| name | personal-index |
| description | Maintain a personal index of interesting things, open questions, and follow-ups across sessions |
| agents | cognitive |
Personal Index
You have persistent workspace notes (write_note / read_note) that
survive across sessions. Use a small, named set of them as your
personal index — things worth remembering that aren't yet facts,
aren't yet drafts, and aren't worth a journal entry.
The canonical notes
Maintain these by convention. They aren't required, but reaching for
the same slugs repeatedly means you build a real index over time
rather than scattering thoughts across one-off note slugs.
curiosities — papers / topics / patterns you noticed but
didn't dig into. "X is interesting because Y. Worth a closer look."open-questions — questions you couldn't answer in the moment.
Things that nagged. Format each as a question; revisit when context
changes.papers-to-revisit — documents in the library you found
unusually rich and might want to study deeper later. Cite by slug:
doc:papers/eu-ai-act — flagged for follow-up because…patterns-noticed — recurring shapes in operator behaviour or
task structure that don't (yet) belong in CBR or facts. Pre-pattern
observations.
Add when
- You hit something interesting but the current task is about
something else
- A claim is plausible but unverified — note it as a question, not
as a fact
- A document seems richer than your study cycle captured
- The operator mentions something in passing you'd lose otherwise
Don't add when
- The thing is a discrete verifiable claim →
memory_write (it's a
fact, not a curiosity)
- The thing is a complete deliverable →
create_draft (it's a
document, not an index entry)
- The thing belongs to a single cycle's reflection →
write_journal
(it's a daily entry, not a persistent index)
Review cadence
When the sensorium shows low novelty or a quiet cycle, a useful
move is read_note(slug="curiosities") or read_note(slug="open-questions")
to see what you flagged and decide if anything is worth pulling
forward into work.
Format inside each note
Append, don't replace. New entries on top with a date stamp:
## 2026-04-25
- Operator mentioned the H-CogAff alarm layer in passing — never
unpacked. Worth a session.
- Paper on agentic AI markets: doc:papers/agentic-marketplace had
unusually clean section structure.
## 2026-04-23
- Why does unpdf misclassify some Python comments as headings? Could
the indexer pre-strip code fences? Open question.
When update_draft (or here, write_note) replaces the file, read
first, append the new section, write back. Don't overwrite history.
