Skill manager

skill-manager — the one skill that is aware of all the others

Individual lessons enter through the evolve procedure, one reviewed diff at a time. Somebody still has to see the whole genome: whether the pieces are at the right altitude, whether gaps and corpses are accumulating. That somebody is this skill, and the periodic pass runs with FRESH context — the writer of a skill never grades it.

Nested-skill architecture (policy, decided 2026-07-11)

• Few top-level skills, lazy references inside. A skill's body is the always-loaded front door; variants and less-common procedures live in references/ files loaded only when their trigger row matches. Do not rely on separate sibling skills auto-triggering for sub-procedures.
• Hard cap: 10 top-level skills; prefer 5-7. At the cap, adding a skill requires first consolidating two related ones (merge into core + references). Current top-level set (4): workflow, skill-manager, socials, bootstrap.
• Portability. Embed the external knowledge the genome needs (e.g. authoring standards in references/authoring.md) so any coding agent operating this repo has it — never depend on a specific tool's plugin being installed.

The structural rules (load-bearing, not style)

• Skills exist per task-shape, never per incident. A recurring bug becomes one appended procedure in an existing skill, not a new skill.
• Variants of one shape are references/ inside one skill (bootstrap + references/python.md; workflow + references/scale.md), never sibling skills.
• Altitude smells: the same diff recurs after a fix → it was patched too low; one edit forces rewriting siblings → it lives too high.
• Bodies stay under ~500 lines (alarm at 150). A bloated skill fails silently — it stops being read carefully. Push volatile detail down into references; push behavioral rules up into CLAUDE.md only when truly session-wide.
• No version numbers in skill bodies. Decision procedures survive years; pins go stale invisibly. Dated observations are allowed in references, marked with their date.
• Authoring standards (descriptions as triggers, progressive disclosure, eval method): references/authoring.md.

The lifecycle procedures (lazy parts)

Trigger	Load
A lesson lands: root cause found, default overridden, convention decided, same mistake twice, a skill proved stale	references/evolve.md
"absorb / learn from / steal from <repo>"; "spawn a new project from this one"	references/absorb.md
Writing or reviewing any skill/description/reference	references/authoring.md

The miss-log

docs/state/miss-log.md, one line per event: a task arrived that matched no skill, and the agent free-styled it. Logging the miss is how the system notices a hole in itself — an unlogged miss is the system silently deciding it is complete. Any skill (or none) being active, when you catch yourself working without a matching skill: log one line, keep working.

The periodic pass (run it fresh; output = proposed diffs, human approves)

1. Firing audit — has each skill fired in the last N sessions? Never fires: is the description too shy (fix the description) or the skill dead (archive it)?
2. Rot scan — any line encoding a version number or a stale claim? Hand those to workflow/references/rot-check.md.
3. Altitude audit — is one skill doing two stages' work (split), or two skills doing one stage's (merge)? Apply the smells above, and the cap.
4. Miss-log triage — entries that recur have earned a procedure; where does it live (existing skill vs new)? Entries that never recurred get pruned.
5. Threshold review — N sessions, line limits, staleness windows: the manager sets its own thresholds and adjusts them, through the same reviewed-diff door as everything else. Current thresholds live at the bottom of this file.

Current thresholds (self-set, reviewed like everything else)

• Firing audit window: 10 sessions.
• Body size alarm: 150 lines (hard ceiling 500).
• A raw claim older than 6 months is stale until re-verified.
• A miss-log entry that recurs twice has earned a home.
• Top-level skill cap: 10 hard, 5-7 preferred (2026-07-11).