update-portfolio
Skill0 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Sync a roll-up document against the sources it summarizes, and log the decision.
In this repository18 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adopt-poolSkill
- analyze-resultsSkill
- assessment-layoutSkill
- audit-brainSkill
- brain-anatomySkill
- critique-mcqSkill
- critique-thesisSkill
- design-courseSkill
- digestSkill
- grill-pointSkill
- init-brainSkill
- item-defectsSkill
- learning-outcomesSkill
- make-examSkill
- make-practicalSkill
- new-subjectSkill
- thai-office-filesSkill
The file
Files
update-portfolio — sync a roll-up document with its sources
This skill is an ordered checklist: each step opens when the one before it has produced its result. A roll-up document is a single file whose content is a summary of state that lives elsewhere: it goes stale the moment a source changes, and its value is that a reader can trust it without opening the sources.
Whenever a step puts more than one decision to the user, it asks them in the round shape the grill-point skill gives in its step 3.
Steps
- Work from the root that can see every source — open the session at the repository root, not inside one of the trees being summarized. A session rooted in a single tree cannot read the other trees' rules, and will reconcile against a partial picture without noticing.
- Identify the roll-up and its sources — read the host project's agent instructions file (
AGENTS.md, orCLAUDE.md) for which document rolls up what; the document's own frontmatter and section links usually name the sources feeding each section. Then show the user the plan for this run — its steps by number with a 🛑 on each one that stops for the user, then one line of what this step found and one of what it could not find, labelled in the user's language — and wait for the user's go-ahead, or take the dispatch as the go-ahead when this run was sent to work without the user, as a sub-agent; name each later step by its number as it starts. - Read the roll-up in full — read the whole file, not a sampled range. A summary document's sections constrain each other, and editing one against a partial read produces contradictions inside the same file.
- Reconcile section by section — for each section, open the source it summarizes (that tree's index, status file, or project records) and compare claim by claim. Every section accounted for; where the source and the roll-up disagree, the source wins unless the user says otherwise.
- Apply the changes and log the decision — update the affected tables and checklists, then append one row to the document's decision history: date, what changed, and the effect. History rows are append-only — superseded entries stay as the record of what was believed when.
- Refresh the frontmatter dates — set the verified and updated fields to today.
- Verify before finishing — run the project's check script where one exists, then confirm: every section reconciled against its source, the decision row appended, the frontmatter dates refreshed, and every link resolving. Cross-tree links break more often than any others in the repo, and this document holds more of them than any other.
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.

