batch-intake-writeback

name	batch-intake-writeback
description	Turn grouped source-intake batches into durable Obsidian writeback with provenance, routing, and checkpoint verification.

Batch intake writeback

Use this skill when a batch of source records arrives grouped by channel/thread and you need to compact the batch, decide routing, write durable notes, and advance the intake checkpoint.

Core flow

1. Compact by group first.

   • Merge repeated facts/messages inside each channel/thread before writing anything.
   • Treat each grouped conversation/activity window as one unit.

2. Answer the four intake questions for each group.

   • What needs to be done?
   • How can I help now?
   • What facts changed?
   • What patterns/signals changed?

3. Route the group.

   • If the target entity/project is clear: update the relevant State + Log note with provenance.
   • If routing is uncertain or spans multiple entities: write one sourced Inbox note for the batch.
   • If the group is noise with no usable content: skip it and record the skip reason in the batch summary.

4. Write durable notes with provenance.

   • Inbox summaries should include source line ranges or representative vadimgest://... URIs.
   • Entity log entries should use a clear title, src:, mentions:, summary, and facts-touched:.
   • Keep the summary compact; do not mirror raw rows one-for-one when they belong to the same conversation.

5. Commit only after writeback.

   • Run the exact checkpoint commit snippet provided with the batch.
   • Commit only the listed source lines.
   • Verify the checkpoint file actually advanced after the commit.

Important pitfalls

• Do not overwrite a note from a partial read. If a file was read with pagination, truncation, or a warning, re-read the full file before using write-file/overwrite actions.
• Do not create one note per raw row. Group first, then write once per thread/window.
• Do not commit a source line you did not fully process. If any source in the batch is incomplete, leave that source uncommitted.
• Do not invent routing when a single Inbox note is enough. When uncertain, preserve the evidence in Inbox and let later grooming resolve it.

Verification

Before finishing, confirm:

• the intended notes were written,
• the checkpoint file was updated,
• the batch summary reflects what was actually processed,
• the final report names the note paths written.

Reference material

• references/heartbeat-edge-backfill-2026-07-02.md — worked example of grouped intake, routing, note writing, and checkpoint commit.