agentleFS
netgrade-digitalnetgrade-digital/shared-agents/skills/capture-learning/SKILL.md

capture-learning

Skill5 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Create a team learning after user confirms. Use when the user says "learning speichern", "ja" to creating a learning, "capture learning", or "team learning". After non-trivial tasks, only write after explicit user approval.

14 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

13 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 14 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 7

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Write team learnings to pending/ — drafts awaiting human review.

    line 11
  2. Distinctive:

    After non-trivial tasks, the agent must ask:

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    Only write if the user says yes: Never silently write to pending.

    line 19
  4. Distinctive:

    No secrets or customer-specific data

    line 27
  5. Very specific:

    Write only under the path from sa pending path (typically $SHARED_AGENTS_HOME/team/learnings/pending/).

    line 43
  6. Distinctive:

    Use the absolute path in the Write/edit tool — not paths from the open project or Core dev checkout.

    line 44
  7. Distinctive:

    Do not: commit learnings into the public Core-Repo.

    line 45
  8. Very specific:

    Always set versions: for framework/runtime-specific learnings.

    line 85
  9. Very specific:

    Fourth segment: only when the product publishes it (e.g.

    line 100
  10. Very specific:

    How to determine: read from the project (composer.json, composer.lock, package.json, Shopware Admin/CLI bin/console --version).

    line 105
  11. Distinctive:

    After creating the file, always push pending for team review:

    line 109
  12. Very specific:

    After publish: teammates can sa sync → sa review.

    line 122
  13. Very specific:

    Only approved/ after review becomes team truth.

    line 123

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 14 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

Capture Learning

Write team learnings to pending/ — drafts awaiting human review.

Ask first (required)

After non-trivial tasks, the agent must ask:

„Soll ich ein Team-Learning in shared-agents anlegen?"

Only write if the user says yes. Never silently write to pending.

When content is worth capturing

Propose when all apply:

  • Insight is reusable beyond this session
  • Would help a teammate or future agent
  • No secrets or customer-specific data

Skip when trivial, already documented, or user said no.

Where to write (pending only)

Canonical path only — see docs/canonical-paths.md.

# Resolve before write (never use workspace-relative paths):
sa pending path YYYY-MM-DD-short-slug
# Or: "$SHARED_AGENTS_HOME/scripts/learning-path.sh" YYYY-MM-DD-short-slug

Mandatory

  1. Write only under the path from sa pending path (typically $SHARED_AGENTS_HOME/team/learnings/pending/).
  2. Use the absolute path in the Write/edit tool — not paths from the open project or Core dev checkout.
  3. Do not commit learnings into the public Core-Repo.

Forbidden

  • Development/Work/shared-agents/learnings/ (Core has no learnings)
  • Customer project repos (.cursor/, project docs/, etc.)
  • approved/ (human/PR only)

Never write to approved/ — that is human/PR territory.

File format

---
id: project-YYYY-MM-short-slug
project: project-name
domain: [tag1, tag2]
tags: [keyword1, keyword2]
versions: [shopware:6.6.10, php:8.3.14]
confidence: high
source: task
created: YYYY-MM-DD
author: github-or-name
---

## Kontext
What problem or situation triggered this.

## Erkenntnis
The reusable insight in 1–3 sentences.

## Anwendung
Concrete steps or rule of thumb for next time.

## Links
- path/to/file or PR URL (optional)

Versions (required when a stack applies)

Always set versions: for framework/runtime-specific learnings. Use [] only when no stack version is relevant (e.g. pure process/infra docs).

Format: list of name:version pairs (compatible with flat frontmatter parsing):

versions: [shopware:6.6.10, php:8.3.14]
versions: [laravel:11.31.0, php:8.3.14]
versions: [vue:3.4.27, node:20.18.1]
versions: []   # no stack — OK for shared-agents workflow, MCP setup, etc.

Version format (mandatory for stack entries):

  • Full patch level — 6.6.10, not 6.6.x or 6.6
  • Minimum MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH (three numeric segments), e.g. 11.31.0, 3.4.27
  • Fourth segment only when the product publishes it (e.g. Shopware 6.6.10.0); trailing .0 may be dropped → 6.6.10
  • No wildcards (x, *) — always the version the insight was verified against

Common keys: shopware, laravel, symfony, vue, nuxt, react, nextjs, php, node, wordpress, typo3, magento.

How to determine: read from the project (composer.json, composer.lock, package.json, Shopware Admin/CLI bin/console --version). Use the exact version from the environment where the learning was validated.

After writing — mandatory publish

After creating the file, always push pending for team review:

"$SHARED_AGENTS_HOME/scripts/publish-pending-learning.sh" YYYY-MM-DD-short-slug.md

Or: sa pending push <datei>

This commits + pushes only the team repo (team/learnings/pending/) — teammates run sa sync and sa review.

After writing — tell the user

  1. File is in pending/ — not team knowledge for agents yet (not in approved/).
  2. After publish: teammates can sa sync → sa review.
  3. Only approved/ after review becomes team truth.

pending vs approved

pending/approved/
Who writesAgent (after user says yes)Human via sa review
GitAuto commit+push via sa pending pushAuto commit+push via sa review
Used by agentsNoYes
PurposeDraft for team reviewTeam truth

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.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.