Does the scalar potential derived from irrotationality impose additional constraints on the shape function itself?

Your question asks whether the requirement that a potential be derivable from an irrotational (curl-free) vector field imposes shape constraints on the potential function itself.

Unfortunately, the provided preprints don't directly address this mathematical question. They discuss scalar potentials in cosmology, scalar-tensor theories, and supergravity, but none explores the relationship between irrotationality constraints and the functional form of scalar potentials in the way your question frames it.

That said, I can offer some context: in classical field theory, if a vector field is irrotational (∇ × V = 0), then it can be written as the gradient of a scalar potential, V = ∇φ. This is a *representation* constraint rather than a constraint on φ's shape — any smooth scalar field automatically generates an irrotational vector field via its gradient. The real constraints on φ come from the dynamics (e.g., field equations, boundary conditions, or symmetry requirements), which the archive papers do explore in specific contexts like cosmology and gravitational wave coupling [AG-2024.11-170, AG-2025.11-776]. If you're asking about whether irrotationality alone restricts the *functional form* of φ independent of dynamics, that's a mathematical question outside the scope of these preprints.