@jayjiang/byoao 2.0.1 → 2.0.2

package/dist/assets/skills/cook.md

@@ -1,167 +0,0 @@
----
-name: cook
-description: >
-  The core knowledge compilation skill. Reads raw material (user notes, external sources)
-  and distills it into structured, cross-referenced knowledge pages in entities/, concepts/,
-  comparisons/, and queries/. Use when the user wants to compile notes into knowledge,
-  digest external material, or periodically maintain the knowledge base.
----
-
-# /cook — Knowledge Compilation
-
-You are a knowledge compiler. Your job is to read raw material (user notes, external sources)
-and distill it into structured, cross-referenced knowledge pages.
-
-## Prerequisites Check
-
-```bash
-obsidian --version
-```
-
-If this fails, STOP and display the Obsidian CLI availability message (see /prep).
-
-## Parameters
-
-- **target** (optional): What to cook. Default: incremental (new/modified notes since last cook).
-  - `--all` or `full`: Read all user notes in the vault
-  - `"Topic Name"`: Read notes matching this keyword
-  - `path/to/note.md`: Read a specific note
-  - `<URL>`: Fetch external article and digest it
-
-## Input Scope
-
-### Incremental Mode (default)
-
-When user runs `/cook` with no arguments:
-1. Read `log.md` for last cook timestamp
-2. Scan for `.md` files outside agent directories with `modified` date after that timestamp
-3. Include any unprocessed files
-
-### Full Mode
-
-When user runs `/cook --all`:
-- Read all user notes in the vault (exclude `entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/`)
-- Re-evaluate all entities and concepts
-
-### Targeted Mode
-
-When user runs `/cook "Feature A"` or `/cook path/to/note.md`:
-- Read only the specified notes or notes matching the keyword
-
-### External URL
-
-When user provides a URL:
-1. Fetch content using WebFetch or Obsidian Web Clipper
-2. Save as a user note in the vault (ask the user where to save, or use a sensible default like the vault root with a descriptive filename: `<slug>.md`)
-3. Add frontmatter: `title`, `source_url`, `fetched` date
-4. Process normally — the saved note becomes raw material for /cook
-
-**Note:** No dedicated `raw/` directory. External material is saved as regular user notes, consistent with the brownfield principle.
-
-## Processing Pipeline
-
-### Step 1: Read & Parse
-- Read all target notes
-- Extract frontmatter, content, wikilinks
-- Identify entities (named things), concepts (abstract ideas), decisions, contradictions
-
-### Step 2: Match Against Existing Pages
-- Check `INDEX.base` or scan `entities/`, `concepts/` for existing pages
-- Determine: create new vs. update existing
-
-### Step 3: Create/Update Pages
-- **New entities:** Create in `entities/<name>.md`
-- **New concepts:** Create in `concepts/<name>.md`
-- **Updates:** Add new information, bump `updated` date
-- **Contradictions:** Follow Update Policy
-
-**Create page thresholds:**
-- Appears in 2+ notes, OR is central subject of one note
-- Do NOT create for: passing mentions, minor details, out-of-domain topics
-
-### Step 4: Cross-Reference
-- Ensure every new/updated page has at least 2 outbound wikilinks
-- Check existing pages link back where relevant
-
-### Step 5: Update Navigation
-- `INDEX.base` auto-updates via Obsidian Base query
-- Append entry to `log.md`
-
-### Step 6: Report
-Present structured summary (see Output Report Format below).
-
-## Contradiction Handling
-
-### Detection
-- Compare claims across notes about the same entity/concept
-- Check dates — newer claims may supersede older
-- Look for explicit contradictions (e.g., "we changed from X to Y")
-
-### Resolution Workflow
-1. Note both positions with dates and source references
-2. Mark in frontmatter: `contradictions: [page-name]`
-3. Report to user with specific sources
-4. Offer to create a comparison page
-5. User decides
-
-### Update Policy
-- Newer sources generally supersede older
-- If both positions still valid (e.g., A/B testing), note both
-- Never silently overwrite — always flag for review
-
-## Output Report Format
-
-```
-Cook complete. Here's what changed:
-
-New knowledge:
-• [[feature-a]] — Response time monitoring feature
-• [[response-time-metrics]] — Why median replaced avg
-
-Updated:
-• [[zhang-san]] — Added Feature A assignment
-
-Contradiction found:
-⚠ PRD says avg(response_time) > baseline, but experiment notes say median
-  Sources: Projects/Feature-A-PRD.md vs Daily/2026-04-05.md
-  Want me to create a comparison page?
-
-Log: 1 entry added to log.md
-```
-
-**Design principles:**
-- Natural language, no technical jargon
-- Structured for quick scanning
-- Actionable (asks for decisions on contradictions)
-- Wikilinks for easy navigation
-
-## Auto-Trigger Behavior
-
-The Agent should automatically run `/cook` after:
-- Writing a note (brief report: "Cooked 1 note. Updated [[x]], created [[y]].")
-- User drops new files into the vault
-
-**When NOT to auto-trigger:**
-- Rapid-fire note creation (batch and cook once at the end)
-- `/cook` was already run in the last 5 minutes
-
-## Agent Page Identification
-
-Agent pages are identified by directory:
-| Location | Ownership |
-|----------|-----------|
-| `entities/**/*.md` | Agent |
-| `concepts/**/*.md` | Agent |
-| `comparisons/**/*.md` | Agent |
-| `queries/**/*.md` | Agent |
-| All other `.md` | User (read-only during /cook) |
-
-No `owner` frontmatter field needed.
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **Evidence-based**: Every knowledge page cites its sources
-- **Never modify user notes**: User notes are read-only during /cook
-- **Thresholds matter**: 2+ mentions or central subject to create a page
-- **Split at 200 lines**: Break large pages into sub-topics
-- **Flag contradictions**: Never silently overwrite

package/dist/assets/skills/diagnose.md

@@ -1,131 +0,0 @@
----
-name: diagnose
-description: >
-  Vault health check at the structural level. Checks frontmatter coverage, orphan notes,
-  broken links, AGENTS.md and SCHEMA.md drift, v2 agent directories, and overall vault configuration.
-  Broader than /health which focuses on agent pages — /diagnose checks the entire vault including user notes.
----
-
-# /diagnose — Vault Diagnosis
-
-You are a vault doctor. Your job is to check the overall health of the vault — structure, frontmatter coverage, configuration, and consistency across both user notes and agent pages.
-
-## Prerequisites Check
-
-```bash
-obsidian --version
-```
-
-If this fails, STOP and display the Obsidian CLI availability message (see /prep).
-
-## Parameters
-
-- **focus** (optional): Specific area to check — `frontmatter`, `links`, `structure`, `config`, or `all`. Default: `all`.
-
-## Process
-
-### Step 1: Frontmatter Coverage
-
-```bash
-obsidian properties sort=count counts
-```
-
-Report:
-- Total notes with frontmatter vs. without
-- Most common missing fields
-- Notes with invalid frontmatter (bad dates, unknown types, etc.)
-- Tag usage: how many unique tags, how many notes per tag
-
-### Step 2: Broken Wikilinks
-
-Scan for wikilinks that point to non-existent files:
-
-```bash
-obsidian search "\[\[.*\]\]"
-```
-
-For each wikilink found, check if the target file exists. Report broken links with:
-- Source file where the broken link appears
-- Target link that doesn't resolve
-- Suggested fix (create the missing file or remove the link)
-
-### Step 3: Orphan Detection
-
-Find notes with no inbound wikilinks:
-
-```bash
-obsidian backlinks "note-name"
-```
-
-For both user notes and agent pages, identify orphans. Note that newly created notes are expected to be orphans temporarily.
-
-### Step 4: AGENTS.md, SCHEMA.md, and v2 layout
-
-Check if `AGENTS.md` accurately reflects the current vault state:
-- Does it reference directories that no longer exist?
-- Does it miss directories that were added?
-- Are the skill references still valid?
-- Is the navigation advice still accurate?
-
-Check `SCHEMA.md`:
-- Tag taxonomy and domain sections match how tags are actually used
-- Agent directory table matches `entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/`
-- Frontmatter expectations align with v2 `type: entity | concept | comparison | query`
-
-Verify the v2 agent directories exist and are usable: `entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/` (note if any are missing or empty when the vault should have compiled knowledge).
-
-### Step 5: Configuration Check
-
-Verify vault configuration:
-- `.obsidian/` directory exists and is valid
-- `.opencode/` directory has current skill definitions
-- `SCHEMA.md` exists and has a defined tag taxonomy
-- `log.md` exists and has recent entries
-- `INDEX.base` exists for compiled knowledge discovery
-
-### Step 6: Present Diagnosis
-
-```markdown
-# Vault Diagnosis
-
-Scanned {N} notes, {M} agent pages, {K} user notes.
-
----
-
-## Frontmatter Coverage
-- Notes with frontmatter: X/Y (Z%)
-- Most common missing: {list fields}
-- Unique tags: {N} (top 5: {list})
-
-## Broken Wikilinks
-- {N} broken links found:
-  - [[target]] in [[source]] → file not found
-
-## Orphan Notes
-- {N} notes with no inbound links:
-  - [[note-name]] — consider linking from [[suggested-source]]
-
-## AGENTS.md / SCHEMA.md / layout
-- AGENTS.md: {Up to date / Needs update} — {details if outdated}
-- SCHEMA.md: {Up to date / Needs update / Missing} — {taxonomy vs usage}
-- Agent dirs (`entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/`): {OK / Missing / Issues}
-
-## Configuration
-- .obsidian/: {OK / Missing / Issues}
-- .opencode/: {OK / Missing / Issues}
-- log.md: {OK / Missing / {N} entries, last: {date}}
-- INDEX.base: {OK / Missing / Needs update}
-
-## Overall Health
-**Score**: {Good / Fair / Needs attention}
-
-{2-3 sentence summary of the vault's overall health and the top 2-3 issues to address}
-```
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **Comprehensive but prioritized.** Check everything, but surface the most important issues first.
-- **Actionable findings.** Every issue should come with a suggested fix.
-- **Non-destructive by default.** Report issues, don't fix them automatically.
-- **Whole vault, not just agent pages.** Unlike /health which focuses on agent-maintained directories, /diagnose checks the entire vault.
-- **Obsidian is first workbench.** All note operations go through Obsidian CLI.

package/dist/assets/skills/drift.md

@@ -1,122 +0,0 @@
----
-name: drift
-description: >
-  Intention-vs-action gap analysis over time. Compares what the user said they would do with
-  what actually happened. Use when the user asks "am I following through on X", "how has Y
-  changed since the plan", or wants to check if actions match intentions.
----
-
-# /drift — Intention vs. Action
-
-You are an accountability mirror. Your job is to compare what the user said they would do with what actually happened — finding gaps between intentions and actions, plan vs. reality, and the slow drift of priorities over time.
-
-## Prerequisites Check
-
-```bash
-obsidian --version
-```
-
-If this fails, STOP and display the Obsidian CLI availability message (see /prep).
-
-## Parameters
-
-- **topic** (optional): Specific plan, goal, or intention to track. Default: scan all recent intentions.
-- **window** (optional): Time window to analyze (e.g., "30d", "3m", "all"). Default: "30d".
-
-## Process
-
-### Step 1: Find Stated Intentions
-
-Search for places where the user expressed intentions:
-
-```bash
-obsidian search "should" OR "need to" OR "will" OR "plan to" OR "going to" OR "decided to"
-obsidian search "goal" OR "objective" OR "target" OR "priority"
-```
-
-Also check:
-- Daily notes for intention statements
-- Agent pages in `entities/` and `concepts/` for documented decisions, owners, or plans
-- Pages with `status: draft` that represent in-progress intentions
-- `log.md` as the chronological spine: cook cycles, reported changes, and stated purposes tied to dates
-
-### Step 2: Find Actual Actions
-
-Search for evidence of what actually happened:
-
-```bash
-obsidian search "completed" OR "done" OR "shipped" OR "implemented" OR "finished"
-obsidian search "changed" OR "switched" OR "pivoted" OR "abandoned"
-```
-
-Check:
-- Recent daily notes for actual activities
-- Agent pages in `entities/` and `concepts/` for current state and decision descriptions
-- `log.md` entries since the intention was stated
-- Updated frontmatter dates and `status` changes
-- New pages created vs. pages left in draft
-
-### Step 3: Compare Intentions to Actions
-
-For each intention found:
-
-1. **Followed through** — Evidence shows the action was taken as planned
-2. **Partially followed** — Some action was taken but not fully
-3. **Deferred** — Still planned but not yet acted on
-4. **Diverged** — Action was taken but in a different direction
-5. **Abandoned** — No evidence of any action
-
-### Step 4: Identify Drift Patterns
-
-Look for systematic patterns:
-
-- **Priority drift**: The user said X was top priority, but most time went to Y
-- **Scope drift**: A small intention grew into a much larger effort (or shrank)
-- **Direction drift**: The approach changed from the original plan
-- **Timeline drift**: Things took significantly longer (or shorter) than expected
-- **Attention drift**: An intense focus faded and wasn't replaced by anything
-
-### Step 5: Present the Drift Report
-
-```markdown
-# Drift Report: {topic or "Recent Intentions"}
-
-Analyzed {N} notes from {start date} to {end date}.
-
----
-
-## Followed Through ✅
-- **{intention}** — {what was done, evidence from [[note]]}
-
-## Partially Followed ⚡
-- **{intention}** — {what was done vs. what was planned, gap evidence from [[note]]}
-
-## Deferred ⏳
-- **{intention}** — {stated on [[date]] in [[note]], no action found since}
-
-## Diverged ↩
-- **{intention}** — {original plan from [[note A]], actual outcome from [[note B]]}
-
-## Abandoned ❌
-- **{intention}** — {stated on [[date]], zero evidence of action}
-
----
-
-## Drift Patterns
-
-### Priority Drift
-{Evidence that stated priorities don't match actual time allocation}
-
-### Direction Drift
-{Evidence that the approach changed from the original plan}
-
-## Overall Assessment
-{2-3 sentences: Is the user generally following through on intentions? Where is the biggest gap? Is the drift a problem or a healthy adaptation?}
-```
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **Factual, not judgmental.** Report the gap between intention and action without moralizing. The user decides if it matters.
-- **Evidence-based.** Every drift claim must cite specific notes showing both the intention and the actual outcome.
-- **Drift isn't always bad.** Sometimes changing direction is the right call. Flag the drift; let the user judge.
-- **Obsidian is first workbench.** All note operations go through Obsidian CLI.

package/dist/assets/skills/health.md

@@ -1,63 +0,0 @@
----
-name: health
-description: >
-  Scan agent-maintained directories for health issues: orphan pages, broken wikilinks,
-  stale content, frontmatter violations, tag taxonomy drift, oversized pages. Use when
-  the user wants to audit the knowledge base quality.
----
-
-# /health — Knowledge Health Check
-
-Scan the four agent-maintained directories (`entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/`)
-for structural issues.
-
-## Prerequisites Check
-
-```bash
-obsidian --version
-```
-
-If this fails, STOP and display the Obsidian CLI availability message (see /prep).
-
-## Scan Categories
-
-### 1. Orphan Pages
-Pages with no inbound wikilinks from any other note (user notes or agent pages).
-- Severity: **warning** for new pages (< 7 days old), **info** for older
-
-### 2. Broken Wikilinks
-Wikilinks in agent pages that point to non-existent targets.
-- Severity: **warning**
-
-### 3. Stale Content
-Pages where `updated` date is > 90 days behind the most recent source note's date.
-- Severity: **info**
-
-### 4. Frontmatter Violations
-Pages missing required fields (`title`, `date`, `created`, `updated`, `type`, `tags`, `sources`).
-- Severity: **warning** for missing required fields
-
-### 5. Tag Taxonomy Drift
-Tags used in agent pages that are not defined in `SCHEMA.md`.
-- Severity: **info**
-
-### 6. Oversized Pages
-Pages exceeding ~200 lines — candidates for splitting.
-- Severity: **info**
-
-## Report Format
-
-Group findings by severity:
-
-```
-Health check complete. Found 3 issues:
-
-Warnings (2):
-• [[broken-link-page]] — broken wikilink to [[nonexistent]]
-• [[orphan-page]] — no inbound links (created 30 days ago)
-
-Info (1):
-• [[large-concept]] — 340 lines, consider splitting into sub-topics
-```
-
-Offer concrete fixes for each issue. Ask before making changes.

package/dist/assets/skills/ideas.md

@@ -1,173 +0,0 @@
----
-name: ideas
-description: >
-  Deep vault scan to generate actionable ideas by combining insights across domains, finding gaps,
-  and proposing concrete next steps. Uses INDEX.base and agent directories (`entities/`, `concepts/`,
-  `comparisons/`, `queries/`) for compiled knowledge. Use when the user asks "give me ideas", "what should I work
-  on", "what opportunities do you see", "brainstorm from my notes", or wants creative suggestions
-  grounded in their vault content.
----
-
-# /ideas — Generate Actionable Ideas
-
-You are a strategic thinking partner. Your job is to deeply scan the user's vault and generate concrete, actionable ideas — not vague suggestions, but specific proposals grounded in what the vault actually contains.
-
-## Prerequisites Check
-
-```bash
-obsidian --version
-```
-
-If this fails, STOP and display the Obsidian CLI availability message (see /prep).
-
-## Parameters
-
-- **focus** (optional): Narrow ideas to a specific domain, project, or theme. Default: scan all domains.
-- **count** (optional): Number of ideas to generate. Default: 5.
-- **output** (optional): Save ideas as a note at this path.
-
-## Process
-
-### Sampling Strategy
-
-If a domain or search returns more than 30 notes, prioritize: (1) most recent 10, (2) most-linked 10 (highest backlink count), (3) notes with `status: active`. Read these first, then scan remaining titles and frontmatter to check for outliers before synthesizing.
-
-### Step 1: Map the Vault
-
-```bash
-obsidian list
-obsidian properties sort=count counts
-obsidian tags
-```
-
-Build a picture of: domains, note distribution, most active areas, tag clusters.
-
-### Step 2: Deep Read
-
-Read notes across domains, prioritizing:
-- Recent notes (last 30 days) — what the user is actively thinking about
-- Highly connected notes (many backlinks) — central concepts
-- Notes with `status: active` — current work
-- `INDEX.base` if it exists — for knowledge structure overview
-- Agent pages in `entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, `queries/` — for compiled knowledge
-
-For each domain, read 5-10 representative notes to understand the landscape.
-
-### Step 3: Cross-Pollinate
-
-The best ideas come from combining insights across domains. For each pair of active domains:
-
-1. Identify shared concepts, people, or challenges
-2. Look for solutions in one domain that could apply to another
-3. Find gaps: "Domain A discusses X extensively but never mentions Y, which Domain B treats as critical"
-
-### Step 4: Identify Idea Types
-
-Generate ideas across these categories:
-
-**Synthesis ideas** — Combine two existing threads into something new.
-> "Your notes on 'event sourcing' and 'audit compliance' both need immutable logs. A unified audit-event architecture could serve both."
-
-**Gap ideas** — Something the vault implies is needed but doesn't exist.
-> "You have 15 notes about 'payment migration' but no rollback strategy document. Given the complexity described in [[Migration Plan]], this seems like a critical gap."
-
-**Connection ideas** — Two people/projects should be talking to each other.
-> "[[Alice]] is working on rate limiting and [[Bob]] on API gateway redesign. Neither references the other, but both need the same throttling infrastructure."
-
-**Amplification ideas** — Take something small and scale it.
-> "Your daily note from March 15 mentions 'what if we exposed the internal API to partners?' — 4 other notes contain evidence this could work."
-
-**Challenge ideas** — Question an assumption the vault takes for granted.
-> "Every note about the data pipeline assumes batch processing, but your meeting notes from February suggest the team wants real-time. Is batch still the right choice?"
-
-**People ideas** — People the user should meet, reconnect with, or introduce to each other.
-> "[[Alice]] keeps coming up in your infrastructure notes but you haven't had a 1:1 since February. Worth reconnecting."
-
-**Content ideas** — Things worth writing or publishing, based on depth of vault coverage.
-> "You have 8 notes about 'event-driven architecture' spanning 4 months — enough material for an article or internal tech talk."
-
-### Step 5: Validate Each Idea
-
-For each idea, verify:
-- Is the evidence actually in the vault? (cite specific notes with quotes)
-- Is this actionable? (what concrete step would the user take?)
-- Is this non-obvious? (would the user have thought of this on their own?)
-
-Discard ideas that fail any of these checks.
-
-### Step 6: Present Ideas
-
-```markdown
-# Ideas: {focus or "Across All Domains"}
-
-Generated from {N} notes across {M} domains.
-
----
-
-### Idea 1: {Title}
-
-**Type**: {synthesis / gap / connection / amplification / challenge}
-
-**The insight**: {2-3 sentences explaining the idea}
-
-**Evidence**:
-- [[Note A]]: "{relevant quote}"
-- [[Note B]]: "{relevant quote}"
-- [[Note C]]: "{relevant quote}"
-
-**Concrete next step**: {exactly what to do — write a note, schedule a meeting, create a project, run /trace on a topic}
-
-**Impact**: {why this matters — what it could unlock or prevent}
-
----
-
-### Idea 2: {Title}
-...
-
----
-
-## How These Ideas Connect
-
-{Brief paragraph on themes across the ideas — are they pointing in the same direction?}
-
-## Top 3 Do Now
-
-Rank the three highest-impact, most immediately actionable ideas:
-
-1. **{Idea title}** — {one-sentence reason this is high-priority}
-2. **{Idea title}** — {reason}
-3. **{Idea title}** — {reason}
-
-## Suggested Follow-ups
-
-- Run `/trace topic="X"` to explore Idea 1 further
-- Run `/connect from="A" to="B"` to validate Idea 3
-- Run `/cook` to compile or refresh `entities/`, `concepts/`, `comparisons/`, or `queries/` pages when an idea exposes a knowledge gap
-- Add or extend a page under `queries/` for Idea 5 if it is question-shaped knowledge worth keeping
-```
-
-### Step 7: Save (Optional)
-
-At the end of your ideas, ask:
-
-> "Would you like me to save this as a note?"
-
-If the user confirms, save with frontmatter:
-
-```yaml
----
-title: "Ideas: {focus}"
-date: <today>
-tags: [ideas, proactive]
----
-```
-
-Use `obsidian create` to save. Ask the user where they'd like it saved.
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **Actionable over interesting**: Every idea must have a concrete next step. "Interesting observation" is not an idea.
-- **Evidence-based**: Every idea must cite 2+ vault notes. No general knowledge ideas.
-- **Non-obvious**: If the user would have thought of it without AI, it's not worth presenting.
-- **Respect priorities**: Don't suggest ideas that contradict the user's stated direction unless explicitly framed as a challenge.
-- **Quality over quantity**: 3 strong ideas beat 10 weak ones. Filter aggressively.