arscontexta 0.6.0

package/skills/reseed/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,385 @@
+---
+name: reseed
+description: Re-derive your knowledge system from first principles when structural drift accumulates. Analyzes dimension incoherence, vocabulary mismatch, boundary dissolution, and template divergence. Preserves all content while restructuring architecture.
+context: fork
+model: opus
+allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Bash, mcp__qmd__search, mcp__qmd__vsearch, mcp__qmd__query, mcp__qmd__get, AskUserQuestion
+argument-hint: "[optional: --analysis-only to see drift report without implementing]"
+---
+
+You are the Ars Contexta re-derivation engine. Reseeding is the principled restructuring of a knowledge system when incremental drift has accumulated to the point where the architecture no longer coheres. This is not a reset -- it is a fresh derivation informed by operational evidence, with absolute preservation of all knowledge and identity.
+
+**ABSOLUTE INVARIANT: Reseed NEVER deletes content.** Knowledge (notes/) and identity (self/) are always preserved. Structure serves knowledge, not the reverse. If any step would result in content loss, stop and warn the user.
+
+## Your Task
+
+Analyze structural drift and re-derive: **$ARGUMENTS**
+
+## Reference Files
+
+Read these during the re-derivation phases:
+
+**Core references:**
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/interaction-constraints.md` -- coherence rules (hard blocks, soft warns, cascades)
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/derivation-validation.md` -- kernel validation and coherence tests
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/three-spaces.md` -- three-space architecture and boundary rules
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/failure-modes.md` -- failure mode taxonomy and domain vulnerability matrix
+
+**Configuration references:**
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/dimension-claim-map.md` -- research claims informing each dimension
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/methodology.md` -- universal principles
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/vocabulary-transforms.md` -- domain-native vocabulary mappings
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/tradition-presets.md` -- pre-validated configuration points
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/personality-layer.md` -- personality derivation dimensions
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/evolution-lifecycle.md` -- seed-evolve-reseed lifecycle, reseed triggers and guardrails
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/self-space.md` -- identity generation rules, identity vs configuration distinction
+
+**Validation:**
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/kernel.yaml` -- the 12 non-negotiable primitives
+- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/validate-kernel.sh` -- kernel validation script
+
+---
+
+## When to Reseed
+
+Reseeding is a significant operation. It should be recommended (by `/architect` or `/health`) when incremental fixes are no longer sufficient:
+
+- **Dimension incoherence spans >3 dimensions** -- too many cascading mismatches for targeted fixes
+- **Vocabulary no longer matches user's language** -- the system speaks a dialect the user has outgrown
+- **Three-space boundaries have dissolved** -- content routinely crosses self/notes/ops boundaries
+- **Template divergence >40%** -- actual note schemas have drifted far from templates
+- **MOC hierarchy no longer reflects actual topic structure** -- navigation is more hindrance than help
+
+If none of these triggers are present, recommend `/architect` for targeted evolution instead.
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 1: Analyze Current State
+
+Automated. Build a complete picture of the system as it exists today.
+
+### 1a. Read derivation history
+
+Read `ops/derivation.md` for:
+- Original dimension positions and confidence levels
+- Conversation signals that drove each choice
+- Personality dimensions
+- Vocabulary mapping
+- Coherence validation results from init
+- Failure mode risks flagged at init
+
+Read `ops/config.yaml` for live configuration values that may differ from derivation.
+
+### 1b. Inventory the system
+
+Count and catalog:
+```bash
+# Notes (domain-named folder)
+find notes/ -name "*.md" -not -name "index.md" | wc -l
+# MOCs
+grep -rl '^type: moc' notes/ | wc -l
+# Templates
+ls templates/*.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l
+# Skills (platform-dependent)
+ls .claude/skills/*/SKILL.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l  # Claude Code
+ls skills/*/SKILL.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l           # OpenClaw
+# Hooks
+ls .claude/hooks/*.sh 2>/dev/null | wc -l
+# Self space
+ls self/*.md self/memory/*.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l
+# Inbox
+find inbox/ -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l
+# Ops
+find ops/ -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | wc -l
+```
+
+Adapt folder names to the domain vocabulary found in derivation.md.
+
+### 1c. Read health history
+
+Scan `ops/health/` for the last 3-5 health reports. Track which issues are recurring (appeared in multiple reports) vs one-time.
+
+### 1d. Collect operational evidence
+
+Read `ops/observations/` for accumulated friction patterns, methodology learnings, and process gaps. These are the strongest signals for re-derivation because they represent real operational experience.
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 2: Identify Drift
+
+For each of the 8 configuration dimensions, measure current position against derived position. Classify the drift:
+
+| Classification | Meaning | Action |
+|---------------|---------|--------|
+| **none** | Current state matches derivation | Confirm -- no change needed |
+| **aligned** | Position shifted but in a sensible direction given growth | Document the evolution, update derivation to match |
+| **compensated** | Mismatch exists but workarounds are in place | Evaluate whether to formalize the compensation or resolve the mismatch |
+| **incoherent** | Cascade is broken -- dimension conflicts with dependent dimensions | Must resolve in re-derivation |
+| **stagnant** | Should have evolved based on system maturity but hasn't | Propose advancement |
+
+### Drift measurement per dimension
+
+**Granularity:** Are notes actually atomic/moderate/coarse? Check average note length, number of claims per note, split frequency.
+
+**Organization:** Is the folder structure still flat? Have subfolders crept in? Are notes filed consistently?
+
+**Linking:** What is the actual link density? Are connections explicit only, or is semantic search active? Check backlink counts.
+
+**Processing:** What is the actual processing intensity? Count pipeline invocations vs direct note creation. Check inbox throughput.
+
+**Navigation depth:** How many MOC tiers exist in practice? Is the hub reachable from all notes within the stated tier count?
+
+**Maintenance:** When did conditions last fire? Are thresholds appropriate for the vault's current state?
+
+**Schema:** What percentage of notes comply with templates? What fields are actually used vs declared?
+
+**Automation:** What hooks and skills are active? Does automation level match what was configured?
+
+### Build the drift report
+
+```
+| Dimension | Derived | Current | Classification | Evidence |
+|-----------|---------|---------|---------------|----------|
+| Granularity | atomic | atomic | none | avg 350 words/note, 1 claim/note |
+| Organization | flat | flat | none | no subfolders detected |
+| Linking | explicit+implicit | explicit only | compensated | qmd configured but unused, grep compensates |
+| Processing | heavy | moderate | incoherent | pipeline exists but reflect/reweave skipped 60% |
+| Navigation | 3-tier | 2-tier | stagnant | 80+ notes but no topic-level MOCs |
+| Maintenance | condition-based (tight) | condition-based (lax) | compensated | conditions rarely fire, manual link fixes |
+| Schema | moderate | minimal | incoherent | 45% of notes missing topics field |
+| Automation | convention | convention | none | hooks active for session orient |
+```
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 3: Re-derive
+
+Fresh derivation informed by operational evidence. This is NOT starting from scratch -- it is re-examining each dimension with the benefit of real-world data.
+
+For each dimension:
+
+1. **Read original rationale** from ops/derivation.md -- why was this position chosen?
+2. **Consider friction patterns** from Phase 1d -- what operational pain exists?
+3. **Query the research graph** -- use `mcp__qmd__query` to search for claims relevant to the friction. Fall back to `mcp__qmd__vsearch`, then to reading bundled reference files directly if MCP is unavailable.
+4. **Read dimension-claim-map.md** for the specific claims that inform this dimension.
+5. **Propose new position or confirm original** -- with explicit reasoning.
+
+The re-derivation should answer for each dimension:
+- What was the original position and why?
+- What does operational evidence suggest?
+- What does the research say about this specific friction?
+- What is the new recommended position?
+- If changed: what cascade effects does this create? (check interaction-constraints.md)
+
+### Vocabulary re-evaluation
+
+Read `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/vocabulary-transforms.md`. Compare the current vocabulary mapping against how the user actually talks about their system (evidence from session logs, observations, user-facing text in notes). If the user has developed their own vocabulary that differs from the mapping, adopt the user's terms.
+
+### Personality re-evaluation
+
+If personality was derived at init, check whether the personality dimensions still fit. Evidence sources: self/identity.md, agent notes in MOCs, session log tone. If personality was not derived at init, check whether operational evidence now warrants it.
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 4: Check Coherence
+
+Apply the full coherence validation from `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/interaction-constraints.md`:
+
+### Pass 1: Hard constraint check
+
+For each hard constraint, evaluate the re-derived configuration. If violated, the re-derivation must be adjusted before proceeding.
+
+Hard constraints:
+- `atomic + navigation_depth == "2-tier" + volume > 100` -- navigational vertigo
+- `automation == "full" + no_platform_support` -- platform cannot support
+- `processing == "heavy" + automation == "manual" + no_pipeline_skills` -- unsustainable
+
+### Pass 2: Soft constraint check
+
+For each soft constraint, evaluate the configuration. Document active soft constraints and their compensating mechanisms.
+
+### Pass 3: Cascade verification
+
+Trace each changed dimension through its cascade chain. Verify that downstream dimensions are either:
+- Consistent with the new position, or
+- Explicitly overridden with documented rationale
+
+### Pass 4: Three-space boundary check
+
+Using `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/three-spaces.md`, verify the re-derived architecture maintains clean boundaries. Check for each of the six conflation patterns.
+
+### Pass 5: Kernel validation (15 primitives)
+
+Using `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/derivation-validation.md`, verify the re-derived system will pass all 15 kernel primitives.
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 5: Present Delta
+
+Show the user exactly what changed and what stays the same.
+
+**Output format:**
+
+```
+=== RESEED ANALYSIS ===
+System: [domain name]
+Platform: [detected]
+Note count: [N]
+
+--- Drift Summary ---
+Dimensions with drift: [N] / 8
+  - [dimension]: [derived] -> [current] ([classification])
+  ...
+
+--- Re-Derivation Proposal ---
+
+| Dimension | Current | Proposed | Change? | Rationale |
+|-----------|---------|----------|---------|-----------|
+| [dim]     | [val]   | [val]    | [yes/no]| [reason]  |
+| ...       | ...     | ...      | ...     | ...       |
+
+--- Impact Assessment ---
+
+For each proposed change:
+
+### [Dimension]: [current] -> [proposed]
+
+**Component modifications:**
+- [specific file/folder/template changes]
+
+**Content impact:**
+- [N] notes affected (need [field update / re-categorization / MOC reassignment])
+- [N] MOCs affected (need [restructuring / renaming / splitting])
+
+**Risk:** [low / medium / high] -- [explanation]
+
+**Rollback:** [specific rollback steps if this change doesn't work]
+
+--- Coherence Validation ---
+Hard constraints: [PASS / FAIL with details]
+Soft constraints: [N active, N compensated]
+Cascade chains: [verified / issues found]
+Three-space boundaries: [clean / violations found]
+Kernel primitives: [N / 11 predicted to pass]
+
+=== END ANALYSIS ===
+```
+
+**If `--analysis-only` was specified:** Stop here. Present the analysis and exit.
+
+**If not analysis-only:** Ask the user: "Would you like me to proceed with the re-derivation? I'll preserve all your content and restructure the architecture."
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 6: Implement on Approval
+
+Execute in strict order. Each step depends on the previous completing successfully.
+
+### Step 1: Archive current derivation
+```bash
+cp ops/derivation.md ops/derivation-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md
+```
+
+### Step 2: Restructure folders
+If folder names change (vocabulary evolution), rename with content preservation:
+```bash
+git mv old-folder/ new-folder/
+```
+Update all file references.
+
+### Step 3: Update templates
+Modify `_schema` blocks, add/remove fields, update enum values. Templates are the single source of truth for schema.
+
+### Step 4: Update context file
+Regenerate sections affected by dimension changes. Preserve user customizations documented in `ops/user-overrides.md` (if it exists). Apply vocabulary transformation throughout.
+
+### Step 5: Update skills
+If skill vocabulary needs updating, modify skill files. For Claude Code: `.claude/skills/`. For OpenClaw: `skills/`.
+
+### Step 6: Update hooks
+If automation level changed, add or remove hooks. Update hook paths to match any renamed folders.
+
+### Step 7: Restructure MOCs
+If navigation depth changed:
+- Create new tier of MOCs (e.g., topic-level MOCs when moving from 2-tier to 3-tier)
+- Redistribute notes across MOCs
+- Update hub MOC to link to new structure
+- Update all notes' Topics footers
+
+### Step 8: Update self/
+**PRESERVE self/memory/ entirely.** Never modify or delete memory files.
+
+Update:
+- `self/identity.md` -- if personality changed
+- `self/methodology.md` -- if processing or maintenance changed
+- `self/goals.md` -- add "post-reseed orientation" as active thread
+
+### Step 9: Regenerate ops/derivation.md
+Write a new derivation record with:
+- All re-derived dimension positions and rationale
+- Operational evidence that informed changes
+- Research claims that supported each decision
+- Previous derivation date and what changed
+- Coherence validation results
+
+### Step 10: Log the reseed
+Create a session log in `ops/sessions/` documenting the reseed: what changed, why, and what to watch for.
+
+---
+
+## PHASE 7: Validate
+
+Run the full validation suite on the re-derived system.
+
+### Kernel validation (15 primitives)
+
+Run `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/validate-kernel.sh` if available, otherwise manually check each primitive:
+
+1. markdown-yaml -- valid YAML frontmatter on all notes
+2. wiki-links -- all wiki links resolve
+3. moc-hierarchy -- MOC structure intact, all notes reachable
+4. tree-injection -- session start loads file structure
+5. description-field -- descriptions present and distinct from titles
+6. topics-footer -- topics present on all non-MOC notes
+7. schema-enforcement -- templates exist, validation mechanism present
+8. semantic-search -- configured or documented for future
+9. self-space -- self/ intact with core files
+10. session-rhythm -- orient/work/persist documented
+11. discovery-first -- notes optimized for findability
+
+### Coherence validation
+
+- **Reachability:** Every note is reachable from the hub MOC within the stated tier depth
+- **Link health:** Zero dangling wiki-links introduced by the reseed
+- **Schema compliance:** All notes pass template validation
+- **Vocabulary consistency:** Same universal term maps to same domain term everywhere
+- **Three-space boundaries:** No conflation patterns introduced
+
+### Report results
+
+```
+=== RESEED VALIDATION ===
+Kernel: [N] / 11 PASS
+Coherence: [PASS / issues]
+Content preserved: [yes -- N notes, N memories unchanged]
+Rollback available: ops/derivation-[date].md
+
+Post-reseed recommendations:
+1. [First thing to check after a few sessions]
+2. [Second monitoring item]
+=== END VALIDATION ===
+```
+
+If any kernel primitive fails, fix it before completing the reseed. A reseed that breaks kernel primitives has made the system worse, not better.
+
+---
+
+## Quality Standards
+
+- **Content preservation is non-negotiable.** Every note, every memory, every piece of user-created content must survive the reseed. Verify counts before and after.
+- Ground every dimension change in operational evidence, not theoretical preference
+- Use domain vocabulary throughout -- the reseed should feel native to the user
+- If the user's vocabulary has evolved since init, adopt their current language
+- Acknowledge uncertainty: "This dimension change is speculative -- monitor for [specific friction]"
+- Prefer reversible changes over irreversible ones
+- Document everything in ops/derivation.md -- the next reseed needs this context

package/skills/reseed/skill.json

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+{
+  "name": "knowledge-reseed",
+  "description": "Re-derive your knowledge system from first principles when structural drift accumulates. Analyzes dimension incoherence, vocabulary mismatch, and template divergence. Preserves all content.",
+  "version": "0.4.0",
+  "author": "arscontexta",
+  "tags": ["knowledge-management", "architecture", "restructuring"],
+  "entry": "SKILL.md",
+  "platform_hints": {
+    "claude-code": {
+      "context": "fork",
+      "model": "opus"
+    },
+    "openclaw": {
+      "type": "external"
+    }
+  }
+}