Index

A back-of-book index of where each concept, technique, and named device appears. Entries point to chapter.section (for example, 4.3 is Chapter 4, Section 3); a bare chapter number points to the chapter as a whole. The most important treatment of a term is listed first; bold marks the section where a term is introduced or defined. For one-line definitions, see the Glossary.

A

abstract (paper/report), 14.5, 13.7, 35.2
abstraction ladder, 3.5, 7.2
accessibility (as obligation), 38.4, 10.6, 22.4
accuracy (ethical obligation), 38.2, 38.1
acceptance criteria (user story), 34.4
acceptance criterion (requirement), 33.2
active voice, 3.3, 35.1
action item, 21.6, 34.6
adverse effect, 36.6
agent–action–object, 3.2
alt-text, 10.6, 9.9, 22.4, 32.7
analogy, 28.2, 28.3
where the analogy breaks, 28.3
annotation (interprets, not labels), 40.3, 9.5, 15.8
ANSI Z535 signal words, 22.3
antecedent, 6.3
APA style, 11.2, 35.2
API documentation, 25.4
approach (grant section), 17.4
architecture decision record (ADR), 25.5, 34.5, 33.5
architecture diagram, 32.2, 33.5
article processing charge (APC), 35.4
ask, the (call to action), 20.4, 19.4, 37.2
assertion–evidence slide, 30.2, 18.2, 31.1
assessment vs. diagnosis (clinical), 36.1
assumed step, 22.8, 26.5
asynchronous communication, 19.5
atomic requirement, 33.2
attribution (figures/data), 11.4, 9.9
audience analysis, 2.1–2.2, 19.1
audience profile, 2.2
audience, primary vs. secondary, 2.8
augmentation vs. outsourcing (AI), 29.4
author-contribution statement, 35.5
axis truncation (zero-baseline), 9.7, 9.9, 30.4

B

backward scheduling (thirds rule), 5.5
badge (README), 25.3
BCC (blind carbon copy), 19.6
benefit (vs. feature), 20.6
bibliography (vs. reference list), 11 (FAQ)
blameless postmortem, 34.6, 21.4
blocking vs. non-blocking comment, 34.1
BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front), 4.3, 13.8, 19.2, 20.4, 21.1
board memo / board packet, 37.6
bottom-up organization, 4.2
broader impacts (NSF), 17.6, 28
budget justification (grant), 17.6
bug report, 34.3
expected vs. actual behavior, 34.3
minimal reproducible example, 34.3

C

C4 model, 32.2
calibrating language to evidence, 13.6, 7.5, 38.2
caption levels (0–3), 9.5, 9.2, 27.8
cardinality (ER diagram), 32.5
CC (carbon copy), 19.6
certainty of evidence (GRADE), 36.5
Challenger O-ring memos, 1.3, 2.7, 4.9, 9.8, 33.7, 37.6, 38.7
changelog, 25.6, 34.7
Keep a Changelog, 25.6
channel selection (email/chat/call), 19.5
chartjunk, 9.3, 30.4
Chicago style, 11.2
citation, 11.1, 11.2
citation as argument, 15.7
clarity, 3.1, 3.8, 3.9
clarity checklist (8 passes), 3.9
clarity vs. simplicity (not dumbing down), 3.8, 28
clean-machine test, 25.2, 26.5
code documentation, 24
code review, 34.1
critique the code, not the coder, 34.1, 34.6
nit (nit:), 34.1
cohesion vs. coherence, 8.5
collaborative writing, 23
comma splice, 6.4
comment (code), 24.2
comment the why, not the what, 24.2
commented-out code, 24.6
redundant / what-comment, 24.2
common knowledge, 11.4
common mistakes (per chapter), 3.10, 6.9, 13.10, 17.8, 20.10, 22.9, 24.7, 33.10, 38.9
compliance documentation, 33.7
compression ladder (four altitudes), 37.5, 37.8
concision, 3.1
concrete vs. abstract language, 3.5, 7.2
confidence interval (CI), 35.2
conflict of interest disclosure, 38.3
conjunctive adverb, 6.4
connotation, 7.1
consent agenda, 37.6
context window (LLM), 29.1
coordinating conjunction (FANBOYS), 6.4
corporate no-voice, 7.4
corrective action (incident), 21.4, 21.5
corresponding author, 35.5
cost of inaction ("do nothing" baseline), 20.3
cover letter (to an editor), 35.6
CRediT taxonomy, 35.5
curation (portfolio), 40.3
curiosity gap, 28.4
curse of knowledge, 1.8, 2.5, 22.8, 24.1, 26.5
curse of the plausible (AI), 29.3

D

dangling modifier, 6.2
dangling transition, 8.4, 8.7
dashboard text, 27.7
data-analysis memo, 27.2, 27.3
data-availability statement, 35.5
data-ink ratio, 9.3, 30.4
data narrative (interpret, don't present), 9.7
data-sentence formula, 9.6
define-on-first-use, 2.5
definition of done, 34.4
deliberate practice, 39.1
denotation, 7.1
design document, 33.5, 34.5
desk reject, 14.6, 35.6
developmental feedback, 12.5
diagram, 32.1
diagrams-as-code, 32.9
Diátaxis framework, 26.1, 22.9, 25.8
direct quotation, 11.3
disclosure (AI use), 29.6
doc drift / stale comment, 24.6
docstring, 24.3
Google / NumPy / Sphinx styles, 24.3
JSDoc, 24.3
PEP 257, 24.3
document owner / single-threaded owner, 23.2
DOI, 11.5
duty of care, 38.8

E

editing, 5.4, 12.1, 12.3
editing hierarchy, 12.2
editorializing (in Results), 13.5
effect size, 35.2
elegant variation (as a bug), 7.9, 24.3
elevator pitch (spoken), 18.5, 31
written elevator pitch, 37.7
email, professional, 19
bad-news email, 19.7
"no" email, 19.8
request email, 19.4
subject line, 19.3
email thread, 19.6
email tone (negativity bias), 19.6
empty phrases / wordiness, 3.4
endpoint (API), 25.4
engineering notebook, 33.8
entity–relationship (ER) diagram, 32.5
epistemic modality, 7.5
euphemism, 7.6
evidence grading / GRADE, 36.5
exception-based reporting, 21.3
executive summary, 20.4, 13.8, 27.6, 37.2
expletive construction, 6.8
explanation (Diátaxis mode), 26.1
explanation effect (self-explanation), 1.2
exploratory vs. explanatory graphics, 9.4

F

false precision, 3 (case study 2)
faulty parallelism, 6.6
feature (vs. benefit), 20.6
features→benefits ("so what?"), 20.6
feasibility study, 21.7
feedback loop (writing), 5.5, 39.5
few-shot example (prompting), 29.5
fiduciary duty, 37.6
figure (vs. table), 9.1
filler words, 31.5
finding vs. observation, 27.4, 27.5
flinch test, 10.1
flowchart, 32.3
footnote, 11.2
forecasting statement, 4.4
F-pattern, 4.1
Frankenstein document, 23.1
front door (README / portfolio), 25.1, 40.6
functional requirement, 33.1

G

gap, the (research), 15.6, 14.3, 16.4
general audience / unobligated reader, 28.1
generative AI, 29.1
given-new contract, 8.3
Given-When-Then, 34.4
git for docs, 23.3
global revision, 12.2–12.3
growth narrative / portfolio cover letter, 40.7

H

hallucination (AI), 29.3
happy path, 26.6
hazard entry (safety doc), 33.7
headline number, 27.4
health literacy, 36.2
hedging, 7.5
hostile question (Q&A), 31.6, 18.6
hourglass structure, 14.4, 13.2
how-to guide (Diátaxis), 26.3
hypothesis (falsifiable), 14.3

I

identity-first language, 7.7
IEEE style, 11.2
illogical comparison, 6.6
IMRaD, 13.2, 13.1
inclusive language, 7.7
inclusivity (ethical obligation), 38.4
incident report, 21.4, 21.5
indication / contraindication, 36.6
information foraging, 4.1
information hierarchy, 4.5
informative header, 4.5
informed consent (document vs. conversation), 36 (intro)
inner critic, 5.4
institutional / contextual knowledge (AI limit), 29.3
instructions, 22.1
Instructions for Use (IFU), 36.6
integration pass (collaborative), 23.5
intention-revealing name, 24.5
in-text citation, 11.2
inverted pyramid, 4.3

J

jargon (audience-relative), 2.3, 3.7
jargon budget, 28.3
journal vs. conference, 14.1

K

K-R-A-C framework, 2.2
knowledge level (three dials), 2.2
known-new chaining, 8.3

L

lab report, 13.1
lede / nut graf, 28.5
level of abstraction (diagram), 32.2
lie of omission, 38.5
lightning talk, 18.5
limitations, 13.6, 38.3
lists vs. prose, 4.6
literature review, 15.1
literature-review chapter (thesis), 16.7
narrative / systematic / scoping review, 15.5

M

magic number, 24.2, 24.5
MAY / OPTIONAL (RFC 2119), 33.3
meeting minutes, 21.6
Mermaid, 32.9
methodology chapter (thesis), 16.7
methods (IMRaD), 13.4, 35.1
minimal reproducible example, 34.3
misplaced modifier, 6.2
mode mixing (Diátaxis), 26.4
mosaic plagiarism, 11.4

N

narrative structure (hook→journey→payoff), 28.5
nit (code-review comment), 34.1
nominalization, 3.2
non-functional requirement, 33.1
normative vs. informative, 33.3

O

observation → interpretation → recommendation ladder, 27.5
OCAR, 4.8
one action per step, 22.2
one-pager, 37.5
one point per slide, 30.3, 18.2
open access (gold/green/diamond), 35.4, 14.6
options analysis, 20.3
original contribution (thesis), 16.1
orphan "this", 6.3
outline, 5.3
overclaiming / overstatement, 13.6, 38.2

P

paragraph (as unit of thought), 8.1
paragraph length (technical), 8.5
paragraph unity, 8.1–8.2
parallel structure (document level), 4.7
paraphrase, 11.3
passive voice (when appropriate), 3.3, 13.4, 35.1
patchwriting, 11.3
payback period, 20.2
peer review, 14.1, 12.5
PEP 257, 24.3
performance order (instructions), 22.2
person-first language, 7.7
persuasion vs. spin, 38.5
pitch (to an editor), 28.8
plain language (patient-facing), 36.2
policy brief, 37.4
postmortem, 34.6
poster, research, 18.4
poster hierarchy, 18.4
reading path, 18.4
predatory journal, 14.8
preliminary data, 17.4
preprint, 35.4, 14.6
problem–solution structure, 20.5, 4.8
procedure, 22.1
progress report, 21.2
proofreading, 5.4, 12.1
proposal, 20.1, 20.2
internal vs. external, 20.9
solicited vs. unsolicited, 20.9
prompt / prompt engineering, 29.5
pronoun ambiguity, 6.3
pull request (PR), 34.2
PR description (what/why/how to test), 34.2
purpose (inform/persuade/instruct/record), 2.6
purpose statement, 5.3
purpose-first opening (email), 19.4
p-value, 35.2

Q

Q&A bridging, 18.6, 31.6
qualifications (proposal), 20.2
quick-start (README), 25.2

R

RACI, 23.6
RAG status (Red/Amber/Green), 21.3
range (portfolio meta-skill), 40.1
reading as a writer, 39.2
reading context, 2.2
read-aloud technique, 12.4, 3.9
read-backwards technique, 12.4
README, 25.1
reasonable-reader standard, 38.6
recommendation-first (data write-up), 27.3–27.4, 13.8
redundant figure, 9.9
redundant modifier, 3.4
reference documentation, 26.1, 25.4
reference list, 11.2
reference manager, 11.5
register (formal/neutral/informal), 7.3
release notes, 34.7
replicability / reproducibility, 13.4, 16.7
reproduction steps, 34.3
request / response (API), 25.4
requirement, 33.1
atomic / unambiguous / testable, 33.2
requirement ID, 33.4
response to reviewers, 14.7, 35.7
reverse outline, 4.4, 12 (exercises)
review / approval workflow, 23.6
revising vs. editing, 5.4, 12.1
revision (as the work), 5.2, 12.1, 40.5
RFC 2119, 33.3
RFP (Request for Proposal), 20.9
risk–mitigation, 20.7
roadmap (talk), 31.1
role prompting, 29.5
root cause, 21.4, 34.6
ROI (return on investment), 20.2
rubber-duck debugging, 1.2
run-on / fused sentence, 6.4

S

saturation (sources), 15.3, 15.8
scanning (how readers read), 4.1, 22.1
scope (decision size), 20.3
scope boundary (thesis), 16.4
scope creep, 16.5
SCQA, 4.8
science communication, 28.1
self-documenting code, 24.5
self-plagiarism, 11.4
semantic structure / real headings, 10.6
semantic versioning (semver), 25.6
sentence variety, 6.7
sequence diagram, 32.4
SHALL / MUST / REQUIRED (RFC 2119), 33.3
shitty first draft (Lamott), 5.1, 5.4
SHOULD / RECOMMENDED (RFC 2119), 33.3
signal word, 22.3
signposting, 4.4
small multiples, 9 (extension)
smart-friend test, 2.5
SOAP note, 36.1
"so what?" test, 3.6, 20.6, 27.5
speaker notes, 18 (project), 31.3
specification (spec), 33.4
Specific Aims, 17.2, 17.3
squinting modifier, 6.2
standalone test (executive summary), 20.4, 37.2
standard operating procedure (SOP), 22.7
status code (HTTP), 25.4
status update, 21.3
strength of recommendation (GRADE), 36.5
stress position, 8.3
structure, 4.1
structured abstract, 14.5
style guide / house style, 23.4, 7
subject line (email), 19.3
subject–verb agreement, 6.5
subordination, 6.4, 6.7
supplementary materials (SI), 35.3
swipe file, 39.2
sycophancy (LLM), 29.1
synthesis, 15.1
synthesis matrix, 15.3

T

table (vs. figure), 9.1
takeaway, the (one per poster/slide), 18.4
teach-back, 36.3
technical report, 13.8
technically vs. functionally present, 1.3
template, not theme (slides), 30.6
testable / verifiable (requirement), 33.2
test case, 33.6
test plan / test report, 33.6
thematic organization (lit review), 15.4
thesis / dissertation, 16.1
three-paper / stapled thesis, 16.9
thesis statement / claim, 16.1–16.2
thought leadership, 37.3
threshold concept (no good writing in the abstract), 2.5
timeline (incident), 21.4
time-to-first-success, 25.1, 25.2
TODO / FIXME comment, 24.6
tolerance, 33.2, 33.9
tone (as a choice), 7.3
tooltip, 27.7
top-down organization, 4.2
topic position, 8.3
topic sentence, 4.4, 8.2
track changes / suggesting mode, 23.3
traceability, 33.4
traceability matrix, 33.4
transcription model (of writing), 1.6
transitions (additive/adversative/causal/sequential), 8.4
translation without distortion, 37.4
transparency (ethical obligation), 38.3
trip report, 21.7
troubleshooting section, 22.6
tutorial (learning-oriented), 26.2
tutorial vs. how-to ("guarantees success" vs. "assumes it"), 26.2
type hint / type annotation, 24.4
typography, 10.2

U

UML (borrow vocabulary, skip ceremony), 32.6
unambiguous (requirement property), 33.2
24-hour gap, the, 5.5, 12.4
user manual / how-to guide, 22.1
user story, 34.4

V

verification (non-delegable, AI), 29.6
verification method (test/inspection/demonstration/analysis), 33.2
version control (documents), 23.3
version history, 23.3
virtual presence (presenting), 31.8
visual design, 10.1
visual hierarchy, 10.3
voice, 7.4

W

warnings, cautions, notes (placement), 22.3
watermelon report, 21.3
WCAG, 10.6, 30.4
weasel word, 7.6
white paper, 37.3
white space (negative space), 10.3
whistleblowing, 38.8
work instruction / assembly procedure, 33.9
worked example & code progression, 26.6
writer's block, 5.1–5.2
writing as thinking, 1.1–1.2
writing process (five stages), 5.2

The seven recurring themes are woven throughout rather than confined to single sections: writing-is-thinking (1, 11, 16, 24, 29), audience-is-everything (2, 19, 20, 27, 28, 37), clarity-is-not-the-enemy-of-precision (3, 7, 33, 36), revision-is-where-the-writing-happens (5, 12, 16, 40), structure-serves-the-reader (4, 8, 13, 21, 32), every-sentence-must-earn-its-place (3, 6, 24, 37), and the-best-writing-is-invisible (7, 10, 30, 32). The before/after transformation — the book's core teaching device — recurs in nearly every chapter. See the Glossary for definitions.