| name | extract-wisdom |
| description | Content-adaptive wisdom extraction from text/podcast/video/article/paper.
Detects wisdom domains in the content and builds custom sections rather
than static headers. 5 depth levels from Instant (1 section) to
Comprehensive (10-15 sections + themes).
[WHAT] Port of the Miessler ExtractWisdom pattern. Spicy/contrarian takes
are required. Voice follows the user's conversational style — bullets
should read like "tell me what you just saw", not a press release.
[WHEN] Use when: extract wisdom, analyse podcast/video/article, key takeaways,
what's interesting here, distill, summarise interview, "extract wisdom from".
NOT for: knowledge archiving (use archive-to-vault), atomic notes (use atomize-zettel).
[LANGUAGE] Source-matching by default; English if explicitly requested.
|
| argument-hint | [URL or file path or text] |
| allowed-tools | Read, WebFetch, Bash, mcp__youtube-transcript__get_transcript, mcp__exa__crawling_exa |
Extract Wisdom
Role: content-adaptive wisdom extraction.
5 depth levels
| Level | Sections | Use |
|---|
| Instant | 1 (One-Sentence Takeaway) | Quickly capture main point |
| Fast | 3 (Top 3 + Takeaway + 2-min) | For quick-scan of an article |
| Basic | 3 + takeaway section | Standard for blog posts |
| Full (default) | 5-12 dynamic sections | Default depth for podcast/video/paper |
| Comprehensive | 10-15+ + Themes & Connections | Book or longer work |
Dynamic sections
Build sections based on what the content actually is. Examples:
- Security talk → "Threat Model Insights" + "Defense Strategies"
- Business podcast → "Contrarian Business Takes" + "Money Philosophy"
- Democracy discussion → "Power analyses" + "Practical resistance tools"
- PhD paper → "Methodological insight" + "Empirical findings" + "Implications"
Mandatory output sections (always)
- One-Sentence Takeaway — the single sentence anyone should remember
- If you only have 2 minutes — top 3 points
- Sources & rabbit holes — referenced material + further reading
Spicy/contrarian takes
Mandatory: controversial or against-the-grain statements must NOT be softened. The user values sharp formulations. If the content had a spicy take, keep it.
Workflow
1. Identify content type
mcp__youtube-transcript__get_transcript URL
WebFetch URL
Read path/to/file.md
2. Scan content for wisdom domains
Classify: is this security / tech / business / policy / academic / personal development / history / philosophy? Build sections accordingly.
3. Extract per domain
Per dynamic section, find:
- Aphorisms (citable lines)
- Core claims (theses with arguments)
- Quotes (direct quotes with author/source)
- Counter-points (what is being rejected/argued against)
4. Output
Markdown file with dynamic headers + mandatory sections. The user chooses:
- Save as-is to
Cards/ via atomize-zettel (for user-authored text)
- Save aphorisms to a personal WISDOM.md
- Save aphorisms to the aphorism skill database (if quoting external persons)
- Send to archive-to-vault if the whole piece is valuable
User customization
Tone in bullets:
- Write as you would talk to a friend, not as a press release
- "He says that X" not "The author argues that X"
- Keep specific numbers/names
- No AI filler patterns ("notably", "key takeaway:")
Source language: matches the source. English podcast → English bullets, etc.
Output language: matches source by default. English if explicitly requested.
Example uses
- "Extract wisdom from this podcast: [URL]"
- "What's interesting in the essay I linked?"
- "Analyse this report at Comprehensive level"
- "Quick-scan of this blog post"
Version history
- v3.0 (2026-05-02): initial public release.
