Install
$ agentstack add skill-lythos-labs-lythoskill-lythoskill-project-scribe-weekly ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Project Scribe — Weekly
> Distill, don't replay. The core thread matters; the 17 commits that touched it don't.
Value Boundary
Weekly is a memory offloading mechanism, not a menu listing.
| Direct queries (skip these) | Scribe-weekly must synthesize | |-----------------------------|-------------------------------| | git log --since="7 days ago" | The one decision that mattered most | | ls daily/2026-05-* | Why the planned vs actual divergence happened | | cat cortex/INDEX.md | Which emergent threads earned attention | | bunx @lythos/project-cortex list | What pattern is hardening into a project trait |
If the next agent can find it via ls daily/, git log, or cortex index — don't replicate it. Link to it.
Why this matters: A future agent reading a weekly cold (no daily access) should get the compressed representation of the week's cognitive work — the pattern, not the commits. Without this, every agent must reconstruct the narrative from 6 daily files + 29 commits + 10 ADRs. Weekly offloads that reconstruction cost once, permanently.
Weekly Prep (like cortex probe — gather before you write)
Do NOT start writing from memory. Run prep first. This is the write-side counterpart to onboarding's read-side: just as onboarding reads daily → verifies git → presents summary, weekly prep gathers all sources → surfaces anomalies → ranks importance.
Step 1: Gather (deterministic)
# Daily surface — which days had activity?
ls daily/*.md | sort | tail -7
# Git surface — what actually landed?
git log --since="7 days ago" --oneline
# Cortex surface — what state changed?
bunx @lythos/project-cortex@0.17.1 probe
bunx @lythos/project-cortex@0.17.1 stats
# ADR surface — what decisions were accepted this period?
ls -lt cortex/adr/02-accepted/ | head -15
# Delta from last weekly — what's new since the last snapshot?
ls weekly/ | sort | tail -1
Step 2: Surface Anomalies
Scan the gathered data for:
- Superseded decisions: later ADR that contradicts an earlier one (e.g., combo redefinition May 6 superseded May 1 section semantics)
- Renamed/removed commands: CLI surface changed (e.g.,
agent-run→single,deck sync→deck to-symlink) - Reversed priorities: a task/epic that was
priority_at_startlast week but never appeared in this week's dailies - Silent gaps: days with no daily file but git shows commits (someone committed outside agent session)
- Missing ADRs: significant code/architecture change in git log with no corresponding ADR accepted in the same window. A rename with 30+ commits and no ADR is a red flag.
Step 3: Importance Ranking (simulated annealing)
- High temperature: dump every event you can recall. Don't filter. Include everything.
- Cool: group related events into clusters (e.g., "path convention fixes" = 5 commits, 2 ADRs, 1 ZK sweep)
- Rank clusters by downstream confusion cost: "if a future agent missed this cluster, how wrong would their decisions be?"
- Freeze: top 1-2 clusters →
core_thread. Clusters that involve superseded docs →docs_now_stale.
Test: can you identify the single most important decision of the week? If the combo redefinition (May 6) would be invisible in your weekly, you didn't rank correctly.
Step 4: Prep Report (show to user before writing)
Present a 5-line summary:
📊 Weekly Prep — 2026-W22
📄 Dailies: 2026-05-21, 2026-05-28 (gap May 22-27)
🔀 ADRs: 3 proposed, 0 accepted this period
⚠️ Anomalies: combo redefinition (May 6) not captured in any weekly
💡 Top cluster: site documentation debt cleanup (P0 → done)
📋 docs_now_stale candidates: ADR-20260501160000000, external-skill-governance-bridge.md
User confirms → proceed to write. User flags missing items → add to cluster list.
When to Run
- User explicitly asks for weekly synthesis
- End of week (typically Sunday) for retrospective
- Before epic planning to understand what unlocked/paused
- Do NOT auto-schedule — the player decides timing
Inputs (collect before writing)
# 1. Daily files from the past 7 days
ls daily/*.md | sort | tail -7
# 2. Git activity (for reference, not replay)
git log --since="7 days ago" --oneline
# 3. Current cortex state
bunx @lythos/project-cortex@0.17.1 index
bunx @lythos/project-cortex@0.17.1 stats
# Cortex uses timestamp IDs (ADR-yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS, TASK-...,
# EPIC-...). This lets you grep by date range:
# ls cortex/adr/02-accepted/ | grep '^ADR-2026051'
# Use this when reconstructing a missing weekly from ground truth.
# 4. Session recall — ask yourself:
# - What was the priority at week start?
# - What actually got done vs paused?
# - What emerged mid-week that wasn't planned?
# - What pattern repeated across multiple days?
Output: weekly/YYYY-Wxx.md
Frontmatter (machine-readable; future agents read this first)
---
period: 2026-05-01_to_2026-05-07
core_thread: "one-line synthesis of the week's unifying theme"
priority_at_start:
- "what was planned"
priority_at_end:
- "what actually became priority"
quests_advanced:
- EPIC-xxx: epic name (status)
quests_unlocked:
- "new task or epic that became actionable"
quests_paused:
- "task or epic that was deferred"
parked_threads:
- "noted but not pursued"
decisions_accepted:
- ADR-xxx: decision title
retro_cells:
planned_done: "what was planned and completed"
planned_paused: "what was planned but didn't happen (and why)"
emergent_done: "what emerged and earned attention"
emergent_paused: "what emerged but was parked"
project_lesson_candidates:
- "pattern that might become a wiki entry if it repeats"
references:
daily: ["daily/2026-05-01.md", "daily/2026-05-02.md", ...]
cortex_index: cortex/INDEX.md
---
Body (~200-300 words, NOT a replay)
- TL;DR (1 paragraph): core thread + the one decision that mattered most.
- 4-Quadrant Retro (table): planned vs emergent × done vs paused.
- Quest DAG: ASCII or Mermaid diagram of epic/task flow.
- Project Lesson Candidates: bullets for patterns worth crystallizing.
- Reference Pointers: links to daily files and indexes. Don't replicate.
The 4-Quadrant Retrospective
Compare intended priorities against actual execution:
| | Done | Paused / Dropped | |---|---|---| | Planned (priority at start) | ✅ Validated priorities — called right | ⚠️ Priority correction — why did it slip? | | Emergent (surfaced mid-week) | 🌱 What proved deserving of attention | 📋 Noted-but-parked threads |
Rule of thumb: One concise line per cell explaining what happened and why. Not a task list.
Salience Filter
> "太细节的小事不会在 weekly 里。特别强烈的印象会在。"
| Include | Exclude | |---------|---------| | Decisions that changed direction | Every commit message | | Patterns across multiple days | Single-day bugs already fixed | | Unblocked epics or tasks | Routine maintenance | | Surprising findings from E2E | Formatting changes, refactors | | Project traits worth documenting | Tool version bumps |
Test: If a future agent reading this weekly cold (no daily access) would mistake a detail for a non-event, it doesn't belong.
Verify Companion
Before relying on a weekly for planning, spot-check its claims against ground truth:
# Does the recorded epic/task status match reality?
bunx @lythos/project-cortex@0.17.1 probe
# Does the git activity match the claimed period?
git log --since="2026-05-01" --until="2026-05-07" --oneline
# Do the referenced daily files exist?
ls daily/2026-05-*.md
Wrong facts in weekly = disaster for next agent. The agent owns this verification — there is no validate-weekly CLI; weekly is a pure skill that produces a doc, the agent uses cortex probe + git log + daily ls to reality-check what it just wrote.
Gotchas
Show draft before writing. Present the weekly content to the user for confirmation. Prevents hallucinated synthesis from being persisted.
Weekly ≠ daily rollup. If it reads like 7 daily handoffs concatenated, it's wrong. Weekly is a new layer of abstraction.
Emergent work is not failure. If the "emergent + done" cell is full while "planned + done" is empty, that's not a planning failure — it's the project responding to E2E reality. Document the pattern, don't apologize.
Cortex is optional. If the project uses cortex, read active epics/tasks. If not, infer quest status from daily handoffs and git history.
Supporting References
| When you need to… | Read | |--------------------|------| | Full frontmatter spec and examples | [references/weekly-format.md](./references/weekly-format.md) | | Validate-companion pattern details | [references/verify-companion.md](./references/verify-companion.md) | | Relationship with daily scribe + onboarding | [references/cqrs-architecture.md](./references/cqrs-architecture.md) |
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: lythos-labs
- Source: lythos-labs/lythoskill
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.