coding-session-insight

name

coding-session-insight

description

Reach into past AI conversation history through the `coding mem` CLI. Use whenever the user asks 'how did we solve X last time', 'have we discussed this before', 'what was the decision on X', 'remind me what we did in this task', '上次怎么解的', '之前讨论过吗', '想起一段对话', or when starting a brainstorm that overlaps prior work, debugging a familiar bug, continuing a task across sessions, or doing a finish-work review. Returns raw past dialogue; decide for the moment whether to update spec, append to task notes, quote inline in the answer, or just internalize.

Coding Session Insight

This skill teaches an AI how to call coding mem — the project's cross-session memory feedstock — and when reaching for it is the right move.

It is intentionally a capability skill, not a workflow. There is no fixed output file, no required write-back step, no "always run after finish-work" rule. What to do with what mem returns is a judgement call made in the moment of the conversation. The skill exists so the AI knows the capability is there and can decide.

What coding mem is

A local CLI that indexes the user's past Claude Code conversation logs and lets you list, search, slice by Coding task boundaries, and dump cleaned dialogue from them. Claude Code sessions live under ~/.claude/projects/.

Nothing in mem is uploaded. All reads are local.

When to reach for it

The bar is "would a senior teammate ask 'didn't we already talk about this?'" — those are the moments. Some concrete patterns:

• Brainstorm rerun risk. Starting a new task that touches an area the user has been in before, and you want to check whether a decision was already made — before re-asking the user.
• Familiar-bug debugging. The current bug pattern feels like one the user reported / fixed before. Pulling the relevant past session can save a full debugging loop.
• Cross-session continuation. The user resumes work after a gap and says "where were we" / "继续上次的" without being specific.
• Decision retrieval. The user references "the decision we made about X" but the decision lives in an old brainstorm, not in any prd.md / spec/.
• Finish-work retrospective. When the user explicitly asks for a wrap-up of what was decided / what hurt / what surprised them in this task — not as a forced step on every finish-work.
• Pattern-spotting across past work. The user asks "do I keep making the same mistake on X" / "我每次都踩这个坑吗" — search across sessions answers that.

If none of these apply, don't call mem. It is a tool, not a ceremony.

When NOT to reach for it

• The relevant context is already in the current turn, prd.md, design.md, recent git log, or the open files. mem is for stuff that has fallen out of immediate reach.
• The user is asking about a fact in the code, not a fact from a past conversation. git log -p / grep / reading the file directly is faster and more authoritative.
• You are in a sub-agent (coding-implement / coding-check) whose dispatch prompt already includes the curated implement.jsonl / check.jsonl context. Adding mem on top usually just clutters.
• The user has explicitly said "don't dig through history, just answer what I asked".

What to do with what mem returns

Treat the output as raw material, not a deliverable. Once you have it, decide based on the live conversation:

• Quote inline in your reply if a specific past exchange answers the user's current question — and cite the session-id / phase so the user can verify.
• Update <task>/prd.md or <task>/design.md if mem surfaced a load-bearing decision that should have been written down but wasn't. Surface the proposed edit to the user first.
• Append to a task-local notes file (e.g. <task>/notes.md or extending an existing one) if the finding belongs to the current task's record but doesn't fit the PRD.
• Update .coding/spec/ if the finding is a project-wide convention or gotcha that would help future tasks. Run the coding-update-spec skill for that — session-insight ends at the discovery.
• Just absorb it for the next few turns and answer better, without writing anything. This is often the right move for one-off recall.

Coding does not prescribe a single destination. Forcing every recall into a fixed file makes the file grow into noise. Let the situation decide.

How to call it

Full CLI reference is in references/cli-quick-reference.md. The 80% case is one of:

# Find sessions whose contents mention a keyword (project-scope is default;
# add --global to search every project on this machine).
coding mem search "<keyword>"

# Dump dialogue from one session, optionally filtered by phase or keyword.
coding mem extract <session-id> --phase brainstorm
coding mem extract <session-id> --grep "<keyword>"

# Drill into a session: top-N hit turns + surrounding context.
coding mem context <session-id> --turns 3 --around 2

# When you do not know the session id yet, start with list + filter.
coding mem list --cwd <project-path>
coding mem projects   # → list active project cwds, then narrow

Phase slicing (--phase brainstorm|implement|all) cuts the session at task.py create and task.py start boundaries. For a finish-work review of the current task, --phase brainstorm recovers the planning discussion and --phase implement recovers the execution loop. Default is all.

Triggering patterns

references/triggering-patterns.md lists more verbatim user phrasings (English + Chinese) that should make you think "reach for mem" — keep that handy when training instinct.

Out of scope

• mem does not edit code or update files. Any write-back is your decision in the moment.
• mem is read-only on the Claude Code JSONL store. It does not push or sync to remote.
• This skill does not replace coding-update-spec (which is the right tool for promoting a finding into project-wide guidance) or the native task / spec workflow.