Runtime Configuration (Step 0 — before any processing)
Read these files to configure domain-specific behavior:
-
ops/derivation-manifest.md— vocabulary mapping, domain context- Use
vocabulary.notesfor the notes folder name - Use
vocabulary.notefor the note type name in output - Use
vocabulary.rethinkfor rethink command name in threshold alerts - Use
vocabulary.topic_mapfor MOC references
- Use
-
ops/config.yaml— thresholdsself_evolution.observation_threshold(default: 10) — for threshold alertsself_evolution.tension_threshold(default: 5) — for threshold alerts
-
ops/methodology/— read existing methodology notes before creating new ones (prevents duplicates)
If these files don't exist (pre-init invocation or standalone use), use universal defaults.
EXECUTE NOW
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Parse immediately:
- If target contains a quoted description or unquoted text: explicit mode — user describes friction directly
- If target is empty: contextual mode — review recent conversation for corrections
- If target contains
--mine-sessionsor--mine: session mining mode — scan ops/sessions/ for patterns
START NOW. Reference below defines the three modes.
Explicit Mode
User provides a description: /remember "don't process personal notes like research" or /remember always check for duplicates before creating
Step 1: Parse the Friction
Analyze the user's description to extract:
- What the agent did wrong (or what the user wants to prevent)
- What the user wants instead (the correct behavior)
- The scope — when does this apply? Always? Only for specific content types? Only in certain phases?
- The category — which area of agent behavior does this affect?
| Category | Applies When |
|---|---|
| processing | How to extract, reduce, or handle content |
| capture | How to record, file, or organize incoming material |
| connection | How to find, evaluate, or add links between notes |
| maintenance | How to handle health checks, reweaving, cleanup |
| voice | How to write, what tone or style to use |
| behavior | General agent conduct, interaction patterns |
| quality | Standards for notes, descriptions, titles |
Step 2: Check for Existing Methodology Notes
Before creating a new note, read all files in ops/methodology/:
ls -1 ops/methodology/*.md 2>/dev/null
For each existing note, check if it covers the same behavioral area. Specifically:
- Does an existing note address the same friction?
- Would the new learning extend an existing note rather than warrant a new one?
| Check Result | Action |
|---|---|
| No existing notes in this area | Create new methodology note |
| Existing note covers different aspect of same area | Create new note, link to existing |
| Existing note covers same friction | Extend existing note with new evidence instead of creating duplicate |
| Existing note contradicts new friction | Create both a new methodology note AND an observation about the contradiction |
Step 3: Create Methodology Note
Write to ops/methodology/:
Rule Zero: This methodology note becomes part of the system's canonical specification. ops/methodology/ is not a log of what happened — it is the authoritative declaration of how the system should behave. Write this note as a directive: what the agent SHOULD do, not what went wrong. Future sessions, /rethink drift checks, and meta-skills will consult this note as ground truth for system behavior.
Filename: Convert the prose title to kebab-case. Example: "don't process personal notes like research" becomes dont-process-personal-notes-like-research.md.
---
description: [what this methodology note teaches — specific enough to be actionable]
type: methodology
category: [processing | capture | connection | maintenance | voice | behavior | quality]
source: explicit
created: YYYY-MM-DD
status: active
---
# [prose-as-title describing the learned behavior]
## What to Do
[Clear, specific guidance. Not "be careful" but "when encountering X, do Y instead of Z."]
## What to Avoid
[The specific anti-pattern this note prevents. What was the agent doing wrong?]
## Why This Matters
[What goes wrong without this guidance. Connect to the user's actual friction — what broke, what was confusing, what wasted time.]
## Scope
[When does this apply? Always? Only for certain content types? Only during specific phases? Be explicit about boundaries.]
---
Related: [[methodology]]
Writing quality for methodology notes:
- Be specific enough that a fresh agent session could follow this guidance without additional context
- Use concrete examples where possible — "when processing therapy notes" not "when processing certain types of content"
- State both the DO and the DON'T — methodology notes that only say what to do miss the anti-pattern that triggered them
- Keep scope explicit — unbounded methodology notes get applied where they should not be
Step 4: Update Methodology MOC
Edit ops/methodology.md (create if missing):
- Find the section for the note's category
- Add the note with a context phrase:
- [[note title]] — [what this teaches] - If no section exists for this category, create one
## [Category]
- [[existing note]] — what it teaches
- [[new note]] — what this teaches
Step 5: Check Pattern Threshold
Count methodology notes in the same category:
grep -rl "^category: [CATEGORY]" ops/methodology/ 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' '
If 3+ notes exist in the same category, this is a signal for /{DOMAIN:rethink}:
This is friction capture #[N] in the "[category]" area.
3+ captures in the same area suggest a systemic pattern.
Consider running /{DOMAIN:rethink} to review [category] methodology patterns
and potentially elevate them to context file changes.
Step 6: Output
--=={ remember }==--
Captured: [brief description of the learning]
Filed to: ops/methodology/[filename].md
Updated: ops/methodology.md MOC
Category: [category]
[If pattern threshold reached:]
This is friction capture #[N] in the "[category]" area.
Consider running /{DOMAIN:rethink} to review [category] methodology patterns.
Contextual Mode
No argument provided: /remember
The agent reviews the current conversation to find corrections the user made that should become methodology notes.
Step 1: Review Recent Context
Scan the current conversation for correction signals. Look for:
| Signal Type | Detection Patterns | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Direct correction | "no", "that's wrong", "not like that", "incorrect" | "No, don't split that into separate notes" |
| Redirection | "actually", "instead", "let's do X not Y", "stop" | "Actually, keep the original phrasing" |
| Preference statement | "I prefer", "always do X", "never do Y", "from now on" | "Always check for duplicates first" |
| Frustration signal | "again?", "I already said", "why did you", "that's the third time" | "Why did you create a duplicate again?" |
| Quality correction | "too vague", "not specific enough", "that's not what I meant" | "That description is too vague — add the mechanism" |
Step 2: Identify the Most Recent Correction
From the detected corrections, identify the most recent one. Present it to the user for confirmation:
--=={ remember — contextual }==--
Detected correction:
"[quoted user text]"
Interpreted as:
[What the agent should learn from this — specific behavioral change]
Category: [category]
Capture this as a methodology note? (yes / no / modify)
Wait for user confirmation. Do not create notes from inferred corrections without approval — the agent might misinterpret what the user meant.
Step 3: Handle Response
| Response | Action |
|---|---|
| "yes" | Create methodology note (same process as explic |