session-workflow

Use when a body of captured journal entries from many sessions should be distilled into durable, higher-level guidance — cluster related entries, synthesize the one generalization each cluster supports, promote only the reinforced and specific ones into long-lived guidance, and reconcile supersession when newer evidence overrides older. Triggers on "consolidate my journals", "what patterns emerged across these sessions", "distill these notes into guidance", "what have we learned over time", "promote the durable insights", "synthesize my entries into wisdom", or running "/consolidate-knowledge". This is the downstream pass that journaling-sessions feeds — journaling captures raw entries one session at a time, this consolidates many of them across sessions. Not for capturing a single session (use journaling-sessions), not for a one-off summary, and distinct from consolidating your agent memory files.

Use when you want to behaviorally evaluate a Claude Code skill — measure whether it auto-activates on the prompts it should and stays quiet on near-misses (trigger recall and specificity), whether its output actually satisfies its own discipline (correct-usage), and whether it beats the no-skill baseline (with/without) — producing a scorecard with confidence intervals. Triggers on "evaluate this skill", "test my skill", "does my skill fire", "measure or benchmark skill performance", "is my description triggering", "build an eval for this skill", or running "/evaluate-skill". Claude Code only — it spawns many headless `claude -p` runs, so it is cost-gated; show the plan first. Not for a one-off manual spot-check, for judging a skill's design qualitatively (that is a fresh-eyes panel, not a behavioral eval), or for listing which skills are installed (that is toolkit-awareness).

Capture knowledge from a work or reference-reading session into structured, separable, retrieval-ready entries for a long-term memory store. Use when the user says "journal", "log this", "wrap up", "session summary", "capture what we learned", or "create registries for everything" — and equally on any request to preserve what was worked out for the future, even about one specific topic — phrasings like "record the decisions/dead ends", "note the reasoning", "don't lose this", "before I forget", "so next time we don't relitigate", "so a future session benefits". Activate proactively when a substantive session is ending after 3+ decisions, findings, or ingested reference items. Covers implementation/decision sessions and end-to-end reference ingestion. Not for quick Q&A or sessions with no novel knowledge; not for consolidating prior journals into higher-level patterns (that is a separate downstream pass).

Sign agent-assisted work with a machine-generated provenance signature: an Assisted-By git trailer naming the exact model that wrote and orchestrated the change, and an Agent-Stack trailer naming the harness and plugin versions it ran on. Use when committing or writing a PR body in a project that adopts the signature, when asked to sign a commit with the model / add model attribution or an LLM signature, when asked which model or tool stack produced a change, or when replacing Co-Authored-By AI boilerplate with provenance trailers. The signature is rendered by a script from live sources, never typed from memory, and the model is listed only in Assisted-By — never as a commit co-author. Not for human authorship credit (real co-authors keep their Co-Authored-By lines).

Use when the user has iterated on a design, plan, spec, architecture, code, or prose over several rounds and can no longer judge it cleanly, before a high-stakes or hard-to-reverse decision, or when they ask for "fresh eyes", "a second opinion", "red team this", "poke holes in this", "sanity-check this independently", "am I anchored" / "too close to this", "critique this from different angles", or run "/review-panel". Prefer this over reviewing the artifact yourself — its value is convening fresh reviewer subagents that are blind to this conversation and to each other, which a review you run while anchored on the same context cannot replicate. Requires spawning fresh-context reviewers (subagents where the harness has them; sequential clean contexts otherwise); always show the plan and rough cost and ask before firing. Not for a quick factual check, a single obvious answer, or a first-pass review of something just created.

Know what skills, agents, commands, and hooks are installed in the current Claude Code environment, and reference them well in prompts and specs. Use when answering "what tools/agents/commands/hooks do I have" (including narrower inventory questions like which hooks are configured), determining which installed skill owns or is responsible for a given concern — a scoring rubric, a schema, project conventions — so you point at the owner instead of duplicating it, planning work that will run in Claude Code, or writing a task spec or definition-of-done that should reference slash commands or quality gates. Produces a live inventory via a scan script rather than relying on a hand-maintained list.