Process and organize notes.md using the LNO (Leverage/Neutral/Overhead) framework for systematic task prioritization.
Use when: (1) adding action items to notes.md, (2) organizing daily tasks, (3) categorizing work by ROI potential,
(4) carrying forward incomplete tasks to new date sections, (5) routing brain-specific notes,
(6) user requests "update notes" or "process my notes", or (7) synchronizing action items from CLAUDE.md files to daily tracking.
Applies Shreyas Doshi's ROI-based prioritization framework to maintain strategic focus in daily execution.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
Instruções da origem · Visualização somente leitura
name
notes-processor
description
Process and organize notes.md using the LNO (Leverage/Neutral/Overhead) framework for systematic task prioritization.
Use when: (1) adding action items to notes.md, (2) organizing daily tasks, (3) categorizing work by ROI potential,
(4) carrying forward incomplete tasks to new date sections, (5) routing brain-specific notes,
(6) user requests "update notes" or "process my notes", or (7) synchronizing action items from CLAUDE.md files to daily tracking.
Applies Shreyas Doshi's ROI-based prioritization framework to maintain strategic focus in daily execution.
allowed-tools
["Read","Edit","Write"]
Notes Processor Skill
Version: 1.0.0
Last Updated: January 27, 2026
Purpose
Systematically organize daily notes using the LNO framework to maintain strategic focus and ensure high-leverage work gets appropriate priority. This skill transforms ad-hoc note-taking into a strategic prioritization system that surfaces ROI-based work categorization.
Invocation
Trigger phrases:
"add action items to notes.md"
"update my notes"
"process notes"
"categorize these tasks"
"organize my daily tasks"
"sync action items from [brain]"
Usage:
Invoked by agents (brain-tracker, meeting-notes-router) or directly when user requests notes organization
Framework: LNO Prioritization
Core Philosophy
The Problem: Not all work is equal. PMs often treat all tasks as equally important, leading to strategic work being crowded out by tactical firefighting.
: Shreyas Doshi's LNO framework categorizes work by ROI potential:
The Solution
🟢 Leverage (L): 10x-100x ROI potential
Strategic initiatives, experiments, research
Documentation systems, templates, automation
Work that compounds over time
Example: "Design experiment to test new onboarding flow"
🟡 Neutral (N): 1x ROI (equal effort to return)
Regular meetings, standard project work
Planning, coordination, reviews
Necessary but not amplifying
Example: "Weekly sync with engineering team"
🔴 Overhead (O): <1x ROI (necessary but low return)
Administrative work, required responses
Urgent fixes, firefighting
Work that must be done but doesn't move strategic goals
Example: "Respond to expense report request"
Why This Matters
Customer Value: By surfacing high-leverage work, PMs spend more time on initiatives that compound customer value rather than reacting to daily noise.
Trade-off: Requires discipline to categorize honestly. Accepting that not all work is strategic enables better resource allocation.
Outcome: Over time, ratio of L:N:O work shifts toward leverage, driving disproportionate impact.
Execution Protocol
Phase 1: UNDERSTAND - Read Current State
CRITICAL: Always read notes.md before modifying.
Read notes.md to understand current structure
Identify current date section (format: # Jan 27: or # Jan 27 (Completed):)
Check for:
Unformatted content at top of file
Processing Queue items
Incomplete tasks in previous date sections
Tasks missing LNO categorization
Phase 2: CATEGORIZE - Apply LNO Framework
For each task or note item:
Step 1: Identify Task Type
Action item with clear deliverable?
Meeting/coordination?
Administrative/reactive work?
Strategic/experimental work?
Step 2: Assess ROI Potential
Ask: "If I complete this, what's the multiplier effect?"
10x return? → Leverage
~1x return? → Neutral
<1x return but necessary? → Overhead
Step 3: Apply Classification
Use keyword hints to guide categorization:
Am I being honest about ROI or inflating importance?
Would Shreyas Doshi agree with this categorization?
Does this serve strategic outcomes or just feel busy?
Phase 3: STRUCTURE - Organize in notes.md
Current Date Section Format:
# Jan 27:## 🟢 Leverage (L)- [ ] **[L]** High-leverage task description *(Created: Jan 20)*## 🟡 Neutral (N)- [ ] **[N]** Standard task description *(Created: Jan 27)*## 🔴 Overhead (O)- [ ] **[O]** Administrative task description *(Created: Jan 27)*
Task Format Rules:
Checkbox states:
[ ] for incomplete (not started)
[>] for in progress
[~] for blocked/waiting
[-] for cancelled/no longer needed
[X] or [x] for completed
Label: **[L]**, **[N]**, or **[O]**
Creation date: *(Created: [date])* in abbreviated format (e.g., "Jan 27")
Completion date (when finished): *(Completed: [date])*
Cancellation date (when cancelled): *(Cancelled: [date])* with brief reason
Phase 4: DATE TRANSITIONS - Carry Forward Logic
When creating new date section:
CRITICAL RULE: Only carry forward active incomplete tasks [ ] and blocked tasks [~]. Never carry forward completed [X], cancelled [-], or in-progress [>] tasks from previous days.
Carryforward Protocol:
For each task in previous date section:
IF checkbox is [ ] (not started):
IF has *(Created: [date])*:
→ Preserve *(Created: [date])* exactly as is
ELSE:
→ Add *(Created: [previous-date])*
→ Copy to new date section
ELSE IF checkbox is [~] (blocked/waiting):
→ Carry forward (still active, waiting on external factors)
→ Preserve creation date
ELSE IF checkbox is [X] or [x] (completed):
→ Skip (done successfully, leave in original date section)
ELSE IF checkbox is [-] (cancelled/no longer needed):
→ Skip (done by cancellation, leave in original date section)
ELSE IF checkbox is [>] (in progress from yesterday):
→ Reset to [ ] and carry forward (new day, new start)
→ Preserve creation date
Append to brain's RunningNotes.md with date header
Log routing in notes.md "✅ Processed Notes" section
Why Route: Brains need context persistence. Daily notes are ephemeral; brain files are durable memory.
Phase 6: COMPLETION & CANCELLATION TRACKING
When task changes from incomplete to complete:
Change checkbox: [ ] → [X]
Add completion timestamp: *(Completed: Jan 27)*
Leave task in original date section (do NOT move)
Format:
- [X] **[L]** Completed task description *(Created: Jan 20)**(Completed: Jan 27)*
When task becomes cancelled/no longer needed:
Change checkbox: [ ] → [-]
Add cancellation timestamp: *(Cancelled: Jan 27)*
Add brief reason inline or as sub-bullet
Leave task in original date section (do NOT move)
Format:
- [-] **[L]** Cancelled task description *(Created: Jan 20)**(Cancelled: Jan 27)* - Reason: Superseded by new unified approach
Why Track Cancellations:
Documents strategic pivots and evolution of thinking
Shows what was considered but not pursued (learning)
Explains why effort wasn't invested (useful for retrospectives)
Transparency about changing priorities
Cancelled tasks behave like completed tasks: They stay in their original date section and do NOT carry forward to future dates.
Phase 7: METADATA UPDATE
Update "Last Updated" timestamp at bottom of notes.md:
---
**Last Updated**: 2026-01-27 14:30
Integration with Brain Tracker
When invoked by brain-tracker or meeting-notes-router:
Input: List of action items with context
Action Items:
- [Owner: Khushal] Follow up with design team on wireframes
- [Owner: Khushal] Draft experiment brief for onboarding test
- Context: From meeting about FCC Beta launch
Processing:
Categorize each using LNO framework
Add to current date section in notes.md
Preserve context (note source/meeting if relevant)
Apply proper formatting with creation date
Output: Confirmation of items added with LNO classification
Quality Gates
Before completing any notes processing:
Read First: Did I read current notes.md state before modifying?
LNO Categorization: Are all tasks properly categorized by ROI potential?
Honest Assessment: Am I being truthful about leverage vs inflating importance?
Carryforward Accuracy: Did I ONLY carry forward incomplete tasks?
Creation Dates Preserved: Are original creation dates maintained on carried-forward tasks?
Completion Timestamps: Are completion dates added to all finished tasks?
Brain Routing: Did I route brain-specific content appropriately?
Metadata Updated: Is the "Last Updated" timestamp current?
Strategic Alignment: Does this organization serve the user's strategic priorities?
Integration with Shannon
This skill embodies Shannon's core philosophy:
Framework-Driven Thinking
LNO framework provides systematic approach to prioritization
Every task categorization is a trade-off decision
Framework reveals patterns: too much overhead? Need more leverage work.
Shreyas Doshi Quality Standards
Customer-centric logic: Leverage work directly serves customer value creation
Explicit trade-offs: Accepting honest categorization over optimistic inflation
Outcome-focused: LNO ratio shifts toward leverage drive real impact
Framework application: Every task gets systematic ROI assessment
Quality Standards Reference
See .claude/rules/quality-gates.md for full Shannon quality gates.
First Principles
Not all work is equal (fundamental truth)
Time is finite resource requiring allocation strategy
Strategic work gets crowded out without explicit prioritization
