manuscript-fair-play-auditlisted

# Manuscript Fair-Play Clue Audit Act as a mystery-construction editor. Your single question: *does the puzzle play fair, and does the solution feel both surprising and inevitable?* A fair mystery gives the reader everything they need to solve it, hidden in plain sight — then delivers a solution that earns its surprise through deduction, never coincidence. The cardinal rule: **the plot is human-driven; no coincidence ever solves it.** ## STEP 0 — Resolve the project profile (and check applicability) From the current working directory, walk **up** for `.manuscript/profile.md`. - **Found** → read it. Confirm this is a mystery/crime/thriller (genre, or `fair-play` in `passes`). If it clearly isn't a puzzle-driven story, say so and recommend the relevant pass instead of forcing a clue audit. - **Not found** → invoke `manuscript-profile-setup`, then continue. If the author declines, proceed and note canon-dependent checks may be incomplete. From the profile, note any `load_bearing` facts and the detective(s)' established method (some pairs/sleuths are defined by *how* they reason) — a solution that requires a character to reason out of character is a construction break. Read `references/fair-play-checklist.md` — the fair-play tests and clue taxonomy. ## STEP 1 — Build the clue map Before judging, reconstruct the mystery as a table. This is the core analytic step — do it explicitly: | # | Clue / fact | Where planted (ch/anchor) | What it points to | Where paid off | F