docs(seo): citation deltas for 4 existing posts

docs/seo-strategy/citation-deltas/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+# Citation Deltas — Inline Citation Pass for Published Posts
+
+Research artifact from issue #392 (Category J of the SEO + AI-discovery plan).
+
+The 4 published blog posts have zero inline citations despite narratively referencing Anthropic essays, arXiv papers, named researchers, and framework docs. Inline citations are associated with higher AI citation lift in generative-engine-optimization research (GEO, KDD 2024). This directory proposes specific link insertions for Julian's manual review and application via Payload admin.
+
+Nothing here modifies post bodies. Nothing here touches production code. Every proposed URL was verified to return HTTP 200 (or an equivalent successful response) at the time of writing.
+
+## Posts covered
+
+| Post                                       | Delta file                                                                       | Proposed citations |
+| ------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ |
+| `where-agentic-patterns-actually-live`     | [where-agentic-patterns-actually-live.md](./where-agentic-patterns-actually-live.md)         | 8                  |
+| `subagent-orchestration-workflow`          | [subagent-orchestration-workflow.md](./subagent-orchestration-workflow.md)                   | 2                  |
+| `what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for`    | [what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for.md](./what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for.md)       | 1                  |
+| `rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age`    | [rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age.md](./rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age.md)       | 1                  |
+
+Total: 12 proposed citations across 4 posts.
+
+## Application workflow
+
+For each delta:
+
+1. Open the Payload admin at `https://detached-node.dev/admin` (or local equivalent).
+2. Navigate to **Posts** and select the post by slug.
+3. In the Lexical body editor, locate the passage cited in the delta — search by the original snippet's distinctive phrasing.
+4. Select the proposed anchor text in the editor.
+5. Open the link drawer (toolbar button or `Cmd-K`). Paste the proposed URL. Confirm.
+6. Repeat for all proposed citations in the delta.
+7. Save and re-publish.
+
+### Lexical link drawer gotcha
+
+Programmatic URL setting (e.g., `react-hook-form` `setValue`, or `evaluate_script` injection) drops the value silently. Use real keystrokes — manual paste-then-type by hand, or simulated `browser_type` if automated. The reference memory `reference_payload_lexical_links_via_playwright.md` documents this.
+
+## Source verification
+
+Every URL in these deltas was verified to return a successful response at the time of writing (2026-05-17). Re-verify before applying if significant time has passed; the Anthropic engineering essays in particular have moved between `www.anthropic.com/engineering/...` and `code.claude.com/docs/en/...` once already in 2025-2026.
+
+When a redirect is involved, the delta lists the final destination URL — not the historical one — so the link is canonical at insertion time.
+
+## What was deliberately NOT proposed
+
+- **Author's own analysis and assertions.** Lines like "The named patterns are vocabulary. The work happens one level down" are Julian's voice, not external references; linking them out would be wrong.
+- **References where no authoritative source could be confidently identified.** Where a phrase like "an earlier piece on subagent orchestration" could refer to multiple posts or an unpublished draft, the delta notes the ambiguity instead of fabricating a link.
+- **General programming concepts.** "Autoregressive", "context window", "pair programming" are common knowledge and do not need citations on a blog post.
+- **Internal cross-links.** A pass adding `[earlier piece](/posts/subagent-orchestration-workflow)` style internal links is a separate concern (related-posts surface, internal-link graph) and out of scope for this delta set.
+
+## How to read a delta entry
+
+Each citation entry has four parts:
+
+1. **Original snippet** — three or so lines of verbatim context around the reference, so Julian can find the passage in the editor.
+2. **Proposed edit** — the same snippet with `[anchor text](url)` inserted at the natural reference point. The anchor text is bolded as the link itself; surrounding prose is untouched.
+3. **Source** — the verified URL.
+4. **Rationale** — one sentence explaining why this source and which discovery audience benefits (AI citation, organic search, employer, recruiter, peer engineers).
+
+A short "References without confidently identifiable sources" section at the end of each delta lists anything Julian should disambiguate himself before applying the rest.

docs/seo-strategy/citation-deltas/rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Citation Deltas — `rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age`
+
+Post URL: https://detached-node.dev/posts/rethinking-systems-in-the-agentic-age
+Published: April 19, 2026
+
+## Summary
+
+- **Proposed citations:** 1
+- **Citations confirmed verified (HTTP 200 / successful fetch):** 1
+- **References mentioned but no authoritative source found:** 0
+
+This is the earliest published post and is largely a posture-setting essay — what to evolve, what to leave behind, where to spend attention, how to work together. The post deliberately stays at the level of framing, so it names very few concrete external technologies. The one inline citation worth adding is to MCP, which is the only named protocol in the body.
+
+## Proposed insertions
+
+### Citation 1: MCP / connectors (the only named protocol in the post)
+
+**Original snippet:**
+
+> They were created and adopted to solve specific problems, and those problems are not just going to disappear. It will take time for our ways of working to evolve, and many of these technologies may be able to evolve along with us. Properly maintained connectors or MCP servers might be enough for us to continue using these services as-is.
+
+**Proposed edit:**
+
+> They were created and adopted to solve specific problems, and those problems are not just going to disappear. It will take time for our ways of working to evolve, and many of these technologies may be able to evolve along with us. Properly maintained connectors or [MCP servers](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/) might be enough for us to continue using these services as-is.
+
+**Source:** https://modelcontextprotocol.io/
+**Source verified:** YES on 2026-05-17. Page titled "What is the Model Context Protocol (MCP)?", canonical home of the open standard.
+**Rationale:** MCP is the only specific external technology the post names by name. Linking it grounds the central claim that existing project-management tooling, git providers, and observability platforms may not need to be thrown out wholesale — they may instead be wrapped with MCP. This citation serves the AI-discovery audience (this is the load-bearing technology mention for "agentic integration" queries), the engineer-reader (concrete protocol to follow), and the employer/peer audiences (signals that the author tracks the current agentic stack, not just abstract framing).
+
+## References without confidently identifiable sources
+
+None for this post.
+
+## Note on absent citations
+
+The post deliberately operates at a posture-setting level — what to evolve, what to leave behind, where to spend attention. References like "AI generated document that the person who generated it hadn't even bothered to read yet", or "the way we've always measured tool effectiveness" are general industry observations, not citations to specific work. Forcing speculative citations into those passages would weaken the post.
+
+If a future revision wanted one additional citation to strengthen AI-discovery surface area, the natural candidate would be a productivity-measurement source (e.g., DORA, SPACE framework) to ground the line *"Productivity shouldn't be measured by the number or size of the artifacts you generate."* This is flagged here for Julian's awareness but not proposed as a delta, because the post's own framing does not actually claim to be in dialogue with any specific productivity-measurement literature, and force-fitting a DORA citation would over-claim.

docs/seo-strategy/citation-deltas/subagent-orchestration-workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+# Citation Deltas — `subagent-orchestration-workflow`
+
+Post URL: https://detached-node.dev/posts/subagent-orchestration-workflow
+Published: April 24, 2026
+
+## Summary
+
+- **Proposed citations:** 2
+- **Citations confirmed verified (HTTP 200 / successful fetch):** 2
+- **References mentioned but no authoritative source found:** 0
+
+This post is mostly Julian's own framing of the orchestrator + clean-context subagent pattern. The two external references that warrant inline citations are: (1) Claude Code as the named tool, and (2) the autoregressive-LLM technical claim, which is grounded enough to deserve a primary source.
+
+## Proposed insertions
+
+### Citation 1: Claude Code (tool reference)
+
+**Original snippet:**
+
+> A walkthrough of an orchestration pattern for agentic coding: a single orchestrator dispatches scoped subagents to independent tasks, and an independent reviewer inspects each result. The examples use Claude Code, but the concepts apply to any modern agentic coding tool.
+
+**Proposed edit:**
+
+> A walkthrough of an orchestration pattern for agentic coding: a single orchestrator dispatches scoped subagents to independent tasks, and an independent reviewer inspects each result. The examples use [Claude Code](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/overview), but the concepts apply to any modern agentic coding tool.
+
+**Source:** https://code.claude.com/docs/en/overview
+**Source verified:** YES on 2026-05-17. The legacy `docs.claude.com/en/docs/claude-code/overview` 301-redirects to `code.claude.com/docs/en/overview`. The destination is the official Claude Code overview page.
+**Rationale:** Claude Code is the named tool the entire walkthrough is grounded in, and it appears in the first paragraph without an anchor. Linking out from the first product mention is the cheapest standard SEO/citation hygiene move, and AI overviews summarizing this post will route through this URL when the post is the citation source. Engineer-reader, AI-citation, and recruiter audiences all benefit.
+
+### Citation 2: Autoregressive LLM behavior (Claude Code best-practices on context-window behavior)
+
+**Original snippet:**
+
+> The large language model powering these tools is autoregressive; every new token attends to the full conversation history. As the context grows with each completed task, irrelevant work from earlier tasks is still present and influencing the model's output.
+
+**Proposed edit:**
+
+> The large language model powering these tools is autoregressive; every new token attends to the full conversation history. As the context grows with each completed task, [irrelevant work from earlier tasks is still present and influencing the model's output](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/best-practices).
+
+**Source:** https://code.claude.com/docs/en/best-practices
+**Source verified:** YES on 2026-05-17. Page titled "Best practices for Claude Code". Contains the explicit statement: *"LLM performance degrades as context fills. When the context window is getting full, Claude may start 'forgetting' earlier instructions or making more mistakes."* This is the operationally-grounded primary source for the claim Julian is making.
+**Rationale:** The autoregressive claim is technical and could be sourced to a transformer paper (Vaswani et al., 2017), but the *operational* claim Julian is making — that residual context degrades subsequent task quality — is better sourced to Claude Code's own best-practices doc, which says exactly this. This citation reinforces the post's central argument about why fresh-context subagents work and routes AI overviews to a load-bearing primary source rather than an academic detour.
+
+## References without confidently identifiable sources
+
+None for this post. The remainder of the prose ("This also changes how review works...", "To structure your work, you will have subagents create tickets...") is Julian's own framing of the orchestration pattern and is correctly unattributed.

docs/seo-strategy/citation-deltas/what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# Citation Deltas — `what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for`
+
+Post URL: https://detached-node.dev/posts/what-tickets-and-prs-are-actually-for
+Published: April 20, 2026
+
+## Summary
+
+- **Proposed citations:** 1
+- **Citations confirmed verified (HTTP 200 / successful fetch):** 1
+- **References mentioned but no authoritative source found:** 0
+
+This post is almost entirely Julian's own argument about why ticketing and PR conventions still pay rent in an agentic workflow. The only external reference that benefits from an inline citation is the MCP / connector mention, which references a concrete open standard with a canonical URL.
+
+## Proposed insertions
+
+### Citation 1: MCP / connectors (the protocol the prose names directly)
+
+**Original snippet:**
+
+> The same artifacts are useful to an AI agent. Dispatching a fresh agent to pick up a ticket lets it start with a clean context and zero in on what matters for execution. With properly set up connectors or MCP servers, an agent can:
+
+**Proposed edit:**
+
+> The same artifacts are useful to an AI agent. Dispatching a fresh agent to pick up a ticket lets it start with a clean context and zero in on what matters for execution. With properly set up connectors or [MCP servers](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/), an agent can:
+
+**Source:** https://modelcontextprotocol.io/
+**Source verified:** YES on 2026-05-17. Page titled "What is the Model Context Protocol (MCP)?", canonical home of the open standard.
+**Rationale:** MCP is the specific protocol the prose names. It is the only concrete external technology in the entire post, and linking it grounds the agent-readability claim that follows (traverse linked docs, interpret design mocks, ingest prior decisions). Linking the protocol home rather than the Claude Code MCP doc keeps the citation tool-agnostic, matching the post's tool-neutral framing. Serves AI-discovery (queries about agent + ticketing integration), engineer-reader (concrete protocol to investigate), and employer/peer audiences (signals literacy in current agentic stack).
+
+## References without confidently identifiable sources
+
+None for this post. The other references the post makes — to "convergence over decades", to engineering teams that "discovered their value the hard way", to "engineering team norms" — are general claims about the practice of software engineering, not citations to specific named work, and should remain unlinked. Adding speculative citations there would weaken rather than strengthen the post's authority.
+
+## Note on absent citations
+
+The post argues a position about the durability of ticketing and PR norms in agentic workflows. It is correct that this is largely original argument, not a literature survey, and the lack of additional citations is by design. The post's discoverability gains will come mostly from the named MCP citation above plus internal cross-links (e.g., to `subagent-orchestration-workflow` for the "multiple lenses" PR-review framing) — but internal cross-linking is out of scope here (see README).