recall

name	recall
description	Answer from the bureau canon with citations and trust tiers — read dossiers as memory, honor each page's status, and never present an unverified claim as fact. Use when running bureau:query, or when the user asks what the project knows / what was decided / what the canon says about something.
argument-hint	"<question>" [--workspace <name>]

Recall — read the canon, tier-aware

The cabinets are repo memory. Recall is the read side of the trust gate: it answers from the compiled canon (not raw retrieval), cites what it used, and carries each claim's tier into the answer so an unverified claim can never masquerade as fact.

Steps

1. Locate the workspace (bureau.json; default bureau). If none, tell the user to run bureau:init first and stop.
2. Find the pages that bear on it. Search the cabinet drawers for pages on the question — by title, by drawer topic, and by following [[links]] between pages. EXCLUDE logbook/, board/, lint/, and every _-prefixed entry (those are history, output, or state, not canon).
3. Answer only from those pages. Synthesize a direct answer. Do NOT add knowledge the canon does not contain; if you must reason beyond it, mark that clearly as inference.
4. Cite with tiers. For each claim used, name the page, its status: (canonical / verified / proposed / stale / contested), and the [[session …]] provenance.
5. Never state non-canonical as fact. canonical is fact; verified is "checked, not approved"; proposed/stale/contested are claims to confirm — flag them in the answer.
6. Name gaps. If the canon does not cover the question, say so; do not fabricate. Suggest the next step (file a session, run bureau:lint).
7. Offer to keep it. If the synthesis reaches a conclusion worth remembering, offer to capture it (bureau:note) so it enters capture → compile → review, never straight to canon.

Rules

1. Compiled canon only. Read dossiers; never re-derive an answer from raw sources or the logbook prose — that is what compile is for.
2. Tier travels. Every cited claim carries its status:; the answer's confidence is capped by its weakest load-bearing tier.
3. No invention. A gap is reported as a gap, not filled with a guess.
4. Read-only. Recall never edits cabinets; capturing a new conclusion goes through the gate.

Examples

Context: A repo with a bureau canon; the user asks a settled question. user: "bureau:query \"how long do auth tokens last?\"" assistant: "From **Token TTL** (`canonical`, sourced to session a1b2c3): auth tokens last 24h. That's an approved fact." A canonical page answers as fact, with the page, its tier, and its provenance cited. Context: the page that answers it is unreviewed. user: "What did we decide about the queue retry policy?" assistant: "The canon has **Queue retry** but it's `proposed` (unreviewed, from session d4e5f6) — so treat this as unverified: it says 3 retries with backoff. Want me to put it through bureau:review before you rely on it?" A non-canonical claim is answered WITH its tier and an explicit 'not fact yet' flag — never presented as settled.

Scope note

This skill covers ONLY reading the canon to answer a question. It does not capture sessions (capture / bureau:file-session), not distil the logbook (compile), not approve claims (review), and not render the gazette (bureau:inspect). It is invoked by the bureau:query command, and auto-triggers when the user asks what the project knows.