When there are many writings in different projects, remembering their content can be challenging, e.g. in a situation where it is meant to refer to several other writings, where a certain topic is covered throughout, something specific has been said, or which could give ideas for a new writing.

It may not always be just good to make writings to be easier to find as from the point of view of managing ones thoughts it might be better to e.g. keep writings written in different time periods or related to different time periods "away" from each other until they are really needed. Groupings might remain the same for a long time and one's mind might be consider them to closely related even when one kind of known that they maybe aren't.

However, searching for useful writings for some purpose might be tedicous and thus in some scenarios there are benefits to preselect writings that one might be want to find quickly later.

In the writing findability groups, the names of groups are limited to a few dozen characters, while the groups themselves may have several descriptions, which can be much longer. These descriptions are those which are intended in some way to characterise e.g. what is to be found in the writings marked on them or what thoughts might be arised.

The search view is a natural place for them to be useful, where the name of a group can be selected from a menu, which then causes a list of its descriptions to appear with links, whose purpose should be guessable.

There is also a view for the "visualisation" of how writing findability group's descriptions target all of users writings, wherein writing's relations to descriptions are presented using symbols, wherein symbols are either mean that a writing doesn't have or it has one or more of such.

The challenge for usability is that the user's mind gets overwhelmed with wondering which symbol is related to which writing finding groups' description and where to keep the descriptions while the user browses through the listed writings, even though they are sorted and separated by project and writing collections. It is indeed possible that looking at these symbols may make them seem "empty" in their meaning. However, the descriptions of one writing finding groups can be taken in use by Ctrl-clicking on it.

A potentially more useful use for the generated descriptions might be in the "inspiration arrangements" view, where the other kind of predefined elements are adequates items. They can moved around on screen and their positions can be saved like images in the image assorting view. More on this in the writing about it.

Instead of textual descriptions, one could imagine using e.g. just single words and listing them alongside the whole names of writings, but wouldn't this probably leave something significant undefined? And if a user has e.g. 600 writings, would it be "functional" to look at them?