refactor: 분리되어 관리하고 있던 문서 시스템을 하나로 통일

.agents/skills/rewriting-technical-prose-naturally/SKILL.md

@@ -33,6 +33,37 @@ Before the first rewrite in a task, read both references:
 Read the complete source and the nearby context needed to interpret pronouns, comparisons, and causes.
 Do not rewrite an isolated paragraph when its protected meaning depends on the surrounding section.
 
+## Required sequence
+
+This is an **editorial** pass. The source's facts, evidence, causal chain, uncertainty, decision status,
+and technical depth are the contract. Work in this order — the steps that have their own section are
+named here so the spine stays visible.
+
+1. **Read the whole record once without editing.** A paragraph fixed before you know how the piece ends
+   is fixed against the wrong context.
+2. **Mark the protected literals and the sentences that carry technical weight** — `Establish the meaning
+   contract` below, and `references/protected-content.md`.
+3. **Name the stylistic problems, and only those.** Repeated sentence frames, forced conversational tone,
+   abstract filler, too many headings, translated constructions, a conclusion restated in three places,
+   paragraphs of identical length, bolding that has stopped meaning anything.
+4. **Edit diction, sentence order inside a paragraph, paragraph boundaries, and headings.** Do not move a
+   fact between sections while doing it.
+5. **Re-read against the original** and restore every technical fact, limitation, condition, and evidence
+   detail that fell out. This step finds more than it seems it should.
+6. **Close with `Mechanical pass` then `Final check`.** The checkers read surface patterns; the read-aloud
+   test and the preservation questions decide.
+
+### Hard rules for this pass
+
+- Do not shorten merely to look more human.
+- **Do not remove implementation detail because the paragraph feels dense.** Density is not a style defect.
+- Do not create `처음에는`, `해보니`, `놀랍게도`, `저희는` or other experience language unless the source
+  records that experience.
+- **Do not imitate one company's or one author's voice.** `style_profile.mjs` measures against five
+  Woowahan articles because they are a *sample of engineering writing*, not a target to sound like. Apply
+  the cross-source patterns in `references/editorial-rules.md`; do not adopt a house style.
+- Do not make every section equally polished, equally long, or structurally symmetric.
+
 ## Establish the meaning contract
 
 Make an internal claim ledger before editing. Do not print it unless asked. Record:
@@ -444,6 +475,20 @@ remove.
 Clean output does not mean the rewrite is good. Both tools read surface patterns and cannot see meaning;
 every rule above still applies, and the read-aloud test below is the one that decides.
 
+## 참조
+
+- `references/regression-examples.md` — 고친 예와 실패 이유
+- `references/protected-content.md` — 옮길 때 한 글자도 바꾸면 안 되는 것
+- `references/editorial-rules.md` — 편집 규칙
+- `references/research-method.md` — 문체 기준값을 다시 재는 방법
+- `references/corpus/` — 한국어 기술 글 코퍼스 조사 노트
+
+문장 규칙 두 개는 `writing-tech-log-records` 스킬에 있다. 두 스킬이 같은 규칙을 쓰므로 사본을
+만들지 않는다.
+
+- `../writing-tech-log-records/references/explaining.md` — 설명하는 법
+- `../writing-tech-log-records/references/ai-tells.md` — 문서군 전체의 리듬
+
 ## Final check
 
 First, read every rewritten sentence aloud and ask: **would a Korean-speaking developer say this to a