| name | minutes-lint |
| description | Health-check your meeting knowledge for contradictions, stale commitments, and decision conflicts. Use when the user asks "any conflicts in my meetings", "check for stale action items", "lint my meetings", "consistency check", "are there contradictions", or wants to audit their decision history. |
/minutes-lint
Run a consistency check across policy-authorized normal meetings to find
decision conflicts and stale commitments. Restricted meetings are excluded from
this agent workflow by default and must never be described as absent evidence.
How to run the lint
-
Run the consistency check:
minutes consistency --stale-after-days 14
Optional filters:
--owner <name> — limit to commitments assigned to a specific person--stale-after-days <N> — change the staleness threshold (default: 7)
-
Parse the JSON output and present it as readable markdown.
Formatting the report
Decision Conflicts
For each conflict, show:
**Topic: {topic}**
- Latest: "{latest decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- Prior: "{prior decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- **Status**: These decisions may contradict each other.
Frontmatter v2: resolved supersessions. When the resolution field is
present on a conflict, the newer decision has a supersedes: entry in its
frontmatter. Treat this as informational, not a red flag. Format as:
**Topic: {topic}** ✓ Resolved
- Current: "{latest decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- Superseded: "{prior decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- **Status**: {resolution text}
If the latest decision also carries an authority field (high/medium/low),
surface it next to the title. Authority is optional — when absent, omit the tag.
Stale Commitments
For each stale item, show:
- [ ] **@{who}**: {task} (due {due_date}, {age_days} days overdue)
- Last discussed: *{meeting title}* ({date})
Clean bill of health
If no conflicts and no stale commitments, say: "No decision conflicts or stale commitments found across your meetings. Everything looks consistent."
When to suggest next steps
- If there are decision conflicts: suggest running
/minutes-debrief on the most recent conflicting meeting, or /minutes-search "{topic}" to review the full decision history
- If there are stale commitments: suggest the user update the action item status in the meeting file, or bring it up in the next meeting with that person
- Relationship-graph commitments come from
minutes commitments --json; treat a nonzero exit as unavailable, never empty
Gotchas
- The consistency check reads live Markdown — it uses stable source snapshots, not a durable graph cache. If a result looks wrong, inspect and correct the referenced meeting source; do not suggest deleting or rebuilding
graph.db (it does not exist)
- Stale != forgotten — some action items are intentionally deferred. Don't alarm the user; present the data and let them decide
- Decision conflicts are topic-based — two meetings discussing "pricing" with different conclusions will flag, even if the later decision intentionally superseded the earlier one. Context matters.
