reflect

name	reflect
description	Session reflection — captures knowledge and self-improvement findings, then auto-applies them as Cursor rules or skills. Analyzes what was learned AND what went wrong. Use when user says "reflect", "self-review", "co można poprawić", "przeanalizuj sesję", "zapamiętaj", or invokes /reflect. Also called automatically by the wrap-up skill.

Reflect

Analyze the full conversation in three passes:

1. Knowledge capture — what was learned that should persist.
2. Self-improvement — what went wrong or could be better.
3. Company knowledge candidate — could any finding benefit the whole org?

If the session was short or routine with nothing notable in any pass, say "Nothing to reflect on" and stop.

Auto-apply all actionable findings immediately — do not ask for approval on each one. Apply changes, then present a summary.

---

Pass 1 · Knowledge capture

Review what was learned during the session. For each finding, decide where it belongs using the placement guide below.

Memory placement guide (Cursor)

Destination	When to use	Format
.cursor/rules/topic.mdc	Permanent project conventions, architecture decisions, coding standards	MDC with alwaysApply: true
.cursor/rules/topic.mdc (scoped)	Rules for specific files or areas	MDC with glob: pattern
.cursor/skills/name/SKILL.md	Reusable multi-step workflows	Skill directory
Existing rule or skill file	Small additions, quirks, insights	Append to the most relevant file

Decision framework

• Permanent project convention? → .cursor/rules/ with alwaysApply: true.
• Scoped to specific files or directories? → .cursor/rules/ with glob:.
• Reusable multi-step workflow? → .cursor/skills/ (new or update).
• Small insight or quirk? → Append to existing rule or skill.
• Already documented somewhere? → Don't duplicate; skip.

---

Pass 2 · Self-improvement

Analyze the conversation for things that went wrong or could be better.

Finding categories

• Skill gap — things that took multiple attempts, were done wrong, or required user correction.
• Friction — repeated manual steps, things the user had to ask for explicitly that should have been automatic.
• Knowledge — facts about the project, user preferences, or setup that were unknown but should have been.
• Automation — repetitive patterns that could become skills, rules, or scripts.

Root cause — łańcuch przyczynowy

Dla każdego znalezionego problemu zadaj pytanie:

Jaki wcześniejszy krok lub brakujący guard zapobiegłby całej tej sytuacji?

Jeśli odpowiedź prowadzi do brakującej reguły, skilla lub checklisty — to jest właściwy finding do utrwalenia, a nie sam objaw techniczny.

Technika: cofnij się od objawu po łańcuchu zdarzeń aż do pierwszej decyzji, która mogła pójść inaczej. Utrwal tę decyzję, nie naprawę objawu.

Action types

Action	Target
New/update rule	.cursor/rules/topic.mdc
New/update skill	.cursor/skills/name/SKILL.md
New/update script	.cursor/skills/name/scripts/

When creating a new rule, choose the correct scope:

• alwaysApply: true — permanent project-wide convention.
• glob: pattern — scoped to specific files/directories.

---

Pass 3 · Company knowledge candidate (JMB.Agents)

After Pass 1 and 2, review all findings (applied and no-action) and evaluate whether any of them could benefit the whole organization.

Evaluation criteria

For each finding ask:

1. Is it project-specific or universal? If the convention, pattern, or workflow would help another JMB Lab team → candidate.
2. Does it already exist in JMB.Agents? Read catalog.json (via jmb-agents-lock.json → sourcePath). If the finding is already covered → skip.
3. Is it mature enough? A finding from a single session might be premature. If the finding has been re-discovered in 2+ sessions or is a well-known industry practice → candidate.

Actions

Verdict	Action
Strong candidate	Propose contribution: "This finding could benefit the org. Run Contribute via JMB.Agents skill."
Maybe	Note it: "Potential JMB.Agents candidate — revisit after next session."
Project-only	No action (already handled in Pass 1/2).

Do not auto-contribute. Present the recommendation and let the user decide whether to run the Contribute operation.

Output

Add a third section to the output format:

JMB.Agents candidates:

5. 🏢 Strong: "Always use dedicated hooks for global listeners"
   → Propose rule: react-global-listeners
   → Run: Contribute rule react-global-listeners to JMB.Agents

6. 🔄 Maybe: "RSC split breaks E2E timing assumptions"
   → Revisit after next session

---

Output format

Present all findings (from both passes) in two sections — applied first, then no-action:

Findings (applied):

1. ✅ Knowledge: discovered convention for field ordering in forms
   → [Rule] Created .cursor/rules/form-field-ordering.mdc

2. ✅ Skill gap: label consistency was missed in 3 places
   → [Rule] Created .cursor/rules/label-consistency.mdc

3. ✅ Automation: onboarding field reorder is a repeated pattern
   → [Skill] Created .cursor/skills/reorder-form-fields/SKILL.md

---
No action needed:

4. Knowledge: Playwright needs --headed for photo upload tests
   Already documented in e2e-smoke-test SKILL.md