zby/commonplace/kb/instructions/write-agent-memory-system-review/SKILL.md
write-agent-memory-system-review
Write or update a local code-grounded agent memory system review from a GitHub repository reference, including checkout refresh, optional sub-agent drafting, semantic QA, and validation.
- Source repository stars
- 80
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 3
- Last source update
- 2026-08-04
- Source checked
- 2026-08-04
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
Use this local skill to write or update type: kb/agent-memory-systems/types/agent-memory-system-review.md notes for external systems under kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/.
Not for
- Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
- Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/zby/commonplace --skill "kb/instructions/write-agent-memory-system-review"Inspect the Agent Skill "write-agent-memory-system-review" from https://github.com/zby/commonplace/blob/890692ef3ee51c9bd3e4a5284ad833b1aec5aee3/kb/instructions/write-agent-memory-system-review/SKILL.md at commit 890692ef3ee51c9bd3e4a5284ad833b1aec5aee3. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Prerequisites
If the system has no reachable source code, stop and write a lightweight note instead.
The topic is a GitHub repository reference: owner/repo or https://github.com/owner/repo.The repository is reachable.The checkout lives under related-systems/, outside kb/. - 02
Steps
1. Normalize the repository target. Derive: - repourl - canonical full GitHub repository URL for citations, https://github.com/{owner}/{repo} with no trailing slash or .git - owner - GitHub owner or organization - reponame - final path segment - reposlug - default review slug, u…
Normalize the repository target. Derive:repourl - canonical full GitHub repository URL for citations, https://github.com/{owner}/{repo} with no trailing slash or .gitowner - GitHub owner or organization - 03
Report
repo cloned or reused
repo cloned or reusedcheckout freshness warning, if anyreview path - 04
Constraints
keep checkouts under related-systems/
keep checkouts under related-systems/use owner-qualified checkout directories for new cloneswrite reviews under kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
**Resolve same-name collisions.** Use the repository name as the default review filename unless there is already an established house-style variant. If `kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/{repo_name}.md` already exists for a different GitHub rRuns scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
git clone "{repo_url}" "{checkout_dir}"Runs scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
git fetch --all --pruneReads files
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Do not read the archived `.replaced.*.md` file while writing the replacement.Evidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 91/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 80 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- zby/commonplace
- Skill path
- kb/instructions/write-agent-memory-system-review/SKILL.md
- Commit
- 890692ef3ee51c9bd3e4a5284ad833b1aec5aee3
- License
- CC-BY-4.0
- Collected
- 2026-08-04
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
Write Agent Memory System Review
Use this local skill to write or update type: kb/agent-memory-systems/types/agent-memory-system-review.md notes for external systems under kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/.
This is a local commonplace-repo workflow, not a promoted cp-skill-* framework skill. The parent agent owns GitHub handling, local source directory setup, artifact lifecycle, taxonomy/semantic QA, the closing validation pass, indexes, and the final report; the delegated worker validates and fixes its own draft's structure before returning, but owns nothing else. Delegate the code-grounded review drafting to a fresh worker context whenever the harness has a sub-agent mechanism.
Delegation means a harness-provided sub-agent/worker tool only. Never start a nested agent by running codex, codex exec, claude, or any other agent CLI from the shell. If the current agent cannot access the required harness sub-agent tool or an agent slot is unavailable, stop or wait and report the blocking condition; do not work around the limit with a command-line agent process.
Prerequisites
- The topic is a GitHub repository reference:
owner/repoorhttps://github.com/owner/repo. - The repository is reachable.
- The checkout lives under
related-systems/, outsidekb/.
If the system has no reachable source code, stop and write a lightweight note instead.
Steps
-
Normalize the repository target. Derive:
repo_url- canonical full GitHub repository URL for citations,https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}with no trailing slash or.gitowner- GitHub owner or organizationrepo_name- final path segmentrepo_slug- default review slug, usuallyrepo_namecheckout_slug- owner-qualified checkout slug:{owner}--{repo_name}checkout_dir-related-systems/{checkout_slug}/source_dir- same path ascheckout_dir; this is the directory passed to the review type contractnote_path-kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/{repo_slug}.md
-
Resolve same-name collisions. Use the repository name as the default review filename unless there is already an established house-style variant. If
kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/{repo_name}.mdalready exists for a different GitHub repository with the same final path segment, usekb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/{owner}--{repo_name}.md. Do not overwrite or update a same-name review unless its**Repository:**line or frontmatter resolves to the sameowner/repo. -
Choose the checkout path. Use the owner-qualified checkout directory for new clones. Existing reviews may have legacy basename-only checkouts such as
related-systems/{repo_name}/; use a legacy checkout only when itsoriginremote resolves to the same GitHubowner/repoyou are reviewing. If a legacy checkout points to a different owner with the same repository name, do not pull it, delete it, or repurpose it; clone the requested repo into the owner-qualifiedcheckout_dir. -
Check main repo state. Run
git status --shortin the main repo before cloning or writing so you know whether unrelated changes already exist. -
Clone or refresh. Run checkout-local git commands from
checkout_dirusing the Bash working directory, a subshell, orcdfirst. Do not spell checkout-local commands asgit -C "{checkout_dir}" ...; permission rules match command prefixes such asgit fetch, andgit -C ... fetchcan unnecessarily trigger approval prompts. After checkout git operations, return to the Commonplace root before metadata capture, archive moves, index refresh, QA, or validation.If
checkout_dirdoes not exist:git clone "{repo_url}" "{checkout_dir}"If
checkout_direxists:( cd "{checkout_dir}" git fetch --all --prune git status --short git merge --ff-only @{upstream} )If using
cdin the current shell instead of a subshell, save the Commonplace root first andcdback to it immediately after the checkout git commands.Use
git fetchrather thangit pullso the refresh uses the agent-approved fetch permission path. If the merge cannot fast-forward because of local commits or conflicts, stop and report the state. Do not force, delete, or overwrite an existing checkout. -
Capture source metadata. Record the top-level listing, most recent commit, README, and package/manifest files for the writer's context. The parent establishes GitHub-specific metadata before delegation:
source_dir:checkout_dirsource_url:repo_urlreviewed_commit: output ofgit rev-parse HEADrun fromcheckout_dircommit_url:{repo_url}/commit/{reviewed_commit}- citation format:
- files:
{repo_url}/blob/{reviewed_commit}/{path} - directories:
{repo_url}/tree/{reviewed_commit}/{path}
- files:
Write the refresh marker immediately after a successful clone or fetch-and-fast-forward:
( cd "{checkout_dir}" git_dir="$(git rev-parse --absolute-git-dir)" date -Iseconds > "$git_dir/commonplace-checkout-refreshed-at" )If the marker is more than 1 hour old by the time drafting starts, carry a checkout freshness warning into the final report. If it is more than 24 hours old, refresh again before drafting.
-
Archive an existing review before writing. If
note_pathexists, archive it before drafting or delegating:git mv "{note_path}" "{note_path%.md}.replaced.{YYYY-MM-DD}.md"If that target path already exists (a same-day rerun already archived one), do not overwrite it: append a numeric suffix starting at
2and increment until the path is free —{note_path%.md}.replaced.{YYYY-MM-DD}.2.md, then.3.md, and so on.Then mark the archived file:
- Set
tags: [](clearing anytrace-learningtag). - Add after the title:
> Replaced {YYYY-MM-DD}. See [{name}](./{name}.md) for the current review. - Remove
user-verifiedif present; archiving is a substantive lifecycle edit and the replacement banner carries the supersession fact. Do not read the archived.replaced.*.mdfile while writing the replacement.
- Set
-
Draft the review by delegation. Use
kb/agent-memory-systems/types/agent-memory-system-review.mdas the worker's artifact contract for required sections and fields. Do not ask the worker to load the full designing-agent-memory-systems note during ordinary review writing — its comparison lens is already condensed into the contract.Before delegating: if the harness cannot launch a sub-agent or worker, stop after setup and report that delegated drafting is unavailable. Do not draft locally unless the user explicitly authorizes a local fallback for this run; if authorized, report
drafting was local, not delegatedas a workflow exception. This is a parent-only decision, made before any worker exists — a worker that has actually been launched is, by construction, the delegated drafting worker and never needs to reason about fallback authorization itself.Launch one fresh sub-agent or worker with a minimal task-local context. Do not fork the parent's full context when the harness offers a clean-context option. Use only the harness sub-agent mechanism for this delegation; do not launch an agent CLI from Bash. Give the worker exactly this task, with the bracketed values filled in — this task text is the worker's complete brief; do not also hand it this skill file.
The worker warning below is a load-bearing mitigation, not optional explanation; rationale: skill discovery re-fires in every sub-agent context.
Draft review content for {note_path}. You are a delegated drafting worker; this task text is your complete and only brief. Your environment may surface `write-agent-memory-system-review` or another skill as available or auto-loaded because this task resembles its trigger — if so, do not invoke or follow it. Its steps (checkout, archiving, indexes, QA, final validation) are written for the parent that dispatched you, not for you. Ignore it entirely and follow only the instructions below. Read, in this order: - kb/agent-memory-systems/COLLECTION.md - kb/agent-memory-systems/types/agent-memory-system-review.md — the artifact contract; authoritative for required sections and fields. Use its current retained-artifact vocabulary, including `knowledge-artifact` and `system-definition-artifact` as behavioral-authority families. - 1-2 current reviews in kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/ and kb/agent-memory-systems/README.md, for style Your inputs: - source_dir: {source_dir} (already prepared; do not mutate it) - note_path: {note_path} - reviewed_revision / source identity: {reviewed_revision} - source_url: {source_url} - reviewed_commit: {reviewed_commit} - commit_url: {commit_url} - citation format — files: {repo_url}/blob/{reviewed_commit}/{path}; directories: {repo_url}/tree/{reviewed_commit}/{path} (unless the caller supplies a different format) If any input above is missing, stop and report which. Verify source_dir is readable (e.g. test -d); if it isn't, stop and report. Never update last-checked without actually reading source_dir. Ground the review in primary sources in source_dir — README, architecture/design docs, CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md, package manifests, and the core source files implementing the central claims. Where the implementation clarifies or contradicts the README, report what the code does and note the divergence. Decide trace-learning status from implementation evidence and either include both the placement section and the trace-learning tag, or omit both. Do not add `user-verified`; drafting and semantic review cannot grant human attestation. Write note_path from the code outward. Then run: commonplace-validate {note_path} Fix any structural or description-quality issues it reports and re-run until clean — you own this file, so fix it directly rather than reporting it back. Do not edit indexes, archived reviews, the trace-learning survey, checkout state, or any file other than note_path. Do not run any commonplace-* command other than commonplace-validate on note_path. Do not spawn further agents unless a proper sub-agent/worker tool is available to you; if you need one and none is available, pause and report the blocker — never run codex, codex exec, claude, or another agent CLI as a substitute. Report: your commonplace-validate result and whether trace-learning applies.The parent owns checkout, archive moves, curated index edits, taxonomy QA, semantic QA, and the final report — none of that is the worker's concern. After verifying the worker-owned draft and validation result, close, terminate, or release the drafting worker; do not retain it for semantic QA or any follow-up task.
-
Update the README only if needed. Only edit
kb/agent-memory-systems/README.mdwhen:- the system was named in the
## Coverage"Review backlog" callout — remove it there, or - the repo adds a genuinely new cross-system pattern worth a line in
## Patterns Across Systems. Keep the edit minimal and specific.
- the system was named in the
-
Update the trace-learning survey if needed. If the review's trace-learning placement adds meaningfully to the survey, update
kb/agent-memory-systems/trace-learning-techniques-in-related-systems.md. -
Run taxonomy QA. Re-read the drafted review and check whether it makes the artifact contract clear where relevant. Work from the type contract's artifact-analysis field list (plus its trace-learning split, when the system learns from traces) — the contract is authoritative for which fields exist and what each means; do not QA against a remembered list. For each contract field, ask: does the review make that mechanism clear where it affects the comparison? Do not force a rigid section into every review; add or revise text only when the existing wording leaves a mechanism ambiguous.
If a field is absent because the reviewed system has no distinctive mechanism there, leave it absent. If the absence hides an important tradeoff, fix the review before semantic QA.
- Run semantic QA. Run the live-agent procedure from
kb/instructions/run-review-batches.mdon the new review note using requested mode with thesemanticbundle: select target pairs withcommonplace-review-target-selector --mode requested, create jobs from selector JSON withcommonplace-create-review-jobs --input -, delegate each job to a sub-agent, then finalize each sentinel-bracketed output withcommonplace-finalize-review-joband the runner/model provenance flags. Treat it as a read-only QA loop: extract findings, fix clearly valid issues, and leave uncertain findings for the final report rather than forcing a rewrite.
If semantic QA cannot be completed through the current harness, report it as a blocked QA step rather than substituting a shell-launched agent.
- Validate. Run:
If validation reports structural or description-quality issues, fix them and validate once more.commonplace-validate "{note_path}"
Report
Report:
- repo cloned or reused
- checkout freshness warning, if any
- review path
- whether drafting was delegated
- whether the curated index changed
- whether
trace-learning-techniques-in-related-systems.mdchanged - taxonomy QA outcome
- semantic gate bundle outcome
- final
commonplace-validateresult
Constraints
Always:
- keep checkouts under
related-systems/ - use owner-qualified checkout directories for new clones
- write reviews under
kb/agent-memory-systems/reviews/ - cite repo source files with GitHub URLs pinned to the commit derived from the checkout
- run semantic QA before final validation
Never:
- put checked-out repos under
kb/ - overwrite or repurpose an existing checkout whose remote points to a different owner/repo
- force-pull, delete, or reset a checkout to handle conflicts
- update
last-checkedwithout actually re-reading the reviewed system - run
codex,codex exec,claude, or another agent CLI from the shell to bypass delegation or worker limits - leave the review unvalidated
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
ab-testing
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
app-store-optimization
App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist
JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills
suede-ab-testing
Suede-owned experimentation discipline for hypotheses, sample sizing, test duration, significance, and repeatable experiment programs. Use when comparing variants, deciding whether a result is reliable, or building an experiment backlog and cadence. NOT FOR: analytics instrumentation (use suede-analytics), post-click conversion diagnosis (use suede-site-alchemy), or writing the variant copy itself (use suede-copy).
narrative-io/narrative-skills-marketplace
design-analysis
Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "