose, because “best” is multi-objective. Examples: studio ops, creative production, business development, technical build, counseling/client work, family system, or balanced general team.
  3. Filter candidates by practical constraints if supplied: include/exclude names, team size, location, role, availability, known relationship, chart recency, public/private flag.
  4. Generate candidate teams: - size 3–5 for Penta/team mode; - size 2 for pair comparison only; - 6+ should be partitioned into sub-Pentas or treated as OC16/organization exploration.
  5. Score teams with transparent heuristic dimensions, not mystical certainty: - authority diversity and decision hygiene; - defined/open center complementarity without excessive pressure concentration; - channel/gate coverage relevant to the purpose; - type mix and energy sustainability; - profile/social geometry fit; - split-definition bridge risks/opportunities; - repeated gates/channels as emphasis or redundancy; - source-limit penalty when BG5/OC16 detail is under-ingested.
  6. Return top N teams with explanations and caveats, plus “why not” notes for near misses.
  7. Never present the result as objectively optimal. Say “best-scoring under this lens/purpose” and keep Strategy/Authority primary for real-world decisions.

Implementation note: for 415 saved charts, brute-forcing all 5-person teams is too large. Use a two-stage search: pre-rank candidates by role/purpose features and diversity, then beam-search / greedy-expand top pools into candidate 3–5 person teams. For 3-person teams, exhaustive search may be feasible after pre-filtering.

Reference: references/bg5-team-explorer-mvp.md documents the first HD Prism script MVP, commands, purpose presets, scoring dimensions, verification, and next API/UI extension path.

Organization / OC16 Pattern

Use oc16-scale only when the question is about organizations, departments, or company structures rather than a 3–5 person team.

Current evidence is orientation-level only. The wiki page concepts/oc16.md says OC16 is a larger-group/organizational scale described by BG5BI as three Pentas plus a leader/alpha. Do not invent detailed OC16 graphing procedures until primary BG5/OC16 material is ingested.

Citation Policy

Every non-obvious BG5/Penta/OC16 claim should cite one of:

{"base": "wiki-human-design", "page": "concepts/bg5"}
{"base": "wiki-human-design", "page": "concepts/penta"}
{"base": "wiki-human-design", "page": "concepts/oc16"}
{"base": "wiki-human-design", "page": "queries/bg5-research-deep-dive-report"}

Chart-mechanics claims cite HD Prism implicitly by naming the source field in chart_facts.

Compose Guidance

When a compose/deep-dive layer weaves this lens into prose:

Good prose move:

Through the BG5 lens, this is less about finding a generic career label and more about protecting the material use of the design. The work path has to honor the same authority that governs the rest of the life; otherwise the Penta or organization can borrow the person’s energy for a structure that is not correct for them.

Common Pitfalls

  1. Calling one chart a Penta analysis. A Penta requires group data. With one person, call it an individual BG5/work lens.

  2. Treating BG5 as generic career coaching. Keep it tied to HD Prism chart mechanics and the BG5/Penta source spine.

  3. Skipping authority. Career/business questions are especially vulnerable to mental, practical, or social pressure. Authority remains the decision filter.

  4. Inventing OC16 details. Current wiki evidence supports the scale model but not detailed OC16 procedure.

  5. Over-citing in final prose. The lens should output citations; compose can decide whether to show them. If the user asks for sources, cite clearly.

  6. Using astrology chart data as input. This is an HD lens. It consumes HD Prism bodygraph JSON, not natal astrology chart JSON.

Verification Checklist