minutes-lint

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.
triggers	["any conflicts in my meetings","check for stale action items","lint my meetings","consistency check","are there contradictions"]
user_invocable	true
metadata	{"display_name":"Minutes Lint","short_description":"Health-check your meeting knowledge for contradictions, stale commitments, and decision conflicts.","default_prompt":"Use Minutes Lint for this task.","site_category":"Knowledge","site_example":"/minutes-lint","site_best_for":"Audit meeting memory for contradictions, stale commitments, and decision conflicts."}
assets	{"scripts":[],"templates":[],"references":[]}
output	{"claude":{"path":".claude/plugins/minutes/skills/minutes-lint/SKILL.md"},"codex":{"path":".agents/skills/minutes/minutes-lint/SKILL.md"}}
tests	{"golden":true,"lint_commands":true}

/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

1. 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)

2. 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- Superseded: "{prior decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})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