[Advice] Mirror-Logic Layered Architecture: Seeking feedback on "Hard Rules" for my Agent ecosystem

Hi everyone,

I’m currently stress-testing a new agent architecture based on three core principles: Layered Structure, Standardization, and Ecosystemic Integration.

Part of the idea is to build prompts using a layered context approach, moving from the most rigid to the most fluid:

The Hard Core: The "moral compass" or absolute laws the agent must follow.

User Context: Stable personal information and preferences (the "Who").

Agent Context: The specific role and mission of that particular agent.

Output/Aesthetic Layer: The softest layer—tone, formatting, and style.

The "Mirror Logic" Twist:

To ensure the agent doesn't lose track of the most important constraints (the "Hard Core"), I’m building the prompts in reverse order at the end. The logic flow is 1→2→3→4→3→2→1. This way, the most critical rules are the first thing the model reads and the last thing it reinforces before generating the output.

I need your brainpower on Step 1:

I’m currently refining the "Hard Rules" (the immutable core). So far, I have things like:

Critical thinking over "people-pleasing" (the agent must be able to challenge me).

High-certainty threshold (if confidence is <80%, it must trigger a clarification alert).

My questions for the community:

What other "Universal Laws" would you include in an agent's hard core to keep it functional but intellectually honest?

Do you see any potential "hallucination loops" by repeating the logic in mirror format?

Has anyone tried a similar "sandwich/mirror" prompt structure with LLMs / Examples / real aplications / posible risks / etc or maybe is definitly a stupid idea.

Thanks