canonicalize-entity
Skill504 starsChanged 49 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Resolve aliases and near-duplicates into canonical entities while preserving provenance and rejecting false merges; entity schema is configurable.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engineword for word, first seen Sep 25, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engine★ 505100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository270 other files it gives its agents.
- abstract-structureSkill
- adjudicate-exchangeSkill
- adjust-abstraction-scopeSkill
- adversarial-deliberationSkill
- aggregate-rankingSkill
- analogical-discoverySkill
- analyze-constraints-readinessSkill
- analyze-experiment-resultsSkill
- analyze-future-scenariosSkill
- analyze-heterogeneitySkill
- analyze-interventionSkill
- analyze-leaderboard-dynamicsSkill
- analyze-patent-citation-networkSkill
- analyze-scaling-regimeSkill
- analyze-temporal-trajectorySkill
- apply-perturbationSkill
- apply-question-frameworkSkill
- apply-separation-principleSkill
- apply-stage-gateSkill
- apply-veto-filterSkill
- appreciative-reframeSkill
- assess-construct-validitySkill
- assess-evidence-saturationSkill
- assess-goal-feasibilitySkill
- assess-patent-claim-scopeSkill
- assess-patent-legal-statusSkill
- assess-prior-art-and-claimsSkill
- assess-problem-wickednessSkill
- assess-publication-biasSkill
- assess-question-qualitySkill
- assess-ranking-consistencySkill
- assess-readiness-dimensionSkill
- assess-removabilitySkill
- assess-sensitivitySkill
- assess-system-boundarySkill
- assumption-stress-testSkill
- atomize-claimSkill
- atomize-conceptSkill
- attach-evidence-to-relationSkill
- audit-benchmark-validitySkill
- audit-convergence-independenceSkill
- audit-data-contaminationSkill
- audit-explanatory-compressionSkill
- audit-reporting-qualitySkill
- audit-structural-equivalenceSkill
- audit-structure-consistencySkill
- audit-study-validitySkill
- audit-validator-independenceSkill
- biologize-problemSkill
- biomimetic-transferSkill
- build-concept-fanSkill
- build-current-reality-treeSkill
- build-domain-ontologySkill
- build-failure-chainSkill
- build-noncircularity-matrixSkill
- calibrate-adversarial-confidenceSkill
- calibrate-probability-forecastSkill
- categorize-evidenceSkill
- challenge-assumptionSkill
- characterize-anomalySkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
Search for near-duplicates and compare definitions, identifiers, and provenance.
- Very specific: line 27
If canonical entities are stable enough to compare against the target domain, consider map-coverage-space as the next tactic.
- Distinctive: line 39
Before merging aliases, verify pages refer to the same concept rather than merely related concepts.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
canonicalize-entity
Purpose
Resolve aliases and near-duplicates into canonical entities while preserving provenance and rejecting false merges.
Input contract
required: [raw_entities, entity_schema, alias_evidence]
optional: [synonym_dictionary, organization_relationships, graph_edges, canonicalization_policy]
constraints: [the entity schema is explicit; merge requires semantic identity evidence; preserve provenance and redirect relationships]Procedure
- Normalize names, identifiers, and aliases under the caller-supplied entity schema.
- Search for near-duplicates and compare definitions, identifiers, and provenance.
- Merge only semantically identical entities into a canonical record and redirect dependent edges.
- Preserve rejected-merge pairs and rationale, then return the canonicalized register.
If canonical entities are stable enough to compare against the target domain, consider map-coverage-space as the next tactic.
Output contract
produces: [canonical_entities, alias_map, merge_decisions, redirected_edges, rejected_merges]
delta_fields: [findings, evidence_updates, decisions, uncertainties]Quality gates
- Preserve the source merge-candidates gate: scan at least 10 concepts, or all concepts if fewer than 10 exist; a candidate score >7.0 is a merge flag, not proof.
- Before merging aliases, verify pages refer to the same concept rather than merely related concepts; retain inline links and edge redirects where applicable.
- Assignee normalization preserves parent, subsidiary, and acquired-entity relationships rather than collapsing organizations into one name.
Parameterization
The caller must provide the entity type and schema, canonical naming policy, alias/synonym evidence, merge confidence rule, graph-edge policy, and whether the task concerns concepts, assignees, or another entity class.
Failure and counterexamples
Reject merges without semantic identity evidence, threshold-only matches, or records that lose provenance or dependent edges.
Provenance map
- resolved: knowledge-structuring/merge-candidates
- resolved: knowledge-structuring/alias-resolution
- resolved: knowledge-acquisition/assignee-normalization
- intermediate: Pass3/merge-near-duplicate-concepts
- intermediate: Pass3/normalize-assignee
- intermediate: Pass4/map-field-taxonomy
Verbatim source criteria excerpts
merge-candidatesline 18: If search returns another concept with score > 7.0, flag as merge candidate.merge-candidatesline 25: Must scan at least 10 concepts (or all concepts if fewer than 10 exist).alias-resolutionline 29: Before merging, verify the pages truly refer to the same concept (not related but distinct concepts).
Preserved source criteria ledger
| source | physical line | kind | source criterion |
| knowledge-structuring/merge-candidates | 22 | numeric | Scan at least 10 concepts, or all if fewer than 10; score >7.0 flags a merge candidate. |
| knowledge-structuring/alias-resolution | 28 | gate | Verify semantic identity before merging; related-but-distinct concepts must not merge. |
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

