jotbook-stage
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Stage a recently-discussed concept as a lightweight jot. **CRITICAL — auto-invoke this skill at the end of any turn where you delivered a substantive multi-paragraph explanation of a domain concept (a system, mechanism, piece of code, design rationale, or pattern the user might want to revisit). Don't ask permission, don't hedge, don't skip because the topic feels minor — staging is cheap and reversible; failing to capture is permanent. Stage and report in one line.** Writes a small pointer file under the configured jots directory; does not write the full entry.
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- jotbook-initSkill
- jotbook-inkSkill
- jotbook-linkSkill
- jotbook-pencil-reviewSkill
- jotbook-pencilSkill
- jotbook-reviewSkill
- jotbook-templateSkill
- jotSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Do NOT auto-invoke for:
- Very specific: line 22
When in doubt, skip — the user can always invoke /jot [subject] explicitly.
- Very specific: line 26
Read .claude/jotbook.local.md if present.
- Very specific: line 58
One line of description: Not two. Not a paragraph. If you feel the urge to write more, you're trying to do jotbook-ink's or …
- Distinctive: line 67
If the user passed an argument, use that as the subject phrase.
- Distinctive: line 71
Write the file using the absolute path.
- Distinctive: line 76
Don't propose to ink or pencil the jot into a full entry immediately.
- Very specific: line 77
Don't add tags, status fields, priority, or other metadata beyond staged:.
- Distinctive: line 78
Don't ask the user to "review" the staged jot — it's already supposed to be lightweight enough that review is unnecessary.
- Distinctive: line 79
Don't stage trivial Q&A ("what's the syntax for X").
≈ “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
Stage a jot
You just gave (or were asked about) an explainer the user wants to revisit later. Write a lightweight pointer file (a "jot") so the topic can be picked up during a future review pass. Do not write the full entry — that's jotbook-ink's job.
When to auto-invoke
Auto-invoke this skill at the end of any turn that delivered a substantive multi-paragraph explanation of a domain concept — a system, mechanism, piece of code, or design rationale that the user might plausibly want to revisit as a long-form note later. Don't ask first. Just stage and report.
Do NOT auto-invoke for:
- Short answers, status updates, error messages
- Code edits with minimal narration
- Routine tool use or clarifications
- Output from any jotbook skill (curation summaries, "the jot backlog is empty",
(jotted: X), etc.) - Trivial Q&A ("what's the syntax for X")
- Anything you wouldn't expect future-you to benefit from a long-form entry on
When in doubt, skip — the user can always invoke /jot [subject] explicitly.
Resolve the jots directory
Read .claude/jotbook.local.md if present. From its frontmatter, extract:
jots_dir— defaultdocs/jotbook/_jots/if missing
If the jots directory does not exist, create it. Before running mkdir, briefly note to the user what you're doing and why — something like "Creating <jots_dir> to hold staged jots (first time staging in this project, or the directory was renamed in settings)." This avoids a context-free permission prompt that could confuse a user who set up jotbook days earlier and forgot.
What to write
A single Markdown file at:
<jots_dir>/YYYY-MM-DD-short-kebab-slug.mdYYYY-MM-DD= today's date (use thecurrentDatefrom context if available, otherwise the system date).short-kebab-slug= 2–5 words capturing the concept, lowercased, hyphenated.
File contents:
---
staged: YYYY-MM-DD
---
One-line description of what was explained — past tense, plain prose.
Files: path/to/file_one.ext, path/to/file_two.extThe Files: line is optional. Include it only when the explainer leaned heavily on specific source files (e.g., "how does this manager work" → yes; "what does eventual consistency mean in general" → no).
Hard limits
- One line of description. Not two. Not a paragraph. If you feel the urge to write more, you're trying to do
jotbook-ink's orjotbook-pencil's job — stop. - No background, no rationale, no code excerpts. A jot is a pointer. The full explanation lives in chat history or will be reconstructed at ink (or pencil) time.
- No headings beyond the frontmatter.
The point of a tiny jot is that some won't survive review, and you should be able to drop one without regret.
Procedure
- Identify the subject:
- If the user passed an argument, use that as the subject phrase.
- Otherwise (auto-invocation or no-arg
/jot), infer from the most recent explainer in the conversation. If there isn't a clear recent explainer, ask the user what they want jotted rather than guessing.
- Derive the slug (kebab-case, ≤ 5 words).
- Check the jots directory for an existing jot with a similar slug or covering the same concept. If one exists, ask the user whether to append to it (add a line to the description), supersede it (replace with today's framing), or create a new one alongside.
- Write the file using the absolute path.
- Report back in one short line: the slug and a brief confirmation. Don't lecture about the workflow. For auto-invocations, keep it especially terse — something like
Jotted: <slug>is plenty.
What NOT to do
- Don't propose to ink or pencil the jot into a full entry immediately. That's a separate explicit step.
- Don't add tags, status fields, priority, or other metadata beyond
staged:. - Don't ask the user to "review" the staged jot — it's already supposed to be lightweight enough that review is unnecessary.
- Don't stage trivial Q&A ("what's the syntax for X"). If you wouldn't expect future-you to benefit from a long-form entry on it, don't stage it.
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.

