F.0.2:8 - Common Anti-Patterns and How to Avoid Them

Anti-pattern	What fails	Repair
Crosswalk as synthesis	Candidate correspondences are presented without a receiving claim or practical action.	State the receiving question, compare action-changing differences, and write one of the three result claims.
Similar words as one concept	Lexical resemblance hides different entities, relations, or explanatory roles.	Restore source-local claims through `F.0.1`; add an `F.9` Bridge only for the relation actually asserted.
Literature narrative without a move	Sources are summarized but no authoring decision changes.	State the proposed practitioner action and first result, or close with a contrast or unresolved inquiry.
Framework fit as assurance	Material is forced into the receiving ontology and fit is treated as truth.	Keep non-fit visible and separate authoring proposal, evidence use, admission, and reliance.
Missing source as falsity	An unavailable or weak source is used to reject the disputed claim.	Make the bounded inquiry state the EntityOfConcern and name the source action that may close it.
Heavy pack by default	Every bounded question is expanded into a full `G.2` programme.	Use one bounded comparison; use `G.2` only when its broad harvesting and handoff result is needed.