| name | quarter |
| description | Generates a strategic quarterly review in the quarterly note: 3-month velocity trend, planned vs actual (from previous quarterly/monthly intent), theme drift across months, source-to-note synthesis ratio, project outcomes (completed/frozen/started), and one strategic question. Creates the quarterly note if it doesn't exist. INVOKE when the user wants a quarterly review or quarter summary. Triggers: 'quarterly review', 'quarter summary', 'итоги квартала', 'квартальный обзор', 'обзор квартала', 'что за квартал'. |
Quarterly Review
Generates a strategic quarterly review without asking questions. Aggregates 3 months of vault data and writes a [!quarterly-review]- block into the quarterly note, then appends a minimal space for the user's own reflections.
Language Detection
Before generating any content, detect the user's writing language. Read the 5 most recent daily notes (periodic/daily/YYYY-MM-DD.md). In non-frontmatter, non-wikilink, non-tag text, count Cyrillic vs Latin characters. If Cyrillic > 30% → write the entire review in Russian. Otherwise → English.
Apply to ALL section headers, metric labels, table column names, inference lines (→), and participation prompts. Callout types and wikilinks remain unchanged regardless of detected language.
Quarterly Note Format
Path: periodic/quarterly/YYYY-QN.md
Compute quarter months and parent year (cross-platform, using obsidian eval):
obsidian eval code="const d=new Date();const q=Math.ceil((d.getMonth()+1)/3);const m1=(q-1)*3+1;const months=[0,1,2].map(i=>d.getFullYear()+'-'+String(m1+i).padStart(2,'0'));d.getFullYear()+'-Q'+q+' '+months.join(' ')"
Frontmatter (exact from template):
---
tags:
- periodic/quarter
up:
- "[[periodic/yearly/YYYY|YYYY]]"
created: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm:ssZ
updated: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm:ssZ
reviewed: false
cssclasses:
- hide-backlinks
---
> [!success]- 🔻 history 🔻
> `$=await dv.view("templates/views/periodic", {type: "month"})`
If the quarterly note exists — find [!quarterly-review]- and replace it. Otherwise create with template, then append the review block after [!success]-.
Execution Flow
User: "quarterly review" / "итоги квартала" / "квартальный обзор"
|
1. Compute current quarter (YYYY-QN) and its 3 months (MM1, MM2, MM3)
|
2. Find or create periodic/quarterly/YYYY-QN.md
|
3. Detect language from last 5 daily notes
|
4. Gather IN PARALLEL:
a. Velocity — count notes/tasks/sources per month, all 3 months
b. Planned vs actual — read user-written sections from monthly notes + previous quarterly
c. Theme drift — wikilink frequency per month, compare Month1 vs Month3
d. Synthesis ratio — total sources processed vs notes created in quarter
e. Project outcomes — completed/frozen/started projects this quarter
|
5. For each section: collect data → derive one "→" inference from the specific pattern
|
6. Write [!quarterly-review]- callout into quarterly note
|
7. Append user participation section below the callout (outside it)
|
8. Minimal chat confirmation
Velocity Trend
Compute the same three metrics as monthly-review, but independently for each of the 3 months. Show as a trend, not just totals.
Per-month computation (repeat for MM1, MM2, MM3)
Notes created:
obsidian search query="[created: YYYY-MM]" path=base/notes total
obsidian search query="[created: YYYY-MM]" path=base/additions total
Tasks closed:
obsidian search query="✅ YYYY-MM" total
Sources processed:
obsidian search query="[status: 🟩] [end: YYYY-MM]" path=sources total
Format as a trend table. Use ↑ / ↓ / → arrows to indicate direction Month1→Month3 (↑ = grew >20%, ↓ = dropped >20%, → = stable within 20%):
> **Velocity trend:**
>
> | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Trend |
> |---|---|---|---|---|
> | Notes created | 8 | 14 | 19 | ↑ |
> | Tasks closed | 31 | 22 | 18 | ↓ |
> | Sources | 3 | 6 | 2 | → |
> | **Total** | 42 | 42 | 39 | |
→ Inference: After the table, derive one data-specific observation. Look for:
- Notes ↑ and tasks ↓ → shifting from execution to thinking — intentional focus change or execution fatigue?
- All metrics ↓ → burnout signal, seasonal slowdown, or deliberate deceleration?
- Sources ↑ but notes → → reading more without producing more — synthesis is lagging
- Strong Month1, weak Month3 → lost momentum through the quarter; what happened?
- Consistent across all 3 months → stable productive rhythm — unusual and worth noting
Write the inference in detected language. Skip if no clear pattern.
Planned vs Actual
Look for stated intentions to compare against what actually happened.
Where to look (in priority order)
-
User-written sections from monthly notes — read text BELOW the [!monthly-review]- callout in each of the 3 monthly notes (periodic/monthly/YYYY-MM1.md, YYYY-MM2.md, YYYY-MM3.md). These are the "Focus for next month" entries the user wrote after each monthly review.
-
Previous quarterly note (periodic/quarterly/YYYY-QN-1.md) — text BELOW the [!quarterly-review]- callout (user's quarterly focus and conclusions from last quarter).
-
Yearly note (periodic/yearly/YYYY.md) — any goals or intentions stated at the top level.
Extract: stated goals, themes flagged as priorities, projects mentioned as upcoming.
Cross-reference with quarter's actual data (themes that grew, projects completed).
> **Planned vs Actual:**
> - Planned: focus on [[writing process]], finish [[Long-form Essay Collection]]
> - Actual: [[learning systems]] dominated (18 refs), [[Long-form Essay Collection]] still 🟦
> - Unplanned: [[productivity systems]] emerged mid-quarter (0 → 11 refs)
If no prior intentions found anywhere — write:
> **Planned vs Actual:** No prior intentions recorded. To use this section next quarter: write your focus below after this review.
→ Inference: Was the drift from plan intentional (genuine reprioritization) or reactive (distraction, external events)? A large gap between planned and actual with no explanation in user notes is a signal worth examining.
Write the inference in detected language. Skip this "→" if no stated focus existed.
Theme Drift
Shows how attention shifted across the 3 months. Reveals what gained momentum and what faded.
Process
For each of the 3 months, aggregate wikilinks from daily notes (periodic/daily/YYYY-MM-*.md) pointing to base/_meta-notes/ and base/notes/. Take top 5 per month.
Show as a drift table — what was top in Month1 vs Month3:
> **Theme drift:**
> - Gained momentum: [[learning systems]] (M1: 3 → M3: 14), [[writing process]] (M1: 0 → M3: 9)
> - Faded: [[productivity systems]] (M1: 12 → M3: 2), [[linux administration]] (M1: 8 → M3: 0)
> - Consistent: [[knowledge management]] (M1: 7, M2: 9, M3: 8)
→ Inference: After listing drift, derive one data-specific observation. Look for:
- A theme gained momentum but no project in that area was started or completed → growing intellectual interest, no output yet
- A faded theme had an active project → project may have stalled when interest shifted
- No consistent themes across all 3 months → intellectually nomadic quarter; lots of exploration, no depth
- A consistent theme with high mentions but no completed project → sustained attention without shipping
Write the inference in detected language. Skip if no clear pattern.
Synthesis Ratio
A PKM-specific metric: how much was consumed vs how much was synthesized into the knowledge base.
Sources processed in quarter = sum of monthly source counts
Notes created in quarter = sum of monthly note counts (base/notes only, not additions)
Ratio = notes / sources
Scale (inline, always show with the number):
- Ratio > 2.0 → strong synthesis: each source generates 2+ notes — reading actively builds the knowledge base
- Ratio 1.0–2.0 → balanced: healthy equilibrium between input and output
- Ratio 0.5–1.0 → consumption-heavy: reading more than synthesizing — inputs are accumulating unprocessed
- Ratio < 0.5 → synthesis gap: significant backlog of unprocessed material
> **Synthesis ratio:**
> - Sources processed: 14 | Notes created: 31 | Ratio: 2.2 (strong synthesis)
> - *Scale: >2.0 = strong, 1.0–2.0 = balanced, 0.5–1.0 = consuming, <0.5 = gap*
→ Inference: After showing ratio, derive one data-specific observation. Look for:
- Ratio dropped compared to previous quarter → more sources added without synthesis steps? Or fewer notes written?
- Ratio very high (>4.0) → unusually productive synthesis; what drove it?
- Ratio < 0.5 three quarters in a row → systematic synthesis gap; a habit change is needed, not a one-time fix
Write the inference in detected language.
If sources = 0 — skip ratio, write: Sources processed: 0 — no external inputs this quarter.
Project Outcomes
What happened to projects during the quarter.
Completed
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 🟩]"
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 📢]"
Frozen this quarter
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: ❄]"
Started this quarter
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 🟦]"
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 🟥]"
Still stuck (carried from previous quarter)
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 🟦]"
obsidian search query="tag:#project [status: 🟥]"
> **Project outcomes:**
> - Completed (2): [[Personal Blog Relaunch]] 📢, [[Home Lab v2]] 🟩
> - Frozen (1): [[Course Outline Draft]] ❄️
> - Started (3): [[Reading System Overhaul]], [[Note Linking Automation]], [[Weekly Podcast]]
> - Still stuck (2): [[Archive Migration]] 🟦 (91 days), [[API Docs Rewrite]] 🟥 (47 days)
→ Inference: After listing outcomes, derive one data-specific observation. Look for:
- Started > Completed → the backlog is growing; starting is much easier than finishing
- Frozen projects outnumber completed → optimistic starts meeting unsustainable scope
- Stuck projects lasting 90+ days → need a decision: clear next action or archive
- All stuck projects share a category or type → there may be a systemic obstacle in that area
Write the inference in detected language.
Strategic Question
Generate exactly 1 sharp strategic inference from the quarter's data. Not a question — a statement that surfaces the biggest tension, gap, or contradiction found in the review. Grounded in the specific numbers.
Look for the biggest gap, contradiction, or momentum signal:
| Pattern | Strategic inference type |
|---|
| Tasks ↓ but notes ↑ | "Shifting from execution to thinking — intentional?" |
| Top theme ≠ any completed project | "Attention ≠ output — where does the effort actually go?" |
| High synthesis ratio but no completed projects | "Thinking fast, shipping slow" |
| Planned focus ≠ actual dominant theme | "Quarter drifted — new priority or loss of focus?" |
| Many started, few completed | "Starting is easy — what makes finishing hard?" |
| Theme consistent all 3 months but no new notes | "Deep engagement or just repeated visiting?" |
> **Strategic question:**
> [[writing process]] dominated 30% of all quarter mentions, but no project in this area was completed — is thinking about writing replacing the act of writing?
Write in detected language, casual register. One sentence, specific, grounded in actual numbers from the review.
Output Format
> [!quarterly-review]- Quarterly review — YYYY-QN
> **Velocity trend:**
>
> | | MM1 | MM2 | MM3 | Trend |
> |---|---|---|---|---|
> | Notes created | N | N | N | ↑/↓/→ |
> | Tasks closed | N | N | N | ↑/↓/→ |
> | Sources | N | N | N | ↑/↓/→ |
> → [inference about trend direction — only if clear pattern]
>
> **Planned vs Actual:**
> - Planned: ...
> - Actual: ...
> → [inference about gap — only if stated focus existed]
>
> **Theme drift:**
> - Gained: [[theme]] (M1: N → M3: N)
> - Faded: [[theme]] (M1: N → M3: N)
> - Consistent: [[theme]]
> → [inference about intellectual trajectory — only if clear pattern]
>
> **Synthesis ratio:**
> - Sources: N | Notes: N | Ratio: N.N (label)
> - *Scale: >2.0 = strong, 1.0–2.0 = balanced, 0.5–1.0 = consuming, <0.5 = gap*
> → [inference about synthesis habit]
>
> **Project outcomes:**
> - Completed (N): ...
> - Frozen (N): ...
> - Started (N): ...
> - Still stuck (N): ...
> → [inference about execution pattern — only if clear pattern]
>
> **Strategic question:**
> [One sharp sentence in detected language]
Rules:
- Write into note — never just output to chat
- Collapsed by default (
- suffix on callout)
- Callout title includes quarter:
[!quarterly-review]- Quarterly review — 2026-Q1
- All labels translated to detected language
- Skip sections with no content — don't write empty headers
- Skip "→" inference lines where no clear pattern exists — never write generic lines
- Every reference =
[[wikilink]]
- Strategic question must be a statement, not an interrogative — thought-provoking without being a direct question
User Participation Sections
After the [!quarterly-review]- callout, appended outside it (in the note body), with a horizontal rule separator:
Default form (always):
---
**Мои выводы / My conclusions:**
**Фокус на следующий квартал / Focus for next quarter:**
Extended form (when review data shows a specific sharp pattern):
---
*[One direct question from the review's most significant finding — e.g., "Если [[writing process]] занял 30% квартала без результата — что конкретно нужно изменить в следующем?" / "If [[writing process]] dominated the quarter without output — what specifically needs to change next quarter?"]*
**Мои выводы / My conclusions:**
**Фокус на следующий квартал / Focus for next quarter:**
Write the italic question in detected language. Use extended form only when a pattern is unambiguous.
Note: The "Focus for next quarter" section is read by the yearly-review skill when computing theme trajectory and priorities.
Chat Output
Review written → periodic/quarterly/2026-Q1.md
Velocity: ↑ notes (8→19), ↓ tasks (31→18), → sources.
Theme drift: learning systems gained, productivity faded.
Synthesis: 2.2 (strong).
Projects: 2 completed, 1 frozen, 3 started, 2 stuck.
If note was created — first line: Created periodic/quarterly/2026-Q1.md + review.
Adapt language of confirmation to match detected language.
