messy-notes-to-decision-log
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when turning rough notes, chat dumps, meeting fragments, scratch documents, or mixed planning material into a decision log with evidence, owners, dates, and unresolved questions.
In this repository19 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-handoff-briefSkill
- api-doc-to-tool-specSkill
- architecture-rfc-reviewSkill
- bug-report-to-reproSkill
- changelog-to-upgrade-planSkill
- competitive-research-briefSkill
- customer-call-to-prdSkill
- database-migration-risk-reviewSkill
- dependency-upgrade-risk-reviewSkill
- incident-log-to-postmortemSkill
- privacy-data-flow-mapSkill
- prompt-to-eval-rubricSkill
- repo-launch-readiness-reviewSkill
- roadmap-to-release-planSkill
- security-review-checklistSkill
- support-ticket-to-evalSkill
- telemetry-to-product-insightsSkill
- tool-permission-auditSkill
- workflow-automation-scoutSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Use when rough notes contain mixed decisions, proposals, actions, and questions.
- Distinctive: line 15
Do not use when the material is a clean task list that only needs formatting.
- Distinctive: line 26
Keep evidence snippets short and source-linked when possible.
- Distinctive: line 44
No decision is marked final without evidence.
≈ “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
Messy Notes To Decision Log
Purpose
Extract durable decisions and unresolved questions from rough material.
Fit
- Use when rough notes contain mixed decisions, proposals, actions, and questions.
- Do not use when the material is a clean task list that only needs formatting.
Inputs
- Notes, chat excerpts, meeting fragments, or planning scratchpads.
- Date, participants, project name, and desired decision format if available.
- Any known owners or deadlines.
Workflow
- Identify explicit decisions, implied decisions, proposals, and open questions.
- Keep evidence snippets short and source-linked when possible.
- Assign owners and dates only when stated; otherwise mark them missing.
- Separate decisions from action items.
- Surface contradictions that need follow-up.
Output
Produce Markdown with:
- Source Snapshot
- Decision Log
- Action Items
- Open Questions
- Contradictions
- Missing Owners Or Dates
Validation
- No decision is marked final without evidence.
- Implied decisions are labeled as inferred.
- Owners and deadlines are not fabricated.
- Contradictions are preserved instead of smoothed over.
- The result is compact enough to paste into a project tracker.
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.