self-actualization

name	self-actualization
description	Comprehensive cognitive self-assessment — honest evaluation of architecture health, growth, and optimization opportunities
tier	standard
applyTo	**/*actuali*,**/*assessment*,**/*self-assess*,**/*health*
disable-model-invocation	true
currency	2026-04-22T00:00:00.000Z

Self-Actualization Skill

The full physical exam. Not "am I sick?" but "how fit am I, and where should I train next?"

What Self-Actualization Is (and Isn't)

It IS	It ISN'T
Honest assessment of current state	Cheerful report that everything is fine
Identification of growth opportunities	List of capabilities
Prioritized improvement plan	Unprioritized wish list
Architecture optimization	Code refactoring
Deep meditation + action plan	Quick health check (that's dream/health)

Assessment Dimensions

1. Structural Integrity (Architecture Health)

Metric	How to Measure	Healthy	Concern
Connection validity	All applyTo targets exist	100% valid	Any broken links
Schema compliance	All frontmatter matches spec	Full compliance	Any format violations
Version alignment	Version string consistent across files	All match	Any drift
File organization	Files in correct directories	All correct	Orphaned files

2. Memory Balance (P:E:D Ratio)

The architecture has three memory types. Healthy balance varies by maturity:

Architecture Maturity	Procedural (P)	Episodic (E)	Domain/Skills (D)
New (< 3 months)	~30%	~20%	~50%
Maturing (3-12 months)	~20%	~15%	~65%
Mature (> 1 year)	~15%	~10%	~75%

Current formula: P = instructions count, E = prompts + episodic, D = skills count.

Imbalance signals:

• Too many instructions, few skills → "Knows how but not what" (procedural heavy)
• Too many skills, few instructions → "Knows what but not how" (domain heavy)
• Too many episodic, few skills → "Remembers sessions but never synthesized" (consolidation debt)

3. Knowledge Depth (Skill Quality)

Quality Level	Signals	Action
Deep	Tables with thresholds, real examples, anti-patterns	None needed
Adequate	Has structure and some detail, missing edge cases	Enrich when convenient
Shallow	Capabilities list, one-liner descriptions, no examples	Rewrite priority
Empty shell	Only frontmatter and a description line	Consider removing

The capabilities-list anti-pattern: "Expert in X. Capabilities: validate, detect, assess..." — this adds zero value because an LLM already knows these things generically. Skills must encode specific knowledge.

4. Connection Density (Link Network)

Metric	How to Measure	Healthy	Concern
Avg connections per skill	Total applyTo links / total skills	3-6	< 2 (isolated) or > 10 (over-connected)
Orphan skills	Skills with no applyTo patterns	0	Any
Hub skills	Skills with > 8 connections	1-2 core hubs	> 4 (over-centralized)
Bidirectional coverage	% of connections that are reciprocated	> 80%	< 60%

5. Trifecta Completeness

Component	Purpose	What's Missing If Absent
SKILL.md	What to know (declarative)	No reference knowledge
.instructions.md	How to do it (procedural)	No step-by-step process
.prompt.md	Interactive workflow (episodic)	No guided conversation

Trifecta priority: Not every skill needs a trifecta. Prioritize trifectas for skills that are:

• Used frequently (high activation count)
• Complex (multi-step processes)
• Error-prone (common mistakes without guidance)

6. Growth Trajectory

Metric	How to Assess	Good Sign	Warning Sign
Skills added this month	Count new SKILL.md files	1-5 new skills	0 (stagnant) or > 10 (unfocused)
Skills deepened	Skills edited to add depth	Active enrichment	Only new, never deepened
Global knowledge growth	New GI-* and GK-* entries	Synthesis happening	No global entries (isolated learning)
Trifecta progression	New instructions/prompts	Capability maturing	Skills without procedures

Self-Actualization Session Flow

1. Inventory — Count all files by type (skills, instructions, prompts, episodic, agents)
2. Structural audit — Run brain-qa or dream for baseline metrics
3. Depth sampling — Read 5-10 smallest skills, assess for shallow content
4. Balance calculation — Compute P:E:D ratio, compare to maturity target
5. Network analysis — Check connection density, find orphans and hubs
6. Growth review — Compare to last self-actualization (what changed?)
7. Priority list — Rank top 3-5 improvements by impact
8. Action plan — Assign each to a session type (quick fix, deep-dive, trifecta build)

Scoring Guide

Dimension	Weight	Score 1-5
Structural Integrity	20%	5=perfect, 1=broken links everywhere
Memory Balance	15%	5=ideal ratio, 1=severely skewed
Knowledge Depth	25%	5=all deep, 1=mostly shallow
Connection Density	15%	5=well-connected, 1=isolated islands
Trifecta Completeness	10%	5=appropriate coverage, 1=skills only
Growth Trajectory	15%	5=healthy momentum, 1=stagnant

Overall: Weighted average. > 4.0 = healthy. 3.0-4.0 = needs attention. < 3.0 = urgent.

Relationship to Other Rituals

Meditation is the foundational ritual. Self-Actualize is a deep meditation variant.

Ritual	Frequency	Depth	Relationship
Meditation	Per-session	Moderate	Foundational — the primary ritual
Dream	On-demand	Structural	Diagnostic — chains after meditation sometimes
Self-Actualize	Monthly	Deep	Deep meditation — always starts with Dream baseline

Session Flow

1. Dream (structural baseline) → 2. 6-dimension assessment → 3. Meditation 4 R's (persist findings)

Drift Remediation Protocol

Self-actualization detects documentation drift — when implementation evolves faster than docs.

Drift Type	Detection	Fix
Version references	Scan for outdated version strings in .github/	grep + multi-replace
Documentation counts	Compare copilot-instructions.md counts vs actual file counts	Update counts
Memory balance	P:E:D ratio outside maturity target	Consolidate episodic, enrich skills, prune redundant instructions

Drift is not always bad — growth causes natural ratio shifts. Remediate only when the shift indicates debt (e.g., unconsolidated sessions, stagnant skills, overlapping instructions).