Bridge curator

Skill bks-lab/open-bridge/skills/bridge-curator

Your AI coding agent starts every session knowing your repos, your clients, and how you work — a plain git repo of markdown + YAML it reads at session start, independent of model or frontend. Context compounds instead of restarting. MIT.

Install

npx -y skills add bks-lab/open-bridge --skill bridge-curator

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

8 stars8 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Periodic background consolidation pass over the Bridge itself. Three phases: (1) Library pass — scans skills/, protocols/, rules/, docs/ for drift (sleeping skills 30d+, overlapping triggers, description-budget busters, duplicates, umbrella candidates); (2) Queue pass — scans work/_learning/proposals/ for stale pending (30d+), conflict clusters (same target), supersedes relations; (3) User-pattern pass — synthesizes 3-8 bullet observations about user preferences from postmortems + audit-trail + trigger-corrections of the last 30 days, writes append-only to work/_learning/user-patterns.md. All findings land as proposals (source.type=curator-suggestion) in work/_learning/proposals/ — **never direct edits to Bridge files**. Trigger: "/bridge-curator", "bridge curator", "curator", "curation", "weekly review", "library consolidation", "consolidate skills", "what patterns do I have", "user pattern synthesis", "consolidate", "skill consolidation", "umbrella skill".

SKILL.md

9.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Bridge Curator

bridge-curator is the periodic background-reflection skill. Once a week (configurable), it walks the Bridge's own state and asks three orthogonal questions:

Is the skill library still coherent? (Library pass)
Is the proposal queue still actionable? (Queue pass)
What has the system observed about how this user works lately? (User-pattern pass)

The output of all three phases is always proposals — markdown files under work/_learning/proposals/ with source.type: curator-suggestion. The curator never edits Bridge files directly. All accepts happen via /bridge-learn.

This is the deliberate inversion of the autonomy-maximalist curator pattern observed in some agentic frameworks (e.g. Hermes Agent's background-curator-fork). See rules/learning-autonomy.md § Layer B for the full design rationale.

When to run

Manual: user says /bridge-curator, "bridge curator", "curator", etc.
Scheduled: weekly via cron or /schedule, if configured in bridge-config.yaml.learning.curator.schedule.
Surface in /briefing: on the configured auto_surface_in_briefing day (default Sunday), /briefing Stream D adds a "curator due / overdue" one-liner. Running the curator itself stays manual unless user opts into auto-run.

Arguments

Argument	Effect	Default
`(none)`	Run all three passes sequentially	—
`--pass library`	Only library consolidation	all
`--pass queue`	Only proposal-queue consolidation	all
`--pass user-patterns`	Only user-pattern synthesis	all
`--dry-run`	Surface findings, do NOT write proposals or user-patterns	false
`--since <date>`	Scan window starts at this date (default: last curator run)	last run

Three passes

Pass 1 — Library

Full procedure in references/library-pass.md.

Scans skills/, protocols/, rules/, docs/. Detects:

Sleeping skill — no invocation in skill-usage.jsonl for ≥30 days (if Phase-4 telemetry on); else heuristic via skill-name in work/log.md
Trigger overlap — two or more skills with significantly overlapping trigger phrases in their description fields
Description-budget buster — a SKILL.md description field that alone exceeds 1536 chars (Skills 2.0 discovery budget)
Umbrella candidate — three or more skills that share a clear parent workflow and could be one skill with internal modes
Stale doc — a doc whose last_updated: is older than the last edit to anything it references
Missing scope frontmatter — a skill or agent file without explicit scope: (already caught by /bridge-audit Check 6, but the curator cross-references the audit-history JSON to escalate if recurring)

Each finding becomes a proposal in work/_learning/proposals/.

Pass 2 — Queue

Full procedure in references/queue-pass.md.

Scans work/_learning/proposals/. Detects:

Stale pending — status: pending and created >30 days ago
Same-target conflict — two pending proposals with the same target.path and incompatible target.action
Likely supersede — a newer proposal that is a strict superset of an older one (covers same finding plus additional context)
Drift in source — a proposal whose target.path has been edited in git since the proposal was written (the diff_preview may be stale)
Reject-pile accumulation — proposals/rejected/ has accumulated

10 entries with the same target.type pattern, suggesting the underlying generator (postmortem questions, audit checks) is producing low-signal proposals that should be filtered upstream

Output: each cluster becomes a meta-proposal — a curator-suggestion that asks /bridge-learn to perform a specific consolidation action (accept-A-reject-B, defer-both, merge into combined).

Pass 3 — User patterns

Full procedure in references/user-pattern-pass.md.

Reads, in this order:

work/log.md last 30 days
work/done/YYYY-MM/<slug>/STATUS.md postmortems closed in window
work/_learning/audit-trail.md accept/reject decisions in window
work/_learning/proposals/rejected/*.md reasons in window
work/_learning/trigger-corrections.md (if Phase-4 active)

Synthesizes 3-8 observations about how the user works. Format:

- <Observation in 1-2 sentences>.
  Evidence: <pointers — N postmortems, M rejections, K log entries>
  Strength: weak | medium | strong

Writes append-only to work/_learning/user-patterns.md under a new section ## YYYY-MM-DD — Weekly synthesis (n=<sessions>, n=<postmortems>).

Does NOT write to MEMORY.md. A strong-pattern observation may produce an additional proposal with target.type: memory that /bridge-learn can accept into the user's MEMORY.md via the normal proposal flow.

Minimum-signal threshold: if window contains fewer than 5 postmortems and 5 accept/reject events combined, the user-pattern pass produces an "insufficient signal" note instead of forced observations.

Output: Curator Report

After running, emit a single block:

═══ Bridge Curator — <YYYY-MM-DD> ═══

Library pass:   <N> findings → <K> proposals written
  • <severity> <topic-slug>  — <one-line>
  ...

Queue pass:    <N> findings → <K> meta-proposals written
  • <topic-slug> — <conflict-or-stale-or-supersede>
  ...

User-patterns: <N> observations appended to work/_learning/user-patterns.md
                <K> strong-pattern proposals (target.type: memory)
  • <observation excerpt>
  ...

→ Review via /bridge-learn  (current pending: <total>)

If --dry-run: same output, but report uses "would write" instead of "wrote", no files touched.

Proposal-file shape for curator-suggestions

Standard _schema.proposal.yaml with these field defaults:

source:
  type: curator-suggestion           # NEW source.type enum value
  evidence:
    - "work/_learning/audit-history/<ts>.json"     # if Phase 3 data drove it
    - "work/done/<month>/<slug>/STATUS.md#postmortem"  # if postmortem drove it
    - "skills/<name>/SKILL.md"                    # the affected file

severity: P2                         # default, P1 if recurring or strong
status: pending
scope: core | user (depends on target)

target:
  type: skill | standing_order | rule | doc | memory
  path: ...
  action: edit | delete | rename | create

proposal_type: structured | needs-triage

The source.evidence chain is always concrete — the curator must cite which files / scans led to the finding. No invented proposals.

Edge cases

Empty Bridge (new install, no postmortems, no audit-history yet) → all three passes return "insufficient signal — run more sessions then re-curate". Friendly message, no error.
Conflicting consolidation suggestions (library pass says merge A+B into C, queue pass says A is stale) → emit both as separate proposals and let /bridge-learn resolve.
Privacy mode in user-pattern pass — if bridge-config.yaml.learning.curator.user_patterns.privacy: strict, observations are written with redacted task slugs and customer names (replaced by <task> / <customer> placeholders) so the file is safe to share. Strict mode is opt-in, not default.
Pass-failure isolation — if user-pattern pass crashes (e.g. malformed log entry), library + queue still complete. Failures are reported in the curator report, not bubbled as fatal.

What this skill deliberately does NOT do

❌ Edit any Bridge file directly. All changes route via proposals.
❌ Write to MEMORY.md. User-patterns is a separate, lower-trust file.
❌ Auto-accept its own proposals. Even if a finding has 5-of-5 evidence pointers, /bridge-learn still gates the apply.
❌ Send any data off-machine. No cloud user-model service. No telemetry export.
❌ Run in a separate subprocess / agent fork without user awareness. The curator is a foreground skill invocation; the user sees the report.
❌ Promote findings to your org overlay or open-bridge automatically. Promotion is /bridge-sync territory after /bridge-learn accept flowed it through the normal commit pipeline.

rules/learning-autonomy.md — the design rule this skill embodies
skills/task-close-postmortem/ — Layer 1 proposal generator (postmortem)
skills/bridge-audit/ — Layer 1 proposal generator (recurring findings)
skills/bridge-learn/ — the review surface that closes the loop
work/_learning/README.md — aggregation layer layout
work/_learning/user-patterns.md — output target for Pass 3
bridge-config.yaml.learning.curator — config block (schedule + pass toggles)