knowledge-graph
Skill119 starsChanged 30 days agoMITView on GitHub
Build and maintain the project's knowledge graph — a tiered set of nodes under docs/graph/ that lets an agent load only the few facts a task needs instead of the whole codebase. Use when adopting a project, when a fact changes, when a node grows too large, or when a task should have matched a node's triggers and didn't. Enforces one home per fact (dedup), honest per-node budgets, cite-don't-fabricate, and a mechanical linter. The library wiki (docs/graph/libraries/) is a leaf tier of this graph, not a separate system.
23 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ddehart/claude-code-pluginstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- AsiaOstrich/EngramGraphtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- debjan/knowledge-graphtheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- nikhilw/structured-agentic-workflowtheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- digitalgym/aipathway-standardstheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use metrics, push and 4 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
GoogleSkillmetrics
Expertise in analyzing time-series repository health metrics, investigating root causes, and proposing proactive workflow improvements.
Also in 3 projects that use this
OpenAISkillpush
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillretrospective
Review how work went and improve the next round. USE WHEN asked for a retro, delays, or process lessons. DO NOT USE for code review or transcript replay.
Also in 3 projects that use this
VercelSkilldeploy
Deploy applications to Vercel. Use when the user says "deploy", "deploy to Vercel", "push to production", "deploy my app", or "go live".
Also in 3 projects that use this
varun29ankuSSkillorchestrate
This skill should be used when the user asks to 'orchestrate a task', 'break down work into parallel agents', 'coordinate subtasks', 'run agents in parallel', or mentions 'multi-agent'. Decomposes complex tasks into tracked subtasks, dispatches parallel subagents, and coordinates until completion.
Also in 3 projects that use this
nicolasestremSkillbrainstorm
Structured idea generation and solution exploration with systematic analysis.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions23 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 23
- AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards★ 84same name
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skills★ 41same name
- iagocavalcante/claude-turbo-search★ 16same name
- iuiaoin/agent-skills★ 16same name
- ariaxhan/kernel-claude★ 15same name
- Alexander-Tyagunov/magician★ 14same name
- nikhilw/structured-agentic-workflow★ 7same name
- cirwel/unitares★ 6same name
- urmzd/saige★ 6same name
- AsiaOstrich/EngramGraph★ 4same name
13 more not listed
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 repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- core/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adopt-existingSkill
- adr-writerSkill
- brainstorm-internalSkill
- brainstorm-socraticSkill
- context-routerSkill
- grill-plannerSkill
- holistic-editingSkill
- humanizerSkill
- library-wikiSkill
- research-and-ingestSkill
- source-indexSkill
- spec-authorSkill
- test-firstSkill
- toolcraftSkill
- validate-knowledgeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 19 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
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
- Very specific: line 69
Every node begins with frontmatter.
- Very specific: line 119
Every fact has exactly one owning node, declared in its owns list.
- Very specific: line 120
Every other file links to it.
- Distinctive: line 146
Every non-obvious claim has a source.
- Very specific: line 213
Write every trigger in the forms a developer actually types, and in forms of three characters or more: the router drops shorter tokens, so …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 19 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
knowledge-graph
The graph at docs/graph/ is how a project stays legible when it no
longer fits in a context window. Each node is one subject; edges say
what a task must load with it; tiers bound the depth. An agent starts at
the router index and traverses (see context-router); this skill is the
discipline of authoring and maintaining what it traverses.
Scale is agnostic: a "subsystem" node may describe a package in a single repo or a whole repo in a multi-repo program. The graph does not privilege either shape: nodes describe subjects, and how many repos those subjects span is a property of the project, not of the method.
Tiers
| Tier | What | Loaded |
| 0 | The kernel (AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md) | Always, by the host tool |
| 1 | docs/graph/index.md — the fallback map | When the routed plan (graph-lint.py --plan) fails, stays empty or looks wrong |
| 2 | docs/graph/nodes/*.md — one subject each | By traversal from the router |
| 3 | Detailed collections below docs/graph/ | Only when a Tier-2 node names the leaf and the task needs it |
A Tier-2 node names another node by id and lets the traversal load its content.
The node contract
Every node begins with frontmatter. The full contract (every key's
semantics: id, owns, requires, peers, composes, artifacts,
libraries, load_when, est_tokens) and the anti-patterns live in
docs/graph/_schema.md, the file installed beside the graph itself;
copy an existing node rather than authoring frontmatter from scratch.
The key that carries the whole design: owns. Each fact-key appears in
exactly one node's list, project-wide.
The edges decide what every later task pays; what requires: and
peers: mean is _schema.md. Two consequences follow. A neighbour a
reader should know about and will usually skip is a peers: edge,
never a prose pointer in the body, because the router prints a peer as
"not loaded", a visible choice a body sentence is not; and a
requires: edge to a node that owns nothing the task uses drags that
node into every route through this one. The root carries no
requires: edge at all: it is the cold start of every session, so
whatever it requires, every session loads; it reaches the rest of the
graph through lazy edges and index.md.
An expertise node ONLY routes. It owns exactly two facts,
<slug>.applicability (when this stack element is in play, and what
goes wrong without it) and <slug>.composition (which
sub-expertises apply under which condition), and it carries at least one
libraries:/artifacts: edge to the depth it points at. The API, the
pin, and the standard stay on those leaves; the node names the leaf that
serves each purpose. Its specialisations hang off composes:, and a
child that requires: its parent must appear in that parent's list: the
linter checks that reciprocity, so a child cannot be added without the
menu learning about it.
Where a grounded idea attaches. A best-practices/ page whose
subject is a discipline, not a language or a file format, is a leaf like
any other, and the only question it raises is which node owns it. Give
it an expertise.* node when the subject is a stack element with a pin
home in docs/graph/libraries/. Attach it to an existing domain.*
node when the graph already owns that concept's vocabulary and
invariants: add the page to that node's artifacts:, and add the
departure's own words to that node's load_when:, so the page is
reachable on the vocabulary a reader would search with. Author a new
domain.* only when neither holds. The evidence is the shelf: every
best-practices page about a stack element is owned by an expertise.*
node, and every page about a concept the graph already names is owned by
a domain.* node. The page's own shape, its sections and its citation
rule, is the shelf's contract in docs/graph/best-practices/README.md,
not this skill's.
The rules
1. One home per fact
Every fact has exactly one owning node, declared in its owns list.
Every other file links to it. Duplicated facts rot asymmetrically:
one copy gets updated, the other silently lies, and a lying doc is worse
than a missing one. When two nodes both want a fact, extract it to a
shared node and have both require it.
Two corollaries. One name per concept: a term maps one-to-one onto
the thing it names, a near-miss synonym is a fault rather than an alias,
and the graph uses the name the world already holds. A serialized, wire,
or externally held identifier is a contract, never renamed to match
internal vocabulary; a deliberate mismatch is recorded so nobody "fixes"
it (skill.holistic-editing owns the rename mechanics). Rendered
views are generated, hand-edited files are shaped for their editor: an
index table or status summary is regenerated from its home
(status-register.py), and edits go to that home; the files a human
does maintain (the linter's PROJECT CONFIG, the plant: block) stay
comment-bearing, grouped, and stably ordered.
2. Version pins live in the library tier
An exact version belongs on its docs/graph/libraries/<name>.md page. A
node body may summarize a version only if it owns the corresponding
*.versions fact-key; otherwise it links to the page. This keeps a
version from being stated in five places and updated in one.
3. Cite, or write "not recorded"
Every non-obvious claim has a source. Where a URL, a CVE id, a version, or a fact is unknown, write "not recorded" or "not audited"; never invent one to fill a section. An honest gap is usable, a confident fabrication is a trap, and a graph exists to be trusted over model memory.
Separate observed from audited. A fact described because it was
seen in source is not the same as a fact that was audited or certified,
and a page's prose keeps the two apart: "the handler validates the
token" (observed in one path) is a different claim from "every path
validates the token" (a coverage claim nobody checked). Say which you
did. Where a page's scope is partial, add an explicit observed
absences / what this page is NOT note, so a reader cannot mistake the
edge of what was surveyed for a guarantee of what holds. The same split
holds for traced versus inferred: a claim not traced to a source,
command output, or dated observation carries an explicit verify:
marker naming what to re-check; a procedure page says whether its
commands were run here; unbuilt work is written in the future tense with
its owning increment named, because a present-tense sentence asserts
that the thing exists.
A number is a fact with a derivation. Where a count, a total or a
ratio appears, the arithmetic that produced it appears with it (what was
counted, over which rows, by which command), and each denominator is its
own fact rather than a figure recomputed in passing. An aggregate is
derived from the rows it summarizes, never restated beside them, since a
summary line written separately from its table contradicts that table as
soon as one row changes (the rendered-views corollary of rule 1). A
validation pass (skill.validate-knowledge) recounts every stated
number against its source; this rule is that recount's one home.
4. Bodies stay small
A node body aims at ~150 lines, and the linter rejects a project node
whose body passes 170. A node that wants to be longer is two nodes: its
topic divides into a sibling leaf rather than being shortened to fit. A
leaf collection stays homogeneous in kind; an artifact of another kind
is filed where its kind lives. est_tokens stays within 2× of the
measured whole file, frontmatter included: the router sums these to
report context cost before work starts, so a lie here corrupts every
plan.
Leaves and branches (knowledge-graph.branch-shape). Review judges
this shape; no lint checks it.
- A leaf holds one topic, sized to what a typical task loads. A leaf
whose separable topics are loaded independently divides into sibling
leaves, each routable by its own
load_whenand linked to the others bypeers:. A leaf whose topics are loaded together stays whole. Protocols, postures and the delegation files are leaves. - A branch is a menu. A branch node (the router index, a hub, a
subsystem or domain node, or a new thin parent) has a
## Leavessection that lists each leaf with a one-line "load when", in the form_schema.mdgives under "Body". Beyond the list it holds only the doctrine that binds every leaf and cannot live in any one of them. - A branch owns its menu: which leaf answers which need, under the
fact key
<slug>.menu. A node that owns no fact, or a list without that routing information, is a link farm: delete it rather than pad it.
5. Compound
Nodes grow with the project. Add a fact when the code gains it; add a
sharp edge when it bites, dated; add a load_when trigger when a task
should have matched and didn't. A fact enters when the project meets it,
so the graph holds no theoretical facts.
Write every trigger in the forms a developer actually types, and in
forms of three characters or more: the router drops shorter tokens,
so EF can never route; write "entity framework" and "dbcontext"
instead. On a composed child the wording decides whether it is ever
reached at all, because descent tests the child's own vocabulary minus
its parent's: a trigger the family already carries sits on the parent,
adds nothing, and descends nobody. Give a child the words only it
answers to. Among siblings, no node's triggers may cover every task
its siblings' triggers cover: that node then loads on all of their
tasks as well as its own, and a node stuffed with every keyword of its
neighbourhood is that superset by accretion.
Compounding extends to being wrong: a recorded fact found false is
struck through and gets a dated Correction beside it, under the one
retraction rule in skill.holistic-editing (The append-only exception).
6. One graph, several depths
libraries/, sources/, product/, architecture/, api/, data/,
prompts/, evaluations/, plans/, runbooks/, specs/, and
decisions/ are leaf collections of this one graph (rule.knowledge,
in context-router). Each leaf hangs off an owning node's edge; a leaf
without one is orphaned knowledge. Maintained project knowledge outside
docs/graph/ is an input to corroborate and ingest.
7. Record where a secret lives
A knowledge page records where a secret lives, never the secret itself, not even a partially masked copy: a "partially masked" token still leaks its shape, length, and prefix, and the graph is committed, searchable, and long-lived. Record a pointer: the secret manager path, the env-var name, the vault key. The fact a reader needs is where to look, and that is safe to own.
8. Status lives in frontmatter, in one vocabulary
Anything that can be open (an ADR, a spec, a risk row, a deviation
node) carries status and status_date in frontmatter, never in prose,
using the one lifecycle vocabulary and its required companions defined
in docs/graph/_schema.md ("Lifecycle status"); a body ## Status
section is a pointer, and a body value that disagrees is a lint failure.
graph-lint.py checks nodes; docs/graph/status-register.py lints the
Tier-3 leaves and is the query surface (--open --hotfix --summary).
The schema is the vocabulary's home.
Node body shape
Answer ONLY these, in this order: what this is (2–3 sentences) · what you must know (the owned facts, terse: bullets, tables, code) · sharp edges (what will bite, dated) · where the code is (concrete paths, not descriptions of paths) · neighbours (why each peer exists and when to cross to it).
The linter
docs/graph/ ships a linter, docs/graph/graph-lint.py, copied in from
docs/graph/templates/knowledge-graph/graph-lint.py and parameterized
on adoption. It makes the dedup rule real rather than aspirational. It
enforces the numbered rules in docs/graph/_schema.md ("The rules the
linter enforces"), which is their one home. Run it before committing any
graph change:
python3 docs/graph/graph-lint.py # lint
python3 docs/graph/graph-lint.py --graph # edges: -> requires, ~> composes
python3 docs/graph/graph-lint.py --plan "<task>" # dry-run the routerA graph without a passing linter is a graph that has already started to lie. Wire it into the verification gates.
An authoring or maintenance pass is done when the linter passes, every new leaf resolves through an owning node's edge, and the facts that motivated the pass each have exactly one home. Growth is demand-driven; stop at the passing lint.
When the graph is wrong
It will be; code moves and the graph lags. On a path the session-start
code-anchor line names, the code wins on facts: fix the node in the
same change. Elsewhere a node's facts about code are current as stated
(rule.knowledge). On every path the node wins on contracts: a code
violation of a recorded contract is a bug, not a doc update. When a task should have matched a node's
load_when and didn't, sharpen the trigger in the same commit.
Reference files
docs/graph/skills/context-router.md— how the graph is traversed.docs/graph/skills/library-wiki.md— the Tier-3 library-page discipline.docs/graph/skills/validate-knowledge.md— proving the graph is usable.docs/graph/templates/knowledge-graph/— the schema, linter, index, and node templates.
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.

