You come to understand something already decided, through small views you can question.
Claude Code. With moo off, you ask what the sudden squeaks in a vocal check file are. Claude reads the notes and scripts and says they are almost certainly wrong notes the pitch tracker placed well above the voice. It gives a table of when they happen, a list of likely causes, a problem with the check file, two proposed fixes and two questions. With moo on, you type /hope:explain and the same words. The reply opens with one sentence: the squeaks are 20 notes the transcription placed above your voice's range, most of them made up. Then come a table of when each jump happens, a small tree of how the pitch tracker and the check file work, a guess that the jumps are breaths, consonants or bleed, which it can't confirm, and a note that the check file's right channel is silent. You ask how sure it is that it's not your voice, and what would tell them apart. It says its last answer overstated it, gives a table of which clues still hold, and a tree of what to listen for in each stem at those times. It asks you to copy the two stems onto the machine so it can measure them.