lilmgenius/paperthin

re0-memo

Turn a finished, failed, or disappointing work cycle into portable lessons, anti-patterns, quality gates, and next-cycle vocabulary.

查看源码

使用方法

  1. 复制安装命令,在自己的智能体环境安装前先检查源码包。
  2. 从原始文档核对所需工具、凭据和支持的宿主。
  3. 说明输入材料与期望交付物,并对照来源检查输出。
npx skills add https://github.com/lilmgenius/paperthin --skill re0-memo

开始前需了解

  • 安装不包含模型订阅、API 额度或访问文件的权限。
  • 仓库星数和安装量反映活跃情况,不等于独立质量或安全测试。
仓库原始内容

按源仓库内容呈现,保留标题、案例、代码、表格、链接以及原文引用的演示图片。

Turn a completed cycle into lessons the next cycle can actually use.

Goal

re0-memo extracts durable learning from a work cycle without defending the artifact that produced it. A cycle can run, pass tests, and still be the wrong thing. The output is not a changelog or therapy note: it is a local, evidence-backed record of what worked, what misled the build, and what gate the next pass must clear.

Use re0-memo when the artifact is done, failed, disappointing, or ambiguous enough that the next agent needs the cycle's lessons more than its momentum.

Workflow

  1. Read the original objective, final artifact, QA evidence, user complaints, and any local planning notes.
  2. Separate working assets from misleading progress: contracts, schemas, tests, services, vocabulary, and examples that earned reuse vs. UI, panels, scaffolds, or abstractions that only looked productive.
  3. Generalize before recording: when feedback arrives as many specific complaints, cluster them upward into the shared pattern before writing anything down — many specifics against many items usually share one root gap. Record the root and its pattern family as the lesson; keep the specifics under it as evidence, not as lessons themselves.
  4. Name each failure as an anti-pattern, not a mood.
  5. Convert repeated or high-impact failures into quality gates for the next pass.
  6. Convert vague user direction into architecture vocabulary a fresh agent can use.
  7. Write or refresh local docs for the cycle: a re0-memo for lessons and a plan for next-cycle contracts, gates, and vocabulary.
  8. Verify that a from-scratch agent could avoid the same failure from those docs alone.

Rules

  • Do not defend the artifact. If it missed the product, say what missed.
  • Do not write a changelog. File lists and effort summaries are not lessons.
  • Do not transcribe a specific complaint as a lesson. A lesson that only fixes the reported case keeps the system human-in-the-loop: the same class of failure returns anywhere a person didn't point. Escalate every specific to the pattern that catches its whole class — the reporter's exact words are evidence, not the gate.
  • Preserve negative corpus. Failed paths are training data.
  • Prefer hard gates over advice.
  • Cite evidence from the cycle: objective, file facts, QA output, screenshots, transcripts, diffs, or user feedback.
  • If the next agent cannot act on it, it is not a lesson yet.
  • Keep provenance local; shipped artifacts should not narrate their scars.

Verification

Before finishing:

  1. Every lesson traces to observed cycle evidence.
  2. Every anti-pattern names a concrete failure mode and the gate that catches it.
  3. No lesson is a single reported case in disguise: each covers a class, with the specifics that raised it sitting under it as evidence.
  4. A fresh agent can tell what to preserve, what to discard, and what to test first without reading the whole old session.

按任务相关推荐

来自同一仓库

更多 Skills

全部 Skills
lilmgenius
社区

aim

When data lands with a thin ask — files, a repo, a paste, a chat scrollback — read it and propose what the user is trying to do with it, as a proposal to confirm rather than a question to answer. Use the moment material arrives without a fully-formed ask, or when the ask reads thinner than the data suggests.

1小时安装量
1
GitHub Stars
1300
最近更新
10月20日
lilmgenius
社区

detool

Make durable artifacts portable by replacing incidental stack, vendor, model, CLI, path, quota, or harness nouns with the mechanism they mean, while keeping provenance, runbooks, and tool-subject claims concrete.

1小时安装量
1
GitHub Stars
1300
最近更新
10月20日
lilmgenius
社区

feynman

Press a decision you just made until you can explain it to a skeptic in your own words, or surface the gap where you can't. The Feynman test aimed at a choice: understanding is cheapest to fake the moment after you decide, so a fresh critic presses for what you can't actually explain. Use right after picking an option, especially one an agent laid out without arguing for.

1小时安装量
1
GitHub Stars
1300
最近更新
10月20日
lilmgenius
社区

hate

Attack a plan, design, or argument like you want it to fail before you commit real effort — return the single load-bearing objection and the cheapest experiment that would prove it matters, not a checklist. User-invoked on purpose: a hate-it reflex always in the agent's reach would bias it toward demolition. Weighs many failure axes but owns the synthesis to one root.

1小时安装量
1
GitHub Stars
1300
最近更新
10月20日