Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
npx skills add https://github.com/agenticnotetaking/arscontexta --skill health
Der Befehl bleibt in einer Zeile. Scrollen Sie horizontal, um ihn vor dem Kopieren vollständig zu prüfen.
Sie bevorzugen eine lokale Kopie? Laden Sie die Dateien herunter, die SkillsMP derzeit vorliegen.
What it checks: Every {vocabulary.note} has at least one incoming wiki link from another file.
How to check:
# For each note file, check if ANY other file links to itfor f in {vocabulary.notes}/*.md; do
[[ -f "$f" ]] || continuebasename=$(basename"$f" .md)
# Search for [[basename]] in all other files
count=$(rg -l "\[\[$basename\]\]" --glob '*.md' | grep -v "$f" | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
if [[ "$count" -eq 0 ]]; thenecho"WARN: $f — no incoming links (orphan)"fidone
Nuance: Orphans are not automatically failures. A note created today that hasn't been through /{vocabulary.cmd_reflect} yet is expected to be orphaned temporarily. Check file age:
Condition
Level
Orphan note created < 24 hours ago
INFO (expected — awaiting reflect phase)
Orphan note created 1-7 days ago
WARN
Orphan note older than 7 days
FAIL (persistent orphan needs attention)
No orphans detected
PASS
Output format:
[2] Orphan Detection ............. WARN
3 orphan notes detected:
- notes/new-claim.md (created 2h ago — awaiting reflect) [INFO]
- notes/old-observation.md (created 5d ago) [WARN]
- notes/forgotten-insight.md (created 14d ago) [FAIL]
Recommendation: run /reflect on forgotten-insight.md and old-observation.md
Category 3: Link Health (quick, full)
What it checks: Every wiki link [[target]] in every file resolves to an existing file.
How to check:
# Extract all wiki links from all markdown files# For each unique link target, verify a file with that name exists
rg -oN '\[\[([^\]]+)\]\]' --glob '*.md' -r '$1' | sort -u | whileread target; do# Search for file matching this name
found=$(find . -name "$target.md" -not -path "./.git/*" 2>/dev/null | head -1)
if [[ -z "$found" ]]; thenecho"FAIL: dangling link [[${target}]] — no file found"# Show which files contain this dangling link
rg -l "\[\[$target\]\]" --glob '*.md'fidone
Thresholds:
Condition
Level
Any dangling link (target does not exist)
FAIL
All links resolve
PASS
Why FAIL not WARN: Dangling links are broken promises. Every [[link]] a reader follows that leads nowhere erodes trust in the graph. Fix these immediately.
What it checks: Every {vocabulary.note}'s description adds genuine information beyond the title — not just a restatement.
How to check:
For each {vocabulary.note}:
Read the title (filename without extension)
Read the description field from YAML frontmatter
Evaluate: does the description add scope, mechanism, or implication that the title does not cover?
Quality heuristics:
Check
Threshold
Description length
50-200 chars ideal. < 30 chars = too terse. > 250 chars = too verbose
Restatement detection
If description uses >70% of the same words as the title = restatement
Information added
Description should mention mechanism, scope, or implication not in title
Thresholds:
Condition
Level
Description is a clear restatement of the title
WARN
Description is < 30 characters
WARN
Description is missing entirely
WARN (also caught by Category 1)
Description adds genuine new information
PASS
This check requires judgment. Use semantic understanding, not just string matching. A description that uses different words but says the same thing as the title is still a restatement.
Output format:
[4] Description Quality .......... WARN
2 descriptions are restatements:
- notes/quality-matters.md
Title: "quality matters more than quantity"
Description: "quality is more important than quantity in knowledge work"
Issue: restates title without adding mechanism or implication
- notes/structure-helps.md
Title: "structure without processing provides no value"
Description: "having structure without processing it is not valuable"
Issue: exact restatement
Recommendation: rewrite descriptions to add scope, mechanism, or implication
What it checks: Content respects the boundaries between self/, {vocabulary.notes}/, and ops/. Each space has a purpose — conflating them degrades search quality, navigation, and trust.
Before running this check: Read ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/three-spaces.md for the full boundary specification.
Six conflation patterns to detect:
5a. Ops into Notes (Infrastructure Creep)
Queue state, health metrics, task files, or processing artifacts appearing in {vocabulary.notes}/ directory.
Detection:
# Check for ops-pattern YAML fields in notes
rg '^(current_phase|completed_phases|batch|source_task|queue_id):' {vocabulary.notes}/ --glob '*.md'# Check for task file patterns in notes
rg '## (Create|Reflect|Reweave|Verify|Enrich)$' {vocabulary.notes}/ --glob '*.md'
Found
Level
Any ops-pattern content in {vocabulary.notes}/
WARN
5b. Self into Notes (Identity Pollution)
Agent identity or methodology content mixed into user's knowledge graph. Agent's operational observations appearing in user's {vocabulary.notes}/ space.
Any agent-reflection content in {vocabulary.notes}/
WARN
5c. Notes into Ops (Trapped Knowledge)
Genuine insights trapped in session logs, observations, or ops files that should be promoted to {vocabulary.notes}/.
Detection:
# Check for claim-like content in ops that could be notes# Look for files with description fields in ops/observations/ or ops/methodology/
rg '^description:' ops/observations/*.md ops/methodology/*.md 2>/dev/null
Found
Level
Content in ops/ with note-like schema (description + topics)
INFO (may be intentional, flag for review)
5d. Self into Ops / Ops into Self
Temporal state stored in self/ (should be in ops/), or identity content stored in ops/ (should be in self/).
Detection:
# Check for temporal/queue content in self/
rg '^(current_phase|status|queue):' self/ --glob '*.md' 2>/dev/null
# Check for identity content in ops/
rg -i '(my identity|I am|who I am|my personality)' ops/ --glob '*.md' 2>/dev/null
5e. Notes into Self
Domain knowledge stored in self/ instead of {vocabulary.notes}/.
Detection:
# Check self/memory/ for notes that have topics linking to notes-space topic maps
rg '^topics:.*\[\[' self/memory/*.md 2>/dev/null | grep -v 'identity\|methodology\|goals\|relationships'
5f. Self Space Absence Effects (when self/ is disabled)
When self/ is disabled, verify ops/ absorbs self-space content correctly. Check that goals and handoffs are in ops/, not floating in {vocabulary.notes}/.
Detection:
# If self/ doesn't exist, check that goals/handoffs are in ops/if [[ ! -d "self/" ]]; then# Check for goals or handoff content in notes/
rg -i '(my goals|current goals|handoff|session handoff)' {vocabulary.notes}/ --glob '*.md'fi
Thresholds:
Condition
Level
Any boundary violation (5a, 5b, 5d, 5e)
WARN
Trapped knowledge in ops (5c)
INFO
Self-absence effects (5f)
WARN
All boundaries intact
PASS
Output format:
[5] Three-Space Boundaries ....... WARN
1 boundary violation detected:
Ops into Notes (infrastructure creep):
- notes/task-tracking.md contains queue state fields (current_phase, batch)
- Should be in ops/queue/ not notes/
1 potential trapped knowledge:
- ops/observations/interesting-pattern.md has note-like schema
Consider promoting to notes/ via /reduce or direct creation
Recommendation: move task-tracking.md to ops/queue/
Category 6: Processing Throughput (full only)
What it checks: The inbox-to-knowledge ratio. High ratios indicate collector's fallacy — capturing more than processing.
[6] Processing Throughput ........ WARN
inbox: 12 | notes: 8 | in-progress: 3 | ratio: 60%
Inbox items outnumber processed notes — collector's fallacy risk
Recommendation: run /reduce on oldest inbox items or /pipeline for end-to-end processing
Category 7: Stale Note Detection (full only)
What it checks: Notes not modified recently AND with low link density. Staleness is condition-based (low link density + no activity since N new notes were added), not purely calendar-based.
How to check:
For each {vocabulary.note}:
Check last modified date (stat or git log)
Count incoming links (same as orphan detection, but counting instead of boolean)
Flag notes with: modified > 30 days ago AND < 2 incoming links
for f in {vocabulary.notes}/*.md; do
[[ -f "$f" ]] || continuebasename=$(basename"$f" .md)
# Last modified (days ago)
mod_days=$(( ($(date +%s) - $(stat -f %m "$f" 2>/dev/null || stat -c %Y "$f" 2>/dev/null)) / 86400 ))
# Incoming link count
incoming=$(rg -l "\[\[$basename\]\]" --glob '*.md' | grep -v "$f" | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
if [[ $mod_days -gt 30 ]] && [[ $incoming -lt 2 ]]; thenecho"STALE: $f — $mod_days days old, $incoming incoming links"fidone
Thresholds:
Condition
Level
Any note > 30 days old with < 2 incoming links
WARN
Any note > 90 days old with 0 incoming links
FAIL
All notes either recent or well-connected
PASS
Prioritization: Sort stale notes by:
Age (oldest first)
Link density (least connected first)
Topic relevance (notes in active topic areas are higher priority)
Output format:
[7] Stale Notes .................. WARN
4 stale notes detected (>30d old, <2 incoming links):
- notes/old-observation.md (92d, 0 links) [FAIL — consider archiving or reweaving]
- notes/early-claim.md (45d, 1 link) [WARN]
- notes/setupial-thought.md (38d, 1 link) [WARN]
- notes/first-draft.md (31d, 0 links) [WARN]
Recommendation: run /reweave on these notes to find connections, or archive if no longer relevant
What it checks: Each {vocabulary.topic_map} has a healthy number of linked notes, and notes in the same topic area are actually linked.
How to check:
For each {vocabulary.topic_map} file:
Count notes that link TO this {vocabulary.topic_map} (notes with this in their topics footer/field)
Check if there are notes in the same topic area NOT linked to the {vocabulary.topic_map} (coverage gaps)
Verify context phrases exist on Core Ideas links (not bare links)
# For each topic mapfor moc in {vocabulary.notes}/*.md; do
[[ -f "$moc" ]] || continue# Check if this is a topic map (has type: moc in frontmatter)
rg -q '^type: moc'"$moc" || continue
moc_name=$(basename"$moc" .md)
# Count notes linking to this topic map
note_count=$(rg -l "\[\[$moc_name\]\]" {vocabulary.notes}/ --glob '*.md' | grep -v "$moc" | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
echo"$moc_name: $note_count notes"done
Thresholds:
Condition
Level
{vocabulary.topic_map} with < 5 notes
WARN (underdeveloped — consider merging into parent)
{vocabulary.topic_map} with > 50 notes
WARN (oversized — consider splitting into sub-{vocabulary.topic_maps})
{vocabulary.topic_map} with > 40 notes
INFO (approaching threshold)
Notes exist in topic area but not linked to {vocabulary.topic_map}
WARN (coverage gap)
All {vocabulary.topic_maps} in 5-50 range with good coverage
PASS
Context phrase check:
# Check for bare links in topic map Core Ideas (links without context phrases)for moc in {vocabulary.notes}/*.md; do
rg -q '^type: moc'"$moc" || continue# Look for "- [[note]]" without " — " context
rg '^\s*- \[\['"$moc" | grep -v ' — ' | grep -v '^\s*- \[\[.*\]\].*—'done
Bare links without context phrases are address book entries, not navigation. Every link in a {vocabulary.topic_map} should explain WHY to follow it.
Output format:
[8] MOC Coherence ................ WARN
3 topic maps checked:
- knowledge-work: 28 notes [PASS]
- graph-structure: 52 notes [WARN — oversized, consider splitting]
3 bare links without context phrases
- agent-cognition: 3 notes [WARN — underdeveloped, consider merging]
Recommendation: split graph-structure into sub-topic-maps; add context phrases to bare links
Condition-Based Maintenance Signals
After running all applicable diagnostic categories, check these condition-based triggers. These are NOT the 8 categories above — they are cross-cutting signals that suggest specific skill invocations.
Condition
Threshold
Recommendation
Pending observations
>= 10 files in ops/observations/
Consider running /rethink
Open tensions
>= 5 files in ops/tensions/
Consider running /rethink
Inbox items
>= 3 items
Consider /reduce or /pipeline
Unprocessed sessions
>= 5 files in ops/sessions/
Consider /remember --mine-sessions
Orphan notes
Any persistent (> 7d)
Run /reflect on orphaned notes
Dangling links
Any
Fix broken references immediately
Stale notes
Low links + old
Consider /reweave
{vocabulary.topic_map} oversized
> 40 notes
Consider splitting
Queue stalled
Tasks pending > 2 sessions without progress
Surface as blocked
Trigger coverage gap
Known maintenance condition has no configured trigger
The meta-trigger: Include a "trigger coverage" check. Compare known maintenance conditions against what is actually being checked. If a maintenance condition has no corresponding check or trigger configured, that gap itself is a finding. This prevents the failure mode where maintenance debt accumulates undetected.
Output Format
The complete health report follows this structure. Every report, regardless of mode, uses this format.
=== HEALTH REPORT ===
Mode: [quick | full | three-space]
Date: YYYY-MM-DD
Notes scanned: N | Topic maps: N | Inbox items: N
Summary: N FAIL, N WARN, N PASS
FAIL:
- [Category N]: [brief description of failure]
[specific files and details]
WARN:
- [Category N]: [brief description of warning]
[specific files and details]
PASS:
- [Category N]: [confirmation]
---
[1] Schema Compliance ............ PASS | WARN | FAIL
[details — specific files, specific issues]
[2] Orphan Detection ............. PASS | WARN | FAIL
[details — specific files, age, link count]
[3] Link Health .................. PASS | WARN | FAIL
[details — specific dangling links, where referenced]
[4] Description Quality .......... PASS | WARN | FAIL (full mode only)
[details — specific files, title vs description comparison]
[5] Three-Space Boundaries ....... PASS | WARN | FAIL (full/three-space mode)
[details — specific boundary violations by type]
[6] Processing Throughput ........ PASS | WARN | FAIL (full mode only)
inbox: N | notes: N | in-progress: N | ratio: N%
[7] Stale Notes .................. PASS | WARN | FAIL (full mode only)
[N notes older than 30d with <2 incoming links, sorted by priority]
[8] MOC Coherence ................ PASS | WARN | FAIL (full mode only)
[details — note count per topic map, coverage gaps, bare links]
---
Maintenance Signals:
[condition-based triggers from table above, if any thresholds met]
- observations: N pending (threshold: 10) [TRIGGERED | OK]
- tensions: N pending (threshold: 5) [TRIGGERED | OK]
- inbox: N items (threshold: 3) [TRIGGERED | OK]
- sessions: N unprocessed (threshold: 5) [TRIGGERED | OK]
---
Recommended Actions (top 3, ranked by impact):
1. [Most impactful action — specific command + specific file]
2. [Second priority — specific command + specific file]
3. [Third priority — specific command + specific file]
=== END REPORT ===
Report Storage
Write every health report to ops/health/YYYY-MM-DD-report.md. If multiple reports are run on the same day, append a counter: YYYY-MM-DD-report-2.md.
This creates a health history that /architect can reference when proposing evolution. Trends across reports reveal systemic patterns that individual reports miss.
Quality Standards
Be Specific
Every finding MUST name the specific file(s) involved.
Bad: "some notes lack descriptions"
Good: "notes/example-note.md and notes/another-note.md are missing the description field"
Bad: "there are dangling links"
Good: "[[nonexistent-claim]] is referenced in notes/old-note.md (line 14) and notes/related.md (line 22) but no file with that name exists"
Prioritize by Impact
Not all issues are equal. The recommended actions section ranks by impact:
Impact Tier
Examples
Why
Highest
Dangling links, persistent orphans
Broken promises in the graph — readers hit dead ends
High
Schema violations, boundary violations
Structural integrity — compounds into larger problems
Medium
Description quality, stale notes
Retrieval quality — degraded but not broken
Low
{vocabulary.topic_map} size warnings, throughput ratio
Maintenance debt — matters at scale
Don't Overwhelm
Focus on the top 5-10 issues in the recommended actions
Group related issues (3 notes missing descriptions = 1 finding, not 3)
For large vaults, cap per-category detail at 10 specific files, then summarize: "...and 15 more"
WARN is for everything else that is suboptimal but not broken.
Mode-Specific Behavior
Quick Mode (default)
Runs categories 1-3 only: Schema, Orphans, Links.
Use when:
Session start health check
Quick pulse on vault integrity
After a batch of note creation
Runtime: Should complete in < 30 seconds for vaults up to 200 notes.
Full Mode
Runs all 8 categories plus maintenance signals.
Use when:
Periodic comprehensive health review
After significant vault changes (large batch processing, restructuring)
When something "feels wrong" about the vault
Before a /architect or /reseed session
Runtime: May take 1-3 minutes for larger vaults due to description quality analysis and {vocabulary.topic_map} coherence checks.
Three-Space Mode
Runs category 5 only: boundary violation checks.
Use when:
After /reseed to verify boundaries are intact
When search results seem contaminated (ops content in knowledge queries)
When self/ is being enabled or disabled
Debugging "why does my search return weird results?"
Runtime: Should complete in < 30 seconds.
Edge Cases
Empty Vault
A vault with 0 notes is not unhealthy — it is new. Report:
Notes scanned: 0 | Topic maps: 0 | Inbox items: N
All categories PASS (no notes to check)
Maintenance Signal: inbox has N items — consider /reduce to start building knowledge
Self Space Disabled
When self/ does not exist:
Skip self-space boundary checks (5b, 5d, 5e inbound)
But DO check that ops/ correctly absorbs self-space content (5f)
Note in the report: "self/ is disabled — boundary checks adapted accordingly"
No Semantic Search
When qmd/MCP tools are unavailable:
Skip any checks that depend on semantic search
Note in the report: "Semantic search unavailable — some checks skipped"
All file-based checks (schema, orphans, links, boundaries) still run
Large Vaults (500+ notes)
Cap per-category file listings at 10, then summarize
Consider running checks in batches if performance degrades
Focus recommended actions on highest-impact items
Integration with Other Skills
Health report findings feed into other skills:
Finding
Feeds Into
How
Orphan notes
/reflect
Run reflect to find connections for orphaned notes
Stale notes
/reweave
Run reweave to update old notes with new connections
Description quality issues
/verify or manual rewrite
Fix descriptions to improve retrieval
Schema violations
/validate
Run validation to fix specific schema issues
Boundary violations
Manual restructuring
Move files to correct space
Processing throughput
/reduce or /pipeline
Process inbox items to improve ratio
{vocabulary.topic_map} oversized
Manual split or /architect
Split oversized {vocabulary.topic_maps} into sub-{vocabulary.topic_maps}
Accumulated observations
/rethink
Review and triage observations
Accumulated tensions
/rethink
Resolve or dissolve tensions
The health-to-action loop:
/health (diagnose) -> specific findings -> specific skill invocation -> /health (verify fix)
Health is diagnostic only — it measures state without prescribing changes. /architect reads health reports and proposes changes with research backing. The separation matters: health tells you WHAT is wrong, architect tells you WHY and HOW to fix it.
