process

name	process
description	Use when the user has external inputs to analyze — transcripts, documents, notes, or pasted text. Extracts structured information (requirements, constraints, decisions, questions) and updates companion context files.
disable-model-invocation	true
argument-hint	[client/companion]

/process — Handle External Inputs

Extract structured information from transcripts, documents, or notes.

Usage:

• /process — Prompts for input, uses current companion
• /process [client/companion] — Override companion, then prompts for input

After invoking, paste text or provide a file path when prompted.

---

Step 1: Determine the Companion

1. If $ARGUMENTS contains a companion path, use that
2. Otherwise, read tracking/current-companion.md for the current companion
3. If no companion is set:

   No companion set. Use /companion to set or create one first.
   

---

Step 2: Get the Input

If no content was provided with the command:

Ready to process input for [companion].

You can:
1. Paste text directly (transcript, notes, etc.)
2. Provide a file path to read

What would you like me to process?

If file path provided: Read the file and use its contents If text pasted: Use the pasted text directly

---

Step 3: Analyze the Input

Read through the input and extract:

Requirements — Things the companion must do

• Explicit statements: "it needs to...", "we want...", "must have..."
• Implicit needs revealed by problems described
• User stories or use cases mentioned

Constraints — Boundaries and limitations

• Technical: "we're using...", "has to integrate with..."
• Timeline: "by Q2", "before launch"
• Resources: "small team", "limited budget"
• Organizational: "needs approval from...", "compliance requires..."

Decisions — Choices that were made or implied

• "We decided to...", "we're going with..."
• Trade-offs discussed and resolved
• Approaches rejected and why

Questions — Things that need clarification

• Ambiguous statements
• Conflicting requirements
• Missing information
• Assumptions that should be validated

Context — Background that helps understand the companion

• Domain knowledge
• Related systems
• User personas
• Historical context

---

Step 4: Present Extraction

Show what was extracted before writing:

## Extracted from Input

### Requirements Found
- [requirement 1]
- [requirement 2]
- ...

### Constraints Identified
- [constraint 1]
- [constraint 2]
- ...

### Decisions Captured
- [decision 1] — [rationale if stated]
- [decision 2]
- ...

### Questions Raised
- [question 1] — needs clarification
- [question 2] — conflicting with [what]
- ...

### Context Notes
- [context 1]
- [context 2]
- ...

---

Does this capture what's important? Anything I missed or misinterpreted?

Compliance Checkpoint 1

STOP and wait for user confirmation before writing to context files.

The user may want to:

• Confirm the extraction is accurate
• Correct misinterpretations
• Add items that were missed
• Remove items that aren't relevant

---

Step 5: Clarify Questions (Optional)

If there are questions or ambiguities:

I flagged [N] items that need clarification. Would you like to address them now?

1. [Question 1]
2. [Question 2]
...

We can clarify now, or save them as open questions for later.

If user wants to clarify, ask one question at a time and capture the answers.

---

Step 6: Update Context Files

After confirmation, update the companion's context files:

context/requirements.md

• Append new requirements under a dated section:

  ## From [input source] — [date]
  
  - [new requirement]
  - [new requirement]
  

context/constraints.md

• Append new constraints similarly

context/decisions.md

• Add rows to the decisions table:

  | [decision] | [rationale] | [date] |
  

context/questions.md (create if needed)

• Open questions that need answers:

  # Open Questions
  
  | Question | Source | Status |
  |----------|--------|--------|
  | [question] | [where it came from] | open |
  

---

Compliance Checkpoint 2

After writing context files, confirm with the user:

Context files updated. Here's what was written:

- context/requirements.md — [N] requirements added
- context/constraints.md — [N] constraints added
- context/decisions.md — [N] decisions added
- context/questions.md — [N] open questions added

Does this look correct?

STOP and wait for user confirmation.

---

Step 7: Summarize

## Processed: [brief description of input]

**Added to [companion]:**
- [N] requirements
- [N] constraints
- [N] decisions
- [N] open questions

**Files updated:**
- context/requirements.md
- context/constraints.md
- context/decisions.md
- context/questions.md

**Next steps:**
  /process   — Feed in more documents
  /gaps      — See what's still missing
  /intake    — Fill gaps through conversation
  /checkpoint — Save session state

---

Extraction Guidelines

Be Conservative

• Only extract what's clearly stated or strongly implied
• Don't invent requirements that weren't mentioned
• Flag ambiguity rather than guessing

Preserve Source

• Note where each item came from
• Keep original language when it's precise
• Paraphrase only for clarity

Identify Conflicts

• If new input conflicts with existing context, flag it
• Don't silently override previous decisions
• Present conflicts for user resolution

Questions Are Valuable

• Unclear input is a signal, not a failure
• Capturing questions prevents false assumptions
• Open questions guide future /intake sessions