knowledge-graph-builder

name	knowledge-graph-builder
description	Use when building knowledge graphs by extracting source-grounded entities, relationships, properties, evidence, schema, and graph-ready data from code, documents, notes, tickets, or mixed corpora.
scenarios	["문서랑 코드에서 지식그래프 만들어줘","이 자료를 엔티티/관계 중심으로 구조화해줘","knowledge graph schema랑 triples 뽑아줘","Build a graph-ready entity and relationship model from these docs"]
compatibility	{"optional":["think-tool"],"remote_mcp_note":"think-tool이 있으면 엔티티 경계, 관계 타입, 온톨로지 후보를 더 일관되게 검토하는 데 활용할 수 있습니다."}

Knowledge Graph Builder

Build a source-grounded knowledge graph from documents, code, notes, tickets, chat logs, or other mixed material.

For long-lived or cross-domain graphs, use knowledge:ontology-builder first or create a small ontology section before extraction. The ontology should define allowed node classes, relationship semantics, properties, constraints, and controlled vocabularies.

Use a knowledge graph when relationships matter as first-class data: Service DEPENDS_ON Database, Decision SUPERSEDES Decision, Person OWNS System, API RETURNS Entity, or Term ALIAS_OF Term.

Quick Intake

Before extracting graph records, ask a lightweight "what is this?" intake when the graph purpose is unclear:

• What domain or system does this material describe?
• What relationship questions should the graph answer? impact, ownership, lineage, dependency, compliance, taxonomy?
• Is this exploratory, or should it become a long-lived graph with ontology constraints?

If the user answers roughly, proceed with a small provisional schema and mark uncertain classes or edges in extraction-report.md. Use knowledge:ontology-builder first only when class/relation semantics will materially affect correctness.

Process

1. Define graph purpose and competency paths. Identify the expected questions the graph should answer: impact analysis, onboarding, comparison, compliance traceability, research synthesis, product taxonomy, code architecture, or support knowledge. Reuse _knowledge/questions.jsonl when present; mark relationship-heavy questions with graph_check: true and their required graph node IDs.
2. Inventory source material. Read representative sources before designing the schema. Capture source paths, URLs, document titles, dates, and other provenance needed to verify extracted facts.
3. Draft or reuse the ontology/schema. Define node labels/classes, relationship types, key properties, uniqueness rules, evidence fields, and constraints. Keep the schema small enough to use; add labels only when they change query behavior or governance.
4. Extract candidates. Pull entities, aliases, attributes, relationships, temporal qualifiers, and source evidence. Prefer explicit statements over inference. Mark inferred edges with confidence and inference_reason. Shared anchors and co-occurrence may nominate a relation for inspection but never establish an edge by themselves.
5. Normalize names. Canonicalize duplicates, aliases, acronyms, file paths, product names, people, teams, services, database objects, and domain terms. Preserve source wording as aliases when useful.
6. Validate relationships. Check direction, cardinality, relation semantics, and evidence. Avoid vague edges such as RELATED_TO unless the user explicitly wants a loose exploration graph. Do not flag every A→B edge without B→A: validate a materialized inverse only when the ontology declares the relation symmetric or defines an inverse that must be stored.
7. Emit graph-ready artifacts. Produce a schema plus machine-usable data such as CSV, JSONL, Cypher, RDF/Turtle, or Markdown tables, depending on the user's storage target.
8. Check graph quality and question reachability. Look for orphan nodes, duplicate canonical entities, unsupported claims, ambiguous edge types, overbroad labels, missing provenance, and extraction drift across sources. For every graph_check question, verify that all required answer nodes are reachable within a declared hop bound through specific, directional, evidence-backed edges. Record the result in _graph/question-reachability.jsonl; unreachable questions are graph defects, not optional observations.

Schema Shape

Start with this minimal structure and adapt it to the corpus:

nodes:
  EntityLabel:
    unique_key: canonical_name
    properties:
      - canonical_name
      - aliases
      - description
      - source_refs
relationships:
  RELATIONSHIP_TYPE:
    from: SourceLabel
    to: TargetLabel
    properties:
      - evidence
      - confidence
      - source_refs
      - valid_from
      - valid_to

Good relationship names are specific and directional:

Weak	Better
RELATED_TO	DEPENDS_ON, IMPLEMENTS, MENTIONS, OWNS, SUPERSEDES
USES for everything	CALLS, QUERIES, IMPORTS, CONFIGURES, AUTHENTICATES_WITH
HAS	HAS_FIELD, HAS_POLICY, HAS_DECISION, HAS_STATUS

Output Options

Choose the smallest useful output unless the user requested a specific graph database.

Artifact	Purpose
schema.md	Human-readable labels, relationships, properties, and modeling decisions
nodes.csv / edges.csv	Portable graph import format
nodes.jsonl / edges.jsonl	Richer nested properties and evidence fields
question-reachability.jsonl	Per-competency-question answer nodes, bounded typed paths, evidence, and pass/fail reachability
graph.cypher	Neo4j-ready constraints and merge statements
graph.ttl	RDF/Turtle output for semantic-web tooling
extraction-report.md	Coverage, assumptions, conflicts, and open questions

For exploratory work, Markdown tables are acceptable. For implementation work, prefer CSV/JSONL plus a concise schema.

Evidence Rules

• Every non-obvious node or edge should include at least one source_ref.
• Preserve exact repository paths, document names, URLs, or ticket IDs in source references.
• Use short evidence snippets only when they clarify why an edge exists; do not copy large source passages.
• Separate direct evidence from inference. Inferred edges require confidence and inference_reason.
• When sources disagree, keep both claims with provenance instead of silently choosing one.
• Include temporal fields when facts can change, such as ownership, status, dependencies, prices, policy, or team structure.
• Do not use a shared god-class file, mapper, controller, or other high-degree anchor as sufficient relation evidence. Cite the source region that establishes the relationship itself.
• Relation edges used for competency reachability require stable edge IDs, specific relationship types, and source references. An evidence excerpt may explain an edge but does not replace provenance.

Question Reachability

Follow the graph record in knowledge-base-builder's answerability contract. A path passes only when its edge IDs resolve, its length is within max_hops, every edge is typed and grounded, and the result includes every required_graph_node_id. Generic hubs, co-occurrence, and RELATED_TO shortcuts do not count.

Reachability tests graph structure, not claim truth. The corresponding _knowledge/question-results.jsonl record must still establish answer coverage from cited content.

Quality Bar

• The graph can answer the motivating questions without returning mostly generic RELATED_TO edges.
• Node labels are stable domain concepts, not one-off document section names.
• Relationship direction is consistent and queryable.
• Symmetric and inverse behavior follows ontology declarations; directional relations are not duplicated merely to make the graph look balanced.
• Canonical entities preserve useful aliases and source terminology.
• Unsupported claims are removed or marked as inference.
• Every declared graph competency question has a passing, bounded, typed, evidence-backed record in _graph/question-reachability.jsonl.
• The output can be imported, queried, or manually reviewed without re-reading the entire source corpus.

Related Skills

• knowledge:knowledge-base-builder - use when the output should be an Obsidian-style linked Markdown vault.
• knowledge:ontology-builder - use when class hierarchy, relationship semantics, constraints, or controlled vocabularies need to be designed before graph extraction.
• knowledge:rag-corpus-builder - use when the goal is retrieval-ready chunks, metadata, citations, and evaluation queries.
• knowledge:knowledge-query - use when querying an existing graph, vault, RAG corpus, or mixed knowledge asset.
• develop:documentation-strategy - use when the main task is planning a documentation system rather than extracting graph data.
• develop:architecture-designer - use when the task is designing system architecture, not modeling extracted knowledge.