haipipe-insight

name	haipipe-insight
description	Insight archive orchestrator. Constructs the project's curated permanent knowledge base under examples/<project>/insights/ through review/apply and D/I/K/W card writers. Preferred path: review finished task/probe/discover/narrative/application material, then apply reviewed cards. Low-level writers remain available for explicit data/information/knowledge/wisdom filing. Never executes code, judges probe truth, or triggers probes.
argument-hint	[verb] [args...]
allowed-tools	Bash, Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Skill
metadata	{"version":"3.0.0","last_updated":"2026-06-22","summary":"Insight archive orchestrator — review, apply, file, index, audit.","changelog":["3.0.0 (2026-06-22): DIKW model recut to in-sample-vs-generalization (JL). D/I describe ONE named dataset (require `dataset:`, no p/CI); K is the generalization layer where p/CI/confidence live and has NO probe gate (low-confidence and negative K are recorded); W reads K confidence to set risk posture. Removed the I->K controlled-comparison-probe gate. Updated dikw-boundaries, insight-md-schema, K writer, K/D/I reviewers, review specialist, agents README.","2.6.0 (2026-06-20): renamed user-facing archive flow to review/apply.","1.0.0 (2026-05-31): baseline metadata added.","2.0.0 (2026-06-11): DIKW producer partition; post-file accumulation check; 3-job design (route + check + dashboard); step-by-step protocol."]}

Skill: haipipe-insight (orchestrator)

The project's permanent knowledge base — curated D/I/K/W cards filed from finished task, probe, discovery, narrative, and application material.

task / probe / discover        produce material
narrative / application ask    decide what is worth archiving
insight review                plans + files curated cards
paper / report / message / ui  cite K/W from the archive

Unlike task or probe, insight does not produce new evidence. It is the archive interface:

review scope → INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml → apply → file cards → index → audit

User-facing language:

review <folder>  = "show me what is worth keeping as insight cards"
apply <INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml> = "write the reviewed cards into insights/"

Internally, this is the same review contract. INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml is the reviewable checklist between raw material and permanent cards.

For a beginner-friendly walkthrough, read play/README.md.

Where the insight base lives (project-level)

examples/Proj-X/
├── tasks/                                  (task — execution)
├── probes/                                (probe — research)
└── insights/                               ← insight writes here
    ├── INDEX.md                            (auto: all entries + status)
    ├── views/                              (auto: topic/source/narrative/status views)
    ├── _reviews/                           (apply-time card-review + index-audit records)
    │
    ├── D_data/                     "what one dataset looks like"   (named dataset profile)
    │   ├── D01_<slug>.md
    │   └── ...
    │
    ├── I_information/              "the pattern inside that dataset" (in-sample, same dataset)
    │   ├── I01_<slug>.md
    │   └── ...
    │
    ├── K_knowledge/                "does it generalize (+confidence)" (generalization claim)
    │   ├── K01_<slug>.md
    │   └── ...
    │
    └── W_wisdom/                   "what to do, tuned to K confidence" (one K-backed action)
        ├── W01_<slug>.md
        └── ...

Hard rule: NO code, no Python, no notebooks, no plots, no session logs inside insights/. That work belongs to task, probe, narrative, or application folders. insight only stores curated markdown cards and derived indices.

Who produces material vs who files cards

DIKW levels are labels on archived cards, not workflow phases.

Card layer      What it is                                    Filing decision
──────────────  ───────────────────────────────────────────  ─────────────────────
🟦 D data       one named dataset's profile (in-sample)       review
🟩 I info       a pattern inside that same dataset            review
🟨 K knowledge  does the pattern generalize, + confidence     review
🟧 W wisdom     a K-backed action, risk-tuned to K confidence  review

• D and I describe ONE dataset and must name it (dataset:); they carry no p-value / CI.
• K is the generalization layer where p-value / CI / confidence live; it has NO admission gate (a probe is not required), and a low-confidence or negative K is still recorded.
• Material comes from task/probe/discover/literature; review decides what becomes permanent KB. The low-level D/I/K/W skills are writer APIs called by review.

---

Three Jobs

This orchestrator has five jobs:

Job 1: REVIEW    inspect a scope and emit a reviewable INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml
Job 2: ROUTE     dispatch explicit low-level D/I/K/W filing requests
Job 3: CHECK     after apply, check accumulation / stale / supersede signals
Job 4: DASHBOARD show the KB state when called with no args
Job 5: EXPORT    write derived OKF-compatible views from source cards

Job 1 (Review/Apply) is the preferred construction path: inspect finished material, emit INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml, apply it through card writers, then review, index, and audit.

Job 2 (Route) is the low-level verb dispatch for explicit D/I/K/W filing.

Job 3 (Check) suggests promotion, stale, or supersede actions after a file operation. It suggests; it does not trigger probes.

Job 4 (Dashboard) is the explore skill — shows what the KB has, what's promotable, what's missing.

Job 5 (Export) is the OKF compatibility view — writes a derived insights/okf/ bundle from the source cards without changing D/I/K/W files.

---

Commands

Two styles: path-based review (give it a source path, auto-detect what to inspect) or verb-based (explicit DIKW level).

# Preferred: user-facing review/apply
/haipipe-insight review <project|narrative|ask-session|probe|task>
/haipipe-insight apply <INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml>

# Convenience: review then apply when explicitly requested
/haipipe-insight review <scope> --auto

# Path-based review shorthand
/haipipe-insight <task-folder-path>              review task material
/haipipe-insight <probe-folder-path>             review probe material
/haipipe-insight <task-group-path>               review task-group material

# Verb-based (explicit DIKW level)
/haipipe-insight data <source>                   D-level: file one dataset's profile + check accumulation
/haipipe-insight information --dataset <name>    I-level: state the in-sample pattern in one dataset
/haipipe-insight knowledge <source>              K-level: file generalization claim (+confidence) + check for W
/haipipe-insight wisdom [--scope <K*>]           W-level: synthesize recommendation from K cards

# Dashboard
/haipipe-insight                                 dashboard (KB state overview)
/haipipe-insight explore [project-path]          coverage scan + promotion suggestions

# OKF compatibility export
/haipipe-insight export-okf [project-path]        write derived insights/okf/ bundle

# Natural language
/haipipe-insight "<natural language>"            infer, dispatch

(For question-driven sessions: → /haipipe-application ask)
(For session machinery (plan / gate / context): → application/)

Path-based review is the recommended entry — you don't need to remember the verb. Just hand it the source folder and it produces the review checklist. Same pattern as /haipipe-task <path> auto-detecting task type.

---

Specialists

haipipe-insight-data            D-LEVEL:  writer API for observation cards → D*.md
haipipe-insight-information     I-LEVEL:  writer API for in-sample patterns (one dataset) → I*.md
haipipe-insight-knowledge       K-LEVEL:  writer API for judged beliefs → K*.md
haipipe-insight-wisdom          W-LEVEL:  writer API for recommendations → W*.md
haipipe-insight-review         REVIEW/APPLY: decide which cards to archive, then call writers
haipipe-insight-explore         READ:     coverage scan + promotion readiness

(Session machinery — plan / gate / context — and the question-driven
 ask workflow live in application. insight only files cards into
 the permanent KB; it does NOT run sessions or hold per-question state.)

---

Agents

Two agent families in insight/agents/, per DIKW type:

insight/agents/
  creators/                                  the headless, agent-callable path
    card-creator-data-agent.md               🟦 called by apply or explicit writer use
    card-creator-information-agent.md        🟩 called by apply or explicit writer use
    card-creator-knowledge-agent.md          🟨 called by apply or explicit writer use
    card-creator-wisdom-agent.md             🟧 called by apply or explicit writer use
  reviewers/                                 per-type quality gate
    card-reviewer-data-agent.md              🟦 accuracy + D boundary
    card-reviewer-information-agent.md       🟩 accuracy + I boundary
    card-reviewer-knowledge-agent.md         🟨 accuracy + K boundary + probe gate
    card-reviewer-wisdom-agent.md            🟧 accuracy + actionability
    index-integrity-auditor-agent.md         🔗 cross-layer: sources↔ref_by, INDEX↔files

Each creator calls the dual-mode haipipe-insight- skill headless. The creator is the fan-out-able subagent_type; the skill holds the filing logic. The reviewer enforces accuracy + style against ref/dikw-boundaries.md.

---

Function Verb Map

VERB-BASED:
data, observations, D-level, raw findings       -> haipipe-insight-data
information, patterns, I-level, trend           -> haipipe-insight-information
knowledge, K-level, validated belief, claim     -> haipipe-insight-knowledge
wisdom, W-level, recommendation, what next      -> haipipe-insight-wisdom
review, collect, archive cards                  -> haipipe-insight-review
explore, coverage, scan, what can we synthesize -> haipipe-insight-explore
export-okf, okf, interchange, graph export       -> scripts/export_okf.py

PATH-BASED (auto-detect source type → review checklist):
tasks/<group>/<task>/  (has results/)           -> haipipe-insight-review review
tasks/<group>/         (has child task dirs)     -> haipipe-insight-review review
probes/<MMDD>_<slug>/  (has probe.yaml)         -> haipipe-insight-review review
applications/ask/<slug>/                        -> haipipe-insight-review review

(ask / question / session / plan / gate / context → /haipipe-application; NOT insight)
(report / stakeholder doc / message / ui         → /haipipe-application; NOT insight)

---

Step-by-Step Protocol

Step 0: Read ../ref/review-contract.md and ../ref/insight-md-schema.md first. Also read ../ref/card-granularity.md and ../ref/card-lifecycle.md before filing, merging, superseding, or reviewing cards. (All ref/ docs live in the skill family's ref/ directory, a sibling of this orchestrator folder — i.e. ../ref/ in the source tree. If a relative path does not resolve because the skill is reached through a .claude/skills/ symlink, resolve the skill's real install path and read <insight>/ref/.) Every card MUST conform to the schema, granularity policy, and lifecycle policy; every archive construction should pass through review unless the user explicitly asks for a low-level writer.

Step 1: Detect AUTO_MODE. Same contract as task: --auto in args, CLAUDE_AUTO_HANDOFF=1, or parent skill passed --auto. AUTO_MODE changes ASK steps into "accept best inference or return blocked."

Step 2: Resolve scope. Cascade (highest to lowest confidence):

(1) REVIEW/APPLY — first positional is review or collect → dispatch to haipipe-insight-review (review mode). First positional apply → dispatch to haipipe-insight-review (apply mode); there is no separate haipipe-insight-apply skill.

(2) EXPLICIT VERB — first positional is a verb (data / information / knowledge / wisdom / explore) → dispatch to that specialist.

(3) PATH-BASED AUTO-DETECT — first positional is a filesystem path → default to review. If args include --file-now or an explicit layer verb, dispatch to a low-level writer.

(4) QUESTION — first positional is a question ("?" / "does" / "is" / "why" opener) → redirect to /haipipe-application ask.

(5) EXPORT — first positional is export-okf or okf → run scripts/export_okf.py <project-or-insights-path> and report artifacts.

(6) NO ARGS → Job 4 (dashboard): run explore to show KB state.

(7) STILL AMBIGUOUS → AUTO: status: blocked. Interactive: ASK.

Step 2a: Source-type detection (path-based review).

Given a path, detect what kind of scope it is and route to review:

Scope type      Path signal                                Dispatch to
───────────     ──────────────────────────────────────     ─────────────────────────
task-folder     path under tasks/ + has results/<run>/     haipipe-insight-review
task-group      path under tasks/ + has child task dirs    haipipe-insight-review
probe-folder    path under probes/ + has probe.yaml        haipipe-insight-review
ask-session     path under applications/ask/               haipipe-insight-review

Detection rules: - ls <path>/results/*/metrics.json succeeds → task-folder review scope - ls <path>/*/results/*/metrics.json succeeds → task-group review scope - ls <path>/probe.yaml succeeds → probe-folder review scope - path contains /applications/ask/ → ask-session review scope - path contains /tasks/ or /probes/ → matching review scope

Low-level direct filing is still available through explicit verbs: /haipipe-insight data <task>, /haipipe-insight knowledge <probe>, etc. The default path-based behavior should produce INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml, not silently create permanent cards.

Step 3: Resolve project root. Infer from the source path (walk up to the examples/Proj*/ ancestor) or from --project arg or from cwd.

Step 4: Dispatch to specialist:

• review scope → Skill("haipipe-insight-review", args="review <scope>")
• apply review → Skill("haipipe-insight-review", args="apply <INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml>")
• explicit D/I/K/W verb → Skill("haipipe-insight-<layer>", args="...")

Step 4a: Lifecycle action choice.

Before creating a new card, check whether the candidate should update an existing one:

same reusable unit + new evidence      → merge
same reusable unit + metadata/refs     → update
old unit false or wrong scope          → supersede
genuinely different reusable unit      → file
not reusable                           → skip
missing evidence                       → blocked

All non-file changes MUST append ## Change log unless they are pure generated-index rebuilds.

Step 5: Post-file accumulation check (Job 2). Runs ONLY after a successful file (status=ok):

After filing a 🟦 D card (a dataset profile): (1) Check whether an in-sample pattern in that dataset is already carded (an I). (2) If not, emit in next:: suggest /haipipe-insight information --dataset <name> to state the pattern inside that dataset. (3) Update INDEX.md (add the new D card entry).

After filing a 🟨 K card: (1) Check if this K implies a concrete action. A low-confidence or negative K can still imply a CONSERVATIVE action (a hedge, a pilot, a "do not yet do X", or gather-more) — confidence sets the W's risk posture, not whether a W exists. (2) If an action is implied and no W card already derives from this K: → emit in next:: suggest /haipipe-insight wisdom --scope K{NN} (3) Update INDEX.md (add the new K card entry).

After filing a 🟩 I card: (1) Update INDEX.md. (2) If the I pattern has a generalization basis (a significance test, or it recurs across datasets/subgroups), suggest in next: a K card recording whether it generalizes + at what confidence. No probe is required.

After filing a 🟧 W card: (1) Update INDEX.md.

After applying INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml: (1) Run all required per-card reviewers. (2) Rebuild relevant INDEX files. (3) Rebuild derived views under insights/views/ when available. (4) Run index-integrity-auditor-agent. (5) Return card ids for the caller to cite.

Step 6: Emit the structured tail:

status:    ok | blocked | failed
summary:   2-3 sentences (what was filed + accumulation check result)
artifacts: [paths created / updated]
next:      suggested next command (promotion suggestion if threshold met, else explore)

---

The Review Funnel

insight's flow is a funnel, not a pipeline. Finished material arrives at different rates. Review decides what deserves permanent memory:

dataset profile + in-sample pattern ──▶ INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml ──▶ D / I cards
generalization claims (+confidence)  ──▶ INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml ──▶ K cards
K-backed actions                     ──▶ INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml ──▶ W cards
all cards                            ──▶ index + audit ─▶ project KB

Key constraint: D and I stay in-sample (one named dataset, no p-value / CI). The inferential quantities (p-value, CI, confidence) appear only at K, the generalization layer. K has NO admission gate — it needs a generalization basis (a significance test, robustness across subgroups, or a vetted external claim) and an honest confidence, not a probe. Low-confidence and negative K are recorded too; confidence, not a gate, is what makes K honest for paper claims and W.

---

Boundary with probe and task

Who produces material and who files permanent cards:

task        → dataset profiles + in-sample patterns (D/I material)
probe       → generalization claims with confidence (K material) + W
narrative   → story gaps and review intent
application ask → question-driven review intent
insight review → D/I/K/W cards + indices + graph audit

Each DIKW level is partitioned by the in-sample vs generalization cut. D and I stay in-sample and named to a dataset; K is the generalization claim (with confidence) and W is the K-backed action. The inferential quantities live only at K.

Dependencies:

insight is CALLED BY narrative/application ask/human review
insight OWNS filing: D/I/K/W cards, INDEX, graph audit
insight NEVER triggers probe (that's application's ask kind)
insight NEVER writes to tasks/ or probes/ directly
insight ONLY writes to insights/
task/probe do not mutate insights/ as part of their core lifecycle

---

Relation to other top-level skills

discover    feeds ideas → seeded questions handled in application ask
project     project umbrella → owns the examples/Proj-X/ shape
narrative   CALLS insight review when story gaps need permanent KB refs
task        PRODUCES D/I material; direct D filing is a low-level manual option
probe       PRODUCES K/W material; direct K filing is a low-level manual option
paper       READS K + W entries → academic publication
application CALLS insight review in ask Phase 4 → files D/I/K/W cards
              drives sessions (ask / message / ui / report) that read K/W

insight is the project's PERMANENT KB. It does NOT run sessions or
own per-question state. It files cards and synthesizes cross-cutting
patterns (I) and recommendations (W). Source of "what does this project KNOW".

---

Files owned by this umbrella

(All ref/ docs live in the skill family ref/ dir = ../ref/ from this orchestrator.)

haipipe-insight/SKILL.md              (this file)
../ref/insight-md-schema.md           canonical entry schema (D/I/K/W)
../ref/card-granularity.md            card size, merge/split, and flat-folder rules
../ref/card-lifecycle.md              file/merge/update/supersede/change-log rules
../ref/insight-context-loading.md     loading strategy for callers
../ref/index-templates.md             INDEX.md / K-INDEX / W-INDEX templates
../ref/dikw-boundaries.md             per-layer boundary + worked examples
../ref/review-contract.md             how insights/ is constructed from finished material
../ref/invocation-modes.md            dual-mode contract
../ref/okf-compat.md                  OKF compatibility contract and export semantics
../scripts/export_okf.py              derived OKF-style bundle exporter

---

Schema authority

Every insight entry under examples/<project>/insights/ MUST conform to ref/insight-md-schema.md. The 4 layer skills (data / information / knowledge / wisdom) all reference this single file as their entry schema source.

Every construction of insights/ SHOULD follow ref/review-contract.md: review, apply, card review, index, audit. Card size and merge/split choices SHOULD follow ref/card-granularity.md. Card updates SHOULD follow ref/card-lifecycle.md. Direct D/I/K/W filing is allowed only when the caller already knows the card is worth archiving.

When loading insight context for a query, follow ref/insight-context-loading.md — layer-cascading + tag-filtering + INDEX-as-gateway.

For generic catalog / graph consumption, follow ref/okf-compat.md. OKF is an export view; the DIKW card files remain the source of truth.

---

Invocation examples

# Preferred: review/apply in one run when explicitly requested
/haipipe-insight review examples/ProjA/applications/ask/03_film_ood --auto

# Low-level: explicit D card from a task
/haipipe-insight data examples/ProjA/tasks/B03_band4/01_eval_h24/

# Verb-based: state the in-sample pattern in one dataset (cites that dataset's D)
/haipipe-insight information --dataset VisitOsteo_1stPair_af14d --scope D01

# Verb-based: explicit K card from a probe
/haipipe-insight knowledge P.0602

# Verb-based: synthesize W recommendation from K cards
/haipipe-insight wisdom --scope K01

# Dashboard: show KB state
/haipipe-insight
/haipipe-insight explore

# OKF export: write derived insights/okf/ bundle
/haipipe-insight export-okf examples/ProjA

---

Risk Profile

CREATES files under examples/<project>/insights/. Never deletes cards — only adds new ones or updates INDEX.md. Review mode writes only INSIGHT_REVIEW.yaml; apply mode writes cards and derived indices.

export-okf deletes and rebuilds only derived insights/okf/ output. It never edits source cards under D/I/K/W.

---

Feedback

/haipipe-insight feedback "<text>" captures a complaint / confusion / wish about THIS skill into feedback/ (one dated file per item, status: open) to fix in a later revision pass. /haipipe-insight feedback list shows the open items. This is feedback about the tool, not the work it produces. Route a feedback first-token here before other parsing. Full convention: feedback/README.md.