بنقرة واحدة
reflect
Cycle review, Learnings with prevention rules, Next-cycle seeds
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Cycle review, Learnings with prevention rules, Next-cycle seeds
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
When --quality-locked is active, loop review/revise at each Quality Gate until findings reach a clean bar (no Critical, no Major, only cosmetic Minor) or the iteration cap (10) is reached. Uses a deterministic Python checker for classification and decision logic; agent runs the actual review and revision steps.
Use after implementation passes the quality gates, when a change needs an independent pass over the code before it ships, or when the user asks to "QA this", "check the implementation", or "verify it matches the spec". Applies to Standard and Comprehensive scopes with the Task tool available; Lightweight tasks skip.
Use when the user picks [A] Review at a spec/plan/ADR/root-cause/fix-plan checkpoint, or asks for an independent review before implementation begins. Applies to Standard and Comprehensive scopes with the Task tool available; Lightweight tasks skip.
Use as the code-quality gate after spec-compliance and constitution checks pass, or when the user says "review my code", "quality check", "security review", or "is this code good". Runs as an independent sub-agent when the Task tool is available.
Adversarial review verifying implementation matches its specification — checks completeness (nothing missing) and precision (nothing extra). Distrusts the implementer's self-report. Use after implementation, or when the user says "check against spec", "does this match requirements", or "verify the implementation".
Configure Sage preset and project settings. Switch between base, startup, enterprise, or opensource constitution presets. Use when the user says "configure sage", "change preset", or "sage settings".
| name | reflect |
| description | Cycle review, Learnings with prevention rules, Next-cycle seeds |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Look back. Extract learnings. Seed the next cycle.
Scan .sage/work/ for recently completed initiatives
(status: completed in frontmatter). Scan .sage/docs/ for
research and analysis artifacts. Read .sage/decisions.md
for the full decision trail.
If no completed work exists: "Sage: No completed initiatives found. /reflect works best after a deliver cycle. Describe what you want to reflect on, or type / for other commands."
Sage → reflect workflow. Looking back at what was done.
[1] Full initiative — review the entire cycle for [initiative name] [2] Recent work — reflect on the last few decisions [3] Specific topic — describe what you want to reflect on
Pick 1-3, type / for commands, or describe what you need.
For full initiative review, gather and present:
Sage: Cycle review for [initiative name].
Timeline: [Date] — Brief approved: [summary] [Date] — Spec approved: [key decisions] [Date] — Plan: [N] tasks planned [Date] — Build complete: [what was shipped]
Decisions made: [count from decisions.md] Approaches tried: [count from scratch.md if exists] Learnings stored: [count from self-learning entries]
Key artifacts: .sage/work/[initiative]/brief.md .sage/work/[initiative]/spec.md .sage/docs/[related research/analysis]
Ask the user for real-world feedback. This is the human input Sage cannot generate — the signal from reality.
Sage: Now I need your perspective on how this went.
[1] What worked well? (What should we do again?) [2] What didn't work? (What caused friction or rework?) [3] What surprised you? (What was unexpected?) [4] What feedback have you received? (From users, team, stakeholders)
Share any or all — or describe your overall assessment.
Pick 1-4, type / for commands, or describe what you need.
Listen to the user's responses. Ask follow-up questions if the feedback is vague — specifics make better prevention rules.
Based on the cycle review + user feedback, identify learnings in three categories:
Reinforce — what went well and should become standard practice. Prevent — what went wrong and should be avoided next time. Improve — what could be better with a specific change.
For each learning, write a WHEN/CHECK/BECAUSE prevention rule:
WHEN: [situation that triggers this learning]
CHECK: [observable condition to verify]
BECAUSE: [what happens if you don't — the consequence]
Learnings quality check (before presenting):
🔒 LEARNINGS CHECKPOINT (Zone 2):
Sage: Learnings extracted from [initiative/topic].
Reinforce:
Prevent:
Improve:
[A] Approve — store learnings [R] Revise [N] New session
Pick A/R/N, or tell me what to change.
On approval:
Store each learning via sage_memory_store with tags:
self-learning, reflect, [initiative-slug], and
category tag (reinforce, prevent, or improve).
Update conventions.md if any learning revealed a project pattern that should become a convention. Announce what was added.
Save reflection report to .sage/docs/reflect-[slug].md
with the full cycle review, user feedback, and learnings.
Append to decisions.md:
### YYYY-MM-DD — Reflection: [initiative/topic]
[Summary of key learnings and what changes going forward.]
The most powerful step — connect learnings to future work.
Sage: Reflection complete. [N] learnings stored.
Seeds for next cycle: [Specific recommendation based on learnings, e.g., "Start with payment edge case research next time — this area took 3x longer than expected."]
Report: .sage/docs/reflect-[slug].md
Next steps: /research — start the next initiative (learnings loaded via Rule 0) /build — spec → plan → implement → verify /design — brief → spec → copy
Type a command, or describe what you want to do next.
Good reflection output:
self-learning + reflect tags so Rule 0
memory search finds them in future cycles.