The Direct approach produced the most ADRs (7, including a new ADR-007 for the layout engine created from the team answer) and is the only version that documents the threat model with 3 explicit trust boundaries inline in Chapter 10. It has 101 Q-ID references despite not starting with a Question Tree — the follow-up prompt added them retroactively.

The trade-off: 7 ADRs means 2 extra ADRs that weren’t in the Original. The Direct approach over-generates when given information — it creates new artifacts rather than just integrating answers.

At 2,481 lines (21% of Original), the Socratic approach achieves the highest Q-ID density (123 references) and strong team-answer traceability (35 markers) with the least text. It is the most concise version that still covers all essential content.

The trade-off: only 3 ADRs (the Question Tree identified fewer decision points), and no threat model documentation. The Socratic approach is selective — it documents only what the Question Tree covered, and the tree didn’t branch into security narrative.

The Two-Phase approach is the only version where the ADR topics match the Original exactly (5 ADRs, correct subjects, correct status including ADR-004 Rejected). It has the most team-answer markers (50) and a resolution log in OPEN_QUESTIONS.adoc mapping each answer to its landing page.

The trade-off: no threat model (same as Socratic), and 35% compression vs. Original is less efficient than Socratic’s 21%.

The Direct approach sees each team answer as an opportunity to create or expand an artifact. When it received OQ-022 (layout engine rationale), it created a new ADR-007. The Two-Phase approach, guided by OQ-4 ("which ADRs exist?"), already knew there were exactly 5 and stuck to them. The Socratic approach only created ADRs for decisions its Question Tree branched into.

This is the core structural difference: the Question Tree constrains the output. Without it, the LLM follows its own judgment about what deserves an ADR. With it, the LLM follows the tree’s decomposition.

The Direct approach received OQ-053 (threat model) as a standalone answer and integrated it into Chapter 10. The Socratic and Two-Phase approaches had equivalent information (OQ-7 / Q-4.7.2) but placed security coverage differently — in quality scenarios rather than as a dedicated threat-model section. This suggests the placement of security information is a prompt-design issue, not an information issue. All three have the same facts; only Direct has a named "Threat Model" section.

The Question Tree doesn’t just improve honesty (Experiment 1c finding). It also constrains output fidelity. The Two-Phase approach matched the Original’s ADR structure precisely because Phase 1 asked "which ADRs exist?" and the team answer locked in the 5 topics. Without this constraint, the Direct approach hallucinated 2 extra ADRs.

All three approaches achieved:

This confirms that the team answers, not the approach structure, determine information completeness. The structure determines how well the information is organized and traceable.

Two-Phase has the most team-answer markers because the Phase 2 prompt required marking every team-provided claim. Socratic has the most Q-IDs because the Question Tree is the documentation structure. Direct has fewer of both because traceability was added retroactively, not built into the process.