agentleFS
mikonosmikonos/deep-learning/SKILL.md

deep-learning

Skill2 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub

All-in-One Deep Reading tool for Zettelkasten. Designed for deeply digesting books, long-form articles, research reports, and academic papers. Use when a user wants to deeply digest a book/long article/report/paper and build a knowledge network, producing structure notes and atomic notes. Blends Mortimer Adler (structure), Feynman (clarity), Luhmann (network), Pragmatist (actionability), and Critics (debate). Enforces High-Fidelity case preservation and Actionable tool extraction. Keywords: deep reading, structure note, deep learning, Zettelkasten.

7 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 8 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 8

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Source text available: No paraphrasing allowed; atomic notes involving cases or studies must preserve specific numbers, …

    line 25
  2. Distinctive:

    Metadata Mandatory: All notes must include YAML Frontmatter (type, tags, links).

    line 28
  3. Very specific:

    Task folder naming: Default to [Title]_structure_note.md.

    line 36
  4. Very specific:

    Structure note naming: Default to YYYYMMDD_00_[Title]_structure_note.md.

    line 37
  5. Very specific:

    Option A: If the target index has an ## Inbox section, append this book's entry under Inbox (e.g.

    line 40
  6. Distinctive:

    Option B: If the target index has no Inbox, create a new Inbox section.

    line 41
  7. Very specific:

    Task: Create the structure note.

    line 62
  8. Very specific:

    Task: Create the index note for this book.

    line 69
  9. Very specific:

    Use file-organize skill if available: determine whether it goes at root level (alongside existing hubs) or in a topic subfolder.

    line 79
  10. Very specific:

    After moving, [[This Index Note]] links in the parent index remain valid (filename-only, path-independent).

    line 80
  11. Distinctive:

    Round 2 (Flesh): Create the newly discovered notes, continue Luhmann Scan.

    line 90
  12. Distinctive:

    No Vague Verbs: Every step must be concrete.

    line 107
  13. Very specific:

    Steps in tables: If a method has multiple steps, each step uses a | Step | What | How | Why | table clearly separating action items, …

    line 111
  14. Distinctive:

    Metaphor check: Do complex concepts have appropriate metaphors?

    line 121

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Deep Reading

Core Philosophy: Not just understanding the world (Understand), but changing it (Act). Scope: Book, Long-form Article, Research Report, Academic Paper.

The Council (Expert Personas)

  1. Mortimer Adler (The Architect): Responsible for structure — extracting core propositions and logic trees.
  2. The Pragmatist (The Engineer): Responsible for actionability — extracting executable SOPs, templates, and checklists.
  3. Richard Feynman (The Teacher): Responsible for clarity — ensuring concepts are demystified and explained in plain language.
  4. Niklas Luhmann (The Librarian): Responsible for connectivity — ensuring knowledge is networked and grows organically.
  5. The Critics (The Stress Testers): Musk, Socrates, Munger — responsible for stress-testing and debate.

The Iron Rules

  1. Always Deep: Regardless of input length, always process at the highest level (structure + tools + debate).
  2. Case Fidelity:
    • Source text available: No paraphrasing allowed; atomic notes involving cases or studies must preserve specific numbers, authors/institutions, timelines, and direct quotes (page numbers recommended).
    • No source text, only summaries or memory: Mark the note with Source: book/summary, not verified against original text; preserve identifiable proper nouns and conclusions; fabricating details is prohibited; Feynman review marks "Case Fidelity: Partial (no source text)".
  3. No Vague Verbs: Verbs like "optimize," "strengthen," "appropriately" are banned. Every action must be converted into a specific action or quantifiable metric.
  4. Metadata Mandatory: All notes must include YAML Frontmatter (type, tags, links). No exceptions.

Storage Rules

  1. Default Location: Daily/YYYY/MM/DD (or your vault's daily folder, e.g. 05_每日记录/YYYY/MM/DD)
    • Get the current date (YYYY, MM, DD); create the date folder if it doesn't exist; create a task folder for this session.
    • Task folder naming: Default to [Title]_structure_note.md.
    • Structure note naming: Default to YYYYMMDD_00_[Title]_structure_note.md.
  2. Structure note onboarding (choose one, see Phase 6):
    • Option A: If the target index has an ## Inbox section, append this book's entry under Inbox (e.g. - [[This Structure Note]] — Book Title, YYYYMMDD).
    • Option B: If the target index has no Inbox, create a new Inbox section.
  3. Index note onboarding (see Phase 2.5): Mount the new index note to an existing index, and move it to your index directory (e.g. Index/ or 03_索引/); see Phase 2.5 for Inbox/entry format.

The Workflow

Execution order: Phase 0 → 1 → 2 → 2.5 → 3 → 4 → 5 → 6 → 6.5 (Workflow Audit, mandatory). No skipping; Phase 2.5 must execute immediately after Phase 2; Phase 6.5 must execute immediately after Phase 6.

Phase 0: Pre-game Plan

Produce an execution plan before starting Phase 1; save as YYYYMMDD_01_[BookTitle]_execution_plan.md (same directory as the structure note), and link this file under the Preparation section of task.md.

Must include:

  1. TODO List (≥6 items): e.g. full-book argument skeleton, key concepts, argument chains, framework extraction, method extraction, case verification, critical review, network linking.
  2. Context: Reading intent (What problem am I trying to solve?).

Phase 1: Overview & Structure

Agent: Mortimer Adler

  1. Task: Create the structure note; output must conform to templates/structure_note_template.md, including core propositions and supporting logic chains.
  2. Note: Invoke structure-note skill if available.

Phase 2: Index Design

Agent: Niklas Luhmann

"Don't ask what category it belongs to — ask who it talks to."

  1. Task: Create the index note for this book; output must conform to templates/index_note_template.md, including keywords and multiple entry points.
  2. Note: Invoke index-note skill if available.

Phase 2.5: Index Note Onboarding

Agent: Niklas Luhmann

Execute immediately after index note creation; ensure the new index is accepted into the knowledge network and physically filed.

  1. Mount to existing index: In your index directory (e.g. Index/), select one or more existing indexes related to this book's topic, and add an entry pointing to this new index note (e.g. under ## Inbox append - [[This Index Note]] — Book Title/Topic, YYYYMMDD, or add to the index's "Theme Structure / Sub-index" section). Ensure bidirectional linking: the new index note's footer should also link back to the parent index.
  2. Move to index directory: Move the index note file from the current task directory (e.g. Daily/...) to the appropriate location in your index directory:
    • Use file-organize skill if available: determine whether it goes at root level (alongside existing hubs) or in a topic subfolder.
    • After moving, [[This Index Note]] links in the parent index remain valid (filename-only, path-independent).
  3. (Multi-index mount check deferred to Phase 6): Whether notes mentioned in this index should also be mounted to other indexes — check and add entries in Phase 6.

Phase 3: Recursive Growth

Agent: Luhmann & Feynman

Core innovation: Create while discovering (Luhmann Scan).

Process:

  1. Round 1 (Skeleton): Starting from the structure note, create all explicitly linked Atomic Notes (Concepts).
  2. Luhmann Scan (mandatory for every note): See references/luhmann_scan.md. Three checks — prerequisites, potential connections, methodology discovery (if a concept includes an executable "how" → log in task.md, create a detailed Method Note in Phase 4). Record format in task.md: Prerequisites → Round 2: [[A]]. Connections → Round 3: [[B]]. Methods → [[MethodName]] (Phase 4).
  3. Round 2 (Flesh): Create the newly discovered notes, continue Luhmann Scan.
  4. Round 3+ (Edges): Until complete or out of scope.

Atomic Note Specification:

  • Template: templates/atomic_note_template.md
  • Focus: Definition, Mechanism, Context.
  • Acceptance: Feynman Test (a layperson can understand it).

Phase 4: Methodology Consolidation

Agent: The Pragmatist

Turn methods discovered in Phase 3 into Method Notes.

Method Note Specification (high priority):

  1. Template: templates/method_note_template.md
  2. Focus: Executable Steps (SOP), Templates, Checklists.
  3. Constraints:
    • No Vague Verbs: Every step must be concrete.
    • Mechanism & Leverage: Why does it work?
    • MVE: Minimum Viable Experiment as the next step.
  4. Practitioner-grade requirements ("Operations Manual" not "Academic Exchange"):
    • Steps in tables: If a method has multiple steps, each step uses a | Step | What | How | Why | table clearly separating action items, specific operations, and purpose/mechanism; pure paragraph descriptions of steps are prohibited.
    • Inline troubleshooting: Embed "Common Issue → Immediate Fix" after each step, rather than collecting all pitfalls at the end; the final Pitfalls section serves as a global anti-pattern summary.
    • Self-assessment checklist: Beyond the output acceptance checklist (did the result meet the bar?), add a "Did I execute correctly?" self-check on execution behavior (e.g. process quality, judgment quality, collaboration quality — adjust dimensions by domain).
    • Pre-flight section: Beyond prerequisites, include an independent "Pre-flight Checklist" — things to confirm before starting (environment, materials, mindset, etc.).

Phase 5: Final Review

Agent: Richard Feynman

Review the entire knowledge network through the Feynman lens:

  1. De-jargon check: Have all technical terms been "translated" into everyday language?
  2. Metaphor check: Do complex concepts have appropriate metaphors?
  3. Logic check: Are there any breaks in the argument chain?
  4. Topology check: Are there any "surprise" connections?

Phase 6: Network Review

Agent: Niklas Luhmann

  1. Link check: Confirm every note (excluding parent-child structure notes) has at least 2 bidirectional links.
  2. Onboarding: Complete index onboarding in relevant indexes under your index directory — create ## Inbox if none exists; file structure notes and atomic notes under appropriate keyword/topic indexes. Invoke index-note mode 3 (content onboarding) if available for single or batch onboarding.
  3. Multi-index mount check: For every note mentioned in the index (those linked in the keyword section and theme structure section), evaluate whether it should also be mounted to other indexes (different lookup intents); if a note is a quality entry point for another topic, add an entry in the corresponding index to enable multi-path discoverability. Output a brief list: [[NoteA]] → already in Index_X; recommend adding to Index_Y (reason).

Phase 6.5: Workflow Audit (Mandatory)

Must execute after Phase 6 is complete. Invoke the workflow-audit skill to perform a Deming + Gawande-perspective execution completeness check and systematic closure:

  1. Audit target: This skill (deep-learning); artifacts: all task directory outputs (execution plan, structure note, index, atomic notes, task.md, etc.).
  2. Output: Save an audit report (YYYYMMDD_[TaskName]_workflow_audit_report.md), including item-by-item checklist, system closure, DoD sign-off, multi-index mount list; any item marked ❌ must be remediated until all DoD items pass.
  3. workflow-audit main file: .cursor/skills/workflow-audit/SKILL.md; report template: workflow-audit/references/audit_report_template.md.

Cannot be skipped. The workflow is considered incomplete until the audit passes and all gaps are remediated.


Task Tracking

Maintain progress in task.md:

# Preparation
- [ ] Pre-game Plan Created (≥6 TODOs + Context; in-conversation block or saved file)

# Structure & Index
- [ ] Structure Note Created (Adler)
- [ ] Index Note Created (Luhmann)
- [ ] Index Note Onboarding (Phase 2.5): Mounted to existing index + moved to Index directory

# Extraction Loop (Phase 3)
- [ ] [[NoteA (Concept)]] + Luhmann Scan
- [ ] [[NoteB (Concept)]] + Luhmann Scan

# Methodology (Phase 4)
- [ ] [[ToolA (Method)]] (SOP/Checklist/MVE)

# Review (Phase 5 & 6)
- [ ] Feynman Check (De-jargon check)
- [ ] Network Check (2+ links per note; index onboarding: Inbox or keyword entry; multi-index mount check)

# Workflow Audit (Phase 6.5, mandatory)
- [ ] Invoke **workflow-audit** for execution completeness check (Deming + Gawande perspective), produce audit report, remediate any ❌ items until all DoD items pass

Definition of Done

  • Phase 0: Execution plan produced (≥6 TODOs + Context).
  • Overview: 5 questions answered clearly; Feynman test passed.
  • Fidelity: With source text — cases include numbers/proper nouns/direct quotes; without source text — source limitations marked, no fabricated details.
  • Actionability: Method Notes contain vague-verb-free steps + reusable templates + practitioner-grade checks (steps with action tables, inline troubleshooting per step, self-assessment checklist, pre-flight checklist).
  • Network: All notes bidirectionally reachable (≥2 links); onboarded to relevant indexes (Inbox or keyword entry); this index mounted to existing indexes and filed in index directory; multi-index mount check completed.
  • Insight: New connections or unexpected discoveries produced.
  • Workflow Audit: Phase 6.5 executed; workflow-audit report produced; all ❌ items remediated; DoD fully passed.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

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.