v1.4.9: Validation fixes, Profiler fix, Quest link duplicate fix, Ascension fixes

2026-03-26 06:47:54 -05:00
parent 284f0c3794
commit 1fc9727fee
194 changed files with 21008 additions and 743 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+---
+description: "Extract reusable patterns from the session, self-evaluate quality before saving, and determine the right save location (Global vs Project)."
+---
+
+# /learn-eval - Extract, Evaluate, then Save
+
+Extends `/learn` with a quality gate, save-location decision, and knowledge-placement awareness before writing any skill file.
+
+## What to Extract
+
+Look for:
+
+1. **Error Resolution Patterns** — root cause + fix + reusability
+2. **Debugging Techniques** — non-obvious steps, tool combinations
+3. **Workarounds** — library quirks, API limitations, version-specific fixes
+4. **Project-Specific Patterns** — conventions, architecture decisions, integration patterns
+
+## Process
+
+1. Review the session for extractable patterns
+2. Identify the most valuable/reusable insight
+
+3. **Determine save location:**
+   - Ask: "Would this pattern be useful in a different project?"
+   - **Global** (`~/.claude/skills/learned/`): Generic patterns usable across 2+ projects (bash compatibility, LLM API behavior, debugging techniques, etc.)
+   - **Project** (`.claude/skills/learned/` in current project): Project-specific knowledge (quirks of a particular config file, project-specific architecture decisions, etc.)
+   - When in doubt, choose Global (moving Global → Project is easier than the reverse)
+
+4. Draft the skill file using this format:
+
+```markdown
+---
+name: pattern-name
+description: "Under 130 characters"
+user-invocable: false
+origin: auto-extracted
+---
+
+# [Descriptive Pattern Name]
+
+**Extracted:** [Date]
+**Context:** [Brief description of when this applies]
+
+## Problem
+[What problem this solves - be specific]
+
+## Solution
+[The pattern/technique/workaround - with code examples]
+
+## When to Use
+[Trigger conditions]
+```
+
+5. **Quality gate — Checklist + Holistic verdict**
+
+   ### 5a. Required checklist (verify by actually reading files)
+
+   Execute **all** of the following before evaluating the draft:
+
+   - [ ] Grep `~/.claude/skills/` and relevant project `.claude/skills/` files by keyword to check for content overlap
+   - [ ] Check MEMORY.md (both project and global) for overlap
+   - [ ] Consider whether appending to an existing skill would suffice
+   - [ ] Confirm this is a reusable pattern, not a one-off fix
+
+   ### 5b. Holistic verdict
+
+   Synthesize the checklist results and draft quality, then choose **one** of the following:
+
+   | Verdict | Meaning | Next Action |
+   |---------|---------|-------------|
+   | **Save** | Unique, specific, well-scoped | Proceed to Step 6 |
+   | **Improve then Save** | Valuable but needs refinement | List improvements → revise → re-evaluate (once) |
+   | **Absorb into [X]** | Should be appended to an existing skill | Show target skill and additions → Step 6 |
+   | **Drop** | Trivial, redundant, or too abstract | Explain reasoning and stop |
+
+   **Guideline dimensions** (informing the verdict, not scored):
+
+   - **Specificity & Actionability**: Contains code examples or commands that are immediately usable
+   - **Scope Fit**: Name, trigger conditions, and content are aligned and focused on a single pattern
+   - **Uniqueness**: Provides value not covered by existing skills (informed by checklist results)
+   - **Reusability**: Realistic trigger scenarios exist in future sessions
+
+6. **Verdict-specific confirmation flow**
+
+   - **Improve then Save**: Present the required improvements + revised draft + updated checklist/verdict after one re-evaluation; if the revised verdict is **Save**, save after user confirmation, otherwise follow the new verdict
+   - **Save**: Present save path + checklist results + 1-line verdict rationale + full draft → save after user confirmation
+   - **Absorb into [X]**: Present target path + additions (diff format) + checklist results + verdict rationale → append after user confirmation
+   - **Drop**: Show checklist results + reasoning only (no confirmation needed)
+
+7. Save / Absorb to the determined location
+
+## Output Format for Step 5
+
+```
+### Checklist
+- [x] skills/ grep: no overlap (or: overlap found → details)
+- [x] MEMORY.md: no overlap (or: overlap found → details)
+- [x] Existing skill append: new file appropriate (or: should append to [X])
+- [x] Reusability: confirmed (or: one-off → Drop)
+
+### Verdict: Save / Improve then Save / Absorb into [X] / Drop
+
+**Rationale:** (1-2 sentences explaining the verdict)
+```
+
+## Design Rationale
+
+This version replaces the previous 5-dimension numeric scoring rubric (Specificity, Actionability, Scope Fit, Non-redundancy, Coverage scored 1-5) with a checklist-based holistic verdict system. Modern frontier models (Opus 4.6+) have strong contextual judgment — forcing rich qualitative signals into numeric scores loses nuance and can produce misleading totals. The holistic approach lets the model weigh all factors naturally, producing more accurate save/drop decisions while the explicit checklist ensures no critical check is skipped.
+
+## Notes
+
+- Don't extract trivial fixes (typos, simple syntax errors)
+- Don't extract one-time issues (specific API outages, etc.)
+- Focus on patterns that will save time in future sessions
+- Keep skills focused — one pattern per skill
+- When the verdict is Absorb, append to the existing skill rather than creating a new file