/microsim-generator

MicroSim Generator Matching Criteria

This reference document provides detailed matching criteria for all available MicroSim generator skills. Use this to score and rank which generator best matches a given diagram specification.

Recent Updates

• 2026-08-18: Adopted verified-infographic-generator from book-media-generator — fact-verified statistics posters, and the reusable claim-verification phases that let any sim carry cited data
• 2026-01-27: Added html-table-generator for interactive matrix comparisons with clickable cells and sliding detail panels
• 2025-11-17: Initial release with 9 MicroSim generators
  • Added: microsim-p5, chartjs-generator, math-function-plotter-plotly
  • Added: mermaid-generator, vis-network, timeline-generator
  • Added: map-generator, venn-diagram-generator, bubble-chart-generator
  • Included comprehensive scoring guidelines for each generator
  • Added decision tree and matching strategy sections

Scoring Scale

• 90-100: Perfect match - Primary use case for this generator
• 70-89: Strong match - Well-suited, minor limitations
• 50-69: Moderate match - Could work but not optimal
• 30-49: Weak match - Significant limitations or workarounds needed
• 0-29: Poor match - Not recommended, use different generator

General Matching Factors

When scoring, consider:

1. Data Type Match: Does the specification's data structure align with what the generator expects?
2. Interactivity Requirements: Does the needed interactivity match the generator's capabilities?
3. Visual Style: Does the desired visual output match the generator's strengths?
4. Complexity: Is the specification within the generator's complexity range?
5. Trigger Words: Does the specification contain keywords strongly associated with this generator?

MicroSim Generator Profiles

1. microsim-p5

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/p5-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Custom animations and simulations
• Interactive educational visualizations
• Physics simulations
• Generative art and creative coding
• Unique visualizations not served by standard libraries

Data Types:

• Any data type (most flexible)
• Real-time/dynamic data
• Procedural/algorithmic visualizations

Interactivity Level:

• Very High
• Sliders, buttons, mouse tracking
• Real-time parameter changes
• Custom interaction models

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "animation", "simulation", "interactive"
• "custom visualization", "p5.js", "creative"
• "physics", "movement", "bouncing", "particles"
• "generative", "procedural", "algorithmic"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification requires custom animations, physics simulations, unique interactions not available in standard libraries, real-time updates, or mentions p5.js
• Score 70-89 if: Needs high interactivity with custom controls, visual effects, or creative visual style
• Score 50-69 if: Standard visualization with some custom styling needs
• Score 30-49 if: Could be done with p5 but standard library would be simpler
• Score 0-29 if: Pure data visualization better served by specialized libraries (charts, plots, diagrams)

Strengths:

• Complete flexibility and customization
• Complex animations and physics
• Real-time interactivity
• Creative visual effects

Limitations:

• Requires more development time
• Not optimized for standard charts/diagrams
• Steeper learning curve for users

2. chartjs-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/chartjs-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Standard statistical charts
• Data comparison visualizations
• Business intelligence dashboards
• Survey results and analytics

Data Types:

• Numerical data (continuous or discrete)
• Categorical data
• Time-series data (for line charts)
• Percentage/proportion data

Chart Types Supported:

1. Bar charts (vertical/horizontal)
2. Line charts
3. Pie charts
4. Doughnut charts
5. Radar charts
6. Polar area charts
7. Scatter plots
8. Bubble charts (also has dedicated bubble-chart-generator)

Interactivity Level:

• Medium
• Hover tooltips
• Legend toggling
• Responsive resizing

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "chart", "bar chart", "line chart", "pie chart"
• "graph", "plot data", "visualize data"
• "compare", "statistics", "percentages"
• "dashboard", "analytics", "metrics"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification explicitly requests one of the supported chart types with numerical/categorical data
• Score 70-89 if: Data visualization needs that closely align with standard chart types
• Score 50-69 if: Could be represented as a chart but might benefit from more specialized tools
• Score 30-49 if: Chart representation possible but not optimal (e.g., timeline data, network data)
• Score 0-29 if: Non-chart visualization (diagrams, maps, networks, mathematical functions)

Strengths:

• Well-established library
• Clean, professional appearance
• Fast implementation
• Wide variety of chart types

Limitations:

• Limited to standard chart types
• Less suitable for custom visualizations
• Not designed for diagrams or workflows

3. math-function-plotter-plotly

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/plotly-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Mathematical function plots
• Calculus visualizations
• Physics equations and wave functions
• Engineering transfer functions
• Scientific function analysis

Data Types:

• Mathematical expressions (f(x) = ...)
• Continuous functions
• Parametric equations
• Numerical function data

Function Categories:

• Trigonometric (sin, cos, tan)
• Polynomial (quadratic, cubic, etc.)
• Exponential and logarithmic
• Physics/engineering functions
• Custom mathematical expressions

Interactivity Level:

• High
• Interactive sliders to move points along curves
• Hover tooltips showing coordinates
• Zoom and pan
• PNG export

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "function", "plot", "f(x)", "equation"
• "graph", "mathematical", "calculus"
• "sine", "cosine", "polynomial", "exponential"
• "plotly", "interactive function"
• "domain", "range", "continuous"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification describes plotting a mathematical function with domain/range, mentions f(x) notation, or requests function exploration with sliders
• Score 70-89 if: Scientific/physics plot that can be expressed as a function
• Score 50-69 if: Numerical data that could be approximated as a function
• Score 30-49 if: Plot needs but not specifically functions (discrete data, categorical)
• Score 0-29 if: Non-plot visualizations (diagrams, charts, timelines, networks)

Strengths:

• Powerful Plotly.js library
• Smooth continuous curves (500+ points)
• Interactive exploration with sliders
• Educational lesson plans included
• Professional mathematical notation

Limitations:

• Focused on functions, not discrete data points
• Not suitable for diagrams or structural visualizations
• Requires function expression in JavaScript Math format

4. mermaid-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/mermaid-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Flowcharts and process diagrams
• State machines and state diagrams
• Sequence diagrams (interactions over time)
• Entity-relationship diagrams
• Class diagrams (UML)
• User journey maps

Data Types:

• Structural/hierarchical relationships
• Sequential processes
• State transitions
• Entity relationships
• Workflow steps

Diagram Types Supported:

1. Flowchart/Graph - Decision trees, workflows
2. State Diagram - State machines, lifecycle
3. Sequence Diagram - Interactions, API calls
4. ER Diagram - Database schemas
5. Class Diagram - Object-oriented design
6. User Journey - UX flows
7. Block Diagram - System components

Interactivity Level:

• Low to Medium
• Primarily static diagrams
• Some hover effects
• Limited interactivity compared to other generators

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "flowchart", "flow chart", "diagram"
• "workflow", "process", "procedure"
• "state machine", "state diagram"
• "sequence diagram", "interaction"
• "ER diagram", "entity relationship"
• "class diagram", "UML"
• "decision tree", "logic flow"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification describes flowcharts, state machines, sequence diagrams, or other standard diagram types supported by Mermaid
• Score 70-89 if: Process or structural visualization that fits Mermaid's diagram types
• Score 50-69 if: Could be represented as a diagram but might need customization
• Score 30-49 if: Diagram needs but with heavy interactivity requirements
• Score 0-29 if: Data-driven visualizations (charts, plots, timelines) or highly interactive needs

Strengths:

• Wide variety of diagram types
• Clean, professional appearance
• Text-based specification (easy to modify)
• Good for documentation

Limitations:

• Limited interactivity
• Less suitable for data-heavy visualizations
• Shape sizes may not scale responsively
• Not ideal for network graphs with physics

5. vis-network

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/vis-network-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Network diagrams (nodes and edges)
• Concept dependency graphs
• Learning graphs showing prerequisite relationships
• Knowledge maps
• Social network visualizations
• System architecture diagrams with connections

Data Types:

• Nodes (entities) and edges (relationships)
• Graph structures
• Hierarchical data that can be graphed
• Network topologies

Interactivity Level:

• Very High
• Physics-based layout
• Drag nodes
• Click for details
• Zoom and pan
• Hover tooltips
• Dynamic clustering

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "network", "graph", "nodes", "edges"
• "relationships", "connections", "dependencies"
• "concept map", "knowledge graph"
• "prerequisite", "dependency graph"
• "network diagram", "topology"
• "vis-network", "interactive graph"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification describes nodes and edges, network relationships, dependency graphs, or concept maps with connections
• Score 70-89 if: Hierarchical or relational data that naturally forms a network structure
• Score 50-69 if: Connected data but could also be shown as a tree or diagram
• Score 30-49 if: Relationships exist but not the primary focus
• Score 0-29 if: Non-network visualizations (charts, plots, timelines, workflows without connections)

Strengths:

• Physics-based automatic layout
• Highly interactive
• Excellent for complex relationships
• Scales well with many nodes
• Group/cluster support

Limitations:

• Can be overwhelming with too many nodes
• Not ideal for strict hierarchies (use Mermaid instead)
• Requires node and edge data structure

6. timeline-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/timeline-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Historical timelines
• Project timelines and schedules
• Product roadmaps and release plans
• Course schedules and curricula
• Event chronologies
• Organizational milestones

Data Types:

• Temporal/chronological data
• Events with specific dates
• Date ranges (start and end dates)
• Categorized events (optional groups)

Interactivity Level:

• High
• Zoom in/out on timeline
• Pan left/right
• Click events for detailed information
• Category filtering with buttons
• Hover for tooltips

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "timeline", "chronological", "chronology"
• "events", "history", "historical"
• "schedule", "calendar", "dates"
• "roadmap", "milestones", "phases"
• "project timeline", "course timeline"
• "sequence of events", "over time"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification includes events with specific dates, mentions timeline/chronological order, or describes temporal sequences
• Score 70-89 if: Time-based data that would benefit from timeline visualization
• Score 50-69 if: Sequential data without specific dates (could use other methods)
• Score 30-49 if: Some temporal aspect but not the primary organizing principle
• Score 0-29 if: Non-temporal visualizations (charts, diagrams, networks, plots)

Strengths:

• Specialized for temporal data
• Excellent date handling and formatting
• Zoom and pan for long timelines
• Category filtering
• Event detail panels

Limitations:

• Requires date information
• Not suitable for non-temporal data
• Limited to linear time representation

7. map-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/map-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Geographic visualizations
• Location markers and points of interest
• Route visualization
• Regional data (GeoJSON)
• Campus maps, facility maps
• Travel itineraries

Data Types:

• Geographic coordinates (latitude, longitude)
• Location names (geocoded to coordinates)
• GeoJSON data for regions
• Marker data with descriptions
• Multiple map layers

Interactivity Level:

• Very High
• Zoom in/out
• Pan across map
• Click markers for popups
• Toggle layers
• Marker clustering for dense data

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "map", "geographic", "location"
• "coordinates", "latitude", "longitude"
• "markers", "pins", "points of interest"
• "route", "path", "journey"
• "GeoJSON", "regions", "boundaries"
• "leaflet", "interactive map"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification includes geographic coordinates, location names, map regions, or explicitly requests a map visualization
• Score 70-89 if: Location-based data that would benefit from spatial representation
• Score 50-69 if: Some geographic component but could use other representations
• Score 30-49 if: Location mentioned but not central to visualization
• Score 0-29 if: Non-geographic visualizations (charts, timelines, diagrams, plots)

Strengths:

• Full-featured mapping with Leaflet.js
• Multiple basemap options (street, satellite, terrain)
• Layer support for complex visualizations
• Marker customization
• GeoJSON support for regions

Limitations:

• Requires geographic data
• Not suitable for abstract spatial layouts
• May be overkill for simple location lists

8. venn-diagram-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/venn-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Set theory visualizations
• Category overlap comparisons
• Concept relationship diagrams (2-4 sets)
• Educational comparisons
• Feature comparison diagrams

Data Types:

• Sets (2-4 distinct categories)
• Set intersections and overlaps
• Educational definitions for each region
• Proportional or symbolic sizes

Interactivity Level:

• Medium
• Hover tooltips with educational definitions
• Static circular layout
• Definitions from glossary (preferred)

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "venn", "venn diagram"
• "sets", "set theory", "overlap"
• "intersection", "union"
• "compare", "categories", "groups"
• "commonalities", "differences"
• "2 circles", "3 circles", "4 circles"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification explicitly requests Venn diagram or describes 2-4 sets with overlaps and intersections
• Score 70-89 if: Category comparison that would benefit from showing overlaps
• Score 50-69 if: Comparison of categories but overlaps not emphasized
• Score 30-49 if: Multiple categories but no clear overlap relationships
• Score 0-29 if: Not a set comparison (charts, timelines, networks, plots)

Strengths:

• Clear visualization of set relationships
• Educational tooltips with glossary integration
• Simple, clean appearance
• Supports 2-4 sets

Limitations:

• Limited to 2-4 sets
• Proportional sizing can be misleading
• Less suitable for complex relationships (use vis-network instead)
• Library not actively maintained (use with caution)

Special Note: Always check /docs/glossary.md for existing definitions before asking user for set definitions.

9. bubble-chart-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/bubble-guide.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Priority matrices (2x2 grids)
• Impact vs Effort analysis
• Risk vs Value assessment
• Portfolio analysis
• Multi-dimensional data comparison (x, y, size)

Data Types:

• Items with 2-3 dimensions
• X-axis value (e.g., Effort, Time, Cost)
• Y-axis value (e.g., Impact, Value, Priority)
• Size dimension (optional, e.g., Resource requirement)
• Quadrant categorization

Interactivity Level:

• Medium
• Hover tooltips
• Quadrant highlighting
• Click for details
• Legend toggling

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "priority matrix", "prioritization"
• "bubble chart", "bubble plot"
• "impact vs effort", "effort vs impact"
• "risk vs value", "value vs complexity"
• "portfolio", "quadrant", "2x2"
• "multi-dimensional", "scatter with size"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification describes priority matrix, impact vs effort, 2x2 quadrant analysis, or bubble chart with 3 dimensions
• Score 70-89 if: Multi-dimensional comparison that would benefit from bubble visualization
• Score 50-69 if: 2D scatter plot without size dimension (could use chartjs instead)
• Score 30-49 if: Comparison data but not naturally 2D or quadrant-based
• Score 0-29 if: Non-comparative visualizations or single-dimension data

Strengths:

• Specialized for priority/portfolio analysis
• Quadrant labeling and highlighting
• Good for decision-making visualizations
• Clean Chart.js implementation

Limitations:

• Very specific use case
• Limited to 2-3 dimensions
• May be overkill for simple scatter plots
• Overlap can make bubbles hard to read with many items

10. html-table-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/html-table.md

Primary Use Cases:

• Framework comparison matrices
• Cultural/philosophical tradition comparisons
• Feature evaluation tables with detailed explanations
• Multi-dimensional analysis grids
• Educational comparison tables with expandable content

Data Types:

• Row categories (e.g., traditions, theories, platforms)
• Column dimensions (e.g., aspects, criteria, features)
• Cell values with summary text and detailed explanations
• Metadata for each row (subtitles, tags, key figures)

Interactivity Level:

• High
• Clickable cells revealing detail panels
• Sliding side panel with descriptions and examples
• Hover effects on cells
• Keyboard navigation (ESC to close)
• Emphasis color-coding

Trigger Words/Phrases:

• "matrix", "comparison matrix", "framework comparison"
• "table with clickable cells", "expandable table"
• "cultural comparison", "tradition comparison"
• "detailed explanations for each cell"
• "dimension analysis", "multi-dimensional comparison"
• "clicking reveals details", "detail panel"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Specification describes a matrix/table where each cell needs expandable detailed content, framework comparisons across multiple dimensions, or mentions clickable cells with detail panels
• Score 70-89 if: Comparison table where cells contain summary values but detailed explanations would enhance learning
• Score 50-69 if: Simple comparison table without need for expanded content (use comparison-table-generator instead)
• Score 30-49 if: Table structure but no interactivity needed
• Score 0-29 if: Non-tabular visualizations (charts, networks, timelines, diagrams)

Strengths:

• Clean separation of concerns (HTML, CSS, JS, JSON data)
• Expandable detail panels for rich content
• Light theme matching MkDocs styling
• Emphasis color system for visual categorization
• Compact layout fits MkDocs iframe
• Mobile responsive with full-width detail panel

Limitations:

• Requires structured data for all cells
• Not suitable for simple star-rating tables (use comparison-table-generator)
• Detail panel takes screen space
• Best for 4-8 rows × 3-6 columns

Special Note: Data should be stored in data.json with row/column structure. Each cell needs: value (short display text), emphasis (color coding), description (detailed explanation), and optionally example (concrete illustration).

11. causal-loop-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/causal-loop-guide.md

Primary Use Cases: Causal loop diagrams (CLDs), feedback loops, systems archetypes (reinforcing/balancing loops, limits to growth, tragedy of the commons), multi-loop systems-thinking articles with a full-system view.

Trigger Words/Phrases: "causal loop", "CLD", "feedback loop", "reinforcing", "balancing", "systems thinking", "runaway dynamic", "systems archetype"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: The request names feedback loops, CLDs, or reinforcing/balancing dynamics
• Score 50-69 if: Generic "network of causes" without loop polarity (consider vis-network-guide)
• Score 0-29 if: Static flowcharts (mermaid) or data charts

Special Note: Produces vis-network diagrams rendered inline via cld-inline.js — never one iframe per diagram (browsers stop rendering past 5–6 iframes per page). Scales from one inline diagram up to a full article.

12. concept-classifier-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/concept-classifier-guide.md

Primary Use Cases: Classification quizzes where students read a scenario and sort it into the correct category — bias identification, fallacy spotting, taxonomy sorting, pattern recognition drills.

Trigger Words/Phrases: "classify", "classifier", "categorize", "sort scenarios", "identify which", "recognize the type"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Students must assign given examples/scenarios to categories from multiple-choice options
• Score 50-69 if: General quiz without a classification framing (use the quiz-generator skill for chapter quizzes instead)
• Score 0-29 if: No student categorization involved

13. infographic-overlay-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/infographic-overlay-guide.md

Primary Use Cases: Interactive labeled illustrations — anatomy/structure diagrams with numbered callout markers (explore/quiz/edit modes) or comparison posters with rectangular hover zones, rendered over an AI-generated annotation-free image.

Trigger Words/Phrases: "diagram overlay", "callout labels", "labeled diagram", "anatomy", "interactive infographic", "hover to identify", "label the parts"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: A background illustration needs interactive labels/zones with explore or quiz modes
• Score 50-69 if: The visual could be drawn natively (p5/Chart.js/Mermaid) with no background image
• Score 0-29 if: Pure simulation or data chart

14. docker-python-lab-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/docker-python-lab-guide.md

Primary Use Cases: Runnable Python code blocks embedded in textbook pages — code editor, Run/Reset buttons, output area; code executes in an isolated Docker container via a local service.

Trigger Words/Phrases: "python lab", "code runner", "runnable code block", "interactive python exercise", "run real Python", "docker lab"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: Students must execute real Python (full stdlib) on a page, Docker-based (not Skulpt)
• Score 0-29 if: Visualization requests with no code execution

15. verified-infographic-generator

Guide Location: skills/microsim-generator/references/verified-infographic-guide.md

Primary Use Cases: Static posters whose factual content must survive scrutiny — every number, percentage, and citation verified against a real source before any pixel is rendered. Also the source of truth for the claim-verification phases (1–4) that any other generator can run first when its sim must present real-world data rather than illustrative values.

Output is NOT a sim. It writes docs/posters/<slug>/ (poster PNG, sources.md, and a numbered audit trail), not docs/sims/. Routing here means exiting the standard scaffold → .js → iframe pipeline.

Trigger Words/Phrases: "verified infographic", "statistics poster", "fact-checked", "cited data", "sourced claims", "evidence-based comparison", "with real numbers", "cite the sources"

Scoring Guidelines:

• Score 90-100 if: A static poster/infographic carries numeric claims that must be traceable to sources
• Score 70-89 if: An interactive sim must present real-world data with citations — run Phases 1–4 here for the claim set, then route the rendering to the matched sim generator (comparison-table, chartjs, timeline, html-table)
• Score 30-49 if: The user supplied pre-verified data and only needs a layout rendered
• Score 0-29 if: Decorative imagery, illustrative/hypothetical numbers, or any interactive sim whose values are pedagogical rather than empirical

Matching Strategy

Step-by-Step Matching Process

1. Extract Key Characteristics

   • Data type (temporal, geographic, relational, numerical, categorical, mathematical)
   • Visual style (chart, diagram, plot, map, timeline, network)
   • Interactivity needs (static, hover, click, drag, sliders, real-time)
   • Explicit mentions of tools/libraries

2. Identify Primary Matches

   • Look for trigger words specific to each generator
   • Match data type to generator specialization
   • Consider visual style requirements

3. Score Each Generator

   • Use the 0-100 scale defined for each generator above
   • Consider multiple factors (data, interaction, visual, trigger words)
   • Be honest about limitations

4. Rank by Score

   • Sort generators from highest to lowest score
   • Include top 3-5 recommendations minimum
   • Always include at least one score above 50 if possible

5. Provide Reasoning

   • Explain why the score is high/low
   • Mention specific features that match or don't match
   • Suggest alternatives if score is low
   • Note any caveats or considerations

Decision Tree Examples

Has dates/timeline? → YES: timeline-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Has geographic coordinates? → YES: map-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Mathematical function f(x)? → YES: math-function-plotter-plotly (high score) → NO: Continue

Nodes and edges? → YES: vis-network (high score) → NO: Continue

Flowchart/process/workflow? → YES: mermaid-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Sets with overlaps? → YES: venn-diagram-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Priority matrix / 2x2? → YES: bubble-chart-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Standard chart type (bar, line, pie)? → YES: chartjs-generator (high score) → NO: Continue

Custom/animated/unique? → YES: microsim-p5 (high score) → NO: Continue

Matrix comparison with clickable cells? → YES: html-table-generator (high score) → NO: Need more information

Common Ambiguities and How to Resolve

"Interactive visualization of data"

• Clarify: What type of data? What kind of interaction?
• Consider: chartjs-generator (if standard charts), microsim-p5 (if custom)

"Graph showing..."

• Clarify: "Graph" can mean chart (ChartJS) or network graph (vis-network)
• Look for: Nodes/edges → vis-network; Data points → chartjs or function plot

"Diagram of..."

• Clarify: Structural (Mermaid), Network (vis-network), or Custom (p5)?
• Look for: Process words → Mermaid; Relationship words → vis-network

"Timeline with events"

• Clear choice: timeline-generator (high score)
• Alternative: chartjs line chart (lower score)

"Map of concepts"

• Clarify: Geographic map or concept map?
• Geographic → map-generator
• Conceptual → vis-network or mermaid-generator

Quality Assurance

When providing match scores, ensure:

1. At least one score ≥ 70: There should be a good match
2. Diversity in scores: Show range of options (don't score everything 50)
3. Clear reasoning: Explain scores with specific features
4. Honesty about limitations: Don't oversell poor matches
5. Alternative suggestions: If primary match has limitations, mention alternatives
6. Complete ranking: Include all relevant generators (usually 3-5 minimum)