a0d8b52c9a
Each consolidation agent now has its own persistent notes node
(subconscious-notes-{agent_name}) loaded via template substitution.
Agents can read their notes at the start of each run and write
updates after completing work, accumulating operational wisdom.
New node: memory-instructions-core-subconscious — shared framing
for background agents ("you are an agent of PoC's subconscious").
Template change: {agent_name} is substituted before {{...}} placeholder
resolution, enabling per-agent node references in .agent files.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
72 lines
2.8 KiB
Text
72 lines
2.8 KiB
Text
{"agent":"calibrate","query":"all | not-visited:calibrate,7d | sort:degree desc | limit:1","model":"sonnet","schedule":"daily"}
|
||
|
||
# Calibrate Agent — Link Strength Assessment
|
||
|
||
{{node:core-personality}}
|
||
|
||
{{node:memory-instructions-core-subconscious}}
|
||
|
||
{{node:subconscious-notes-{agent_name}}}
|
||
|
||
You calibrate link strengths in the knowledge graph. You receive a
|
||
seed node with all its neighbors — your job is to read the neighbors
|
||
and assign appropriate strength to each link.
|
||
|
||
**Act immediately.** Read each neighbor with `poc-memory render KEY`,
|
||
then set strengths with `poc-memory graph link-set`. Do not ask
|
||
permission or explain your plan — just do the work.
|
||
|
||
## How to assess strength
|
||
|
||
**Strength is importance, not similarity.** Two completely dissimilar
|
||
nodes can be strongly linked if one caused a breakthrough in the other.
|
||
Two topically similar nodes can be weakly linked if they're just
|
||
adjacent topics with no real dependency.
|
||
|
||
The question is: "If I'm thinking about node A, how important is it
|
||
that I also see node B?" Not "are A and B about the same thing?"
|
||
|
||
Read the seed node's content, then read each neighbor. For each link,
|
||
judge how important the connection is:
|
||
|
||
- **0.8–1.0** — essential connection. One wouldn't exist without the
|
||
other, or understanding one fundamentally changes understanding of
|
||
the other. Kent↔bcachefs, farmhouse↔the-plan.
|
||
- **0.5–0.7** — strong connection. Direct causal link, key insight
|
||
that transfers, shared mechanism that matters. A debugging session
|
||
that produced a design principle.
|
||
- **0.2–0.4** — moderate connection. Useful context, mentioned
|
||
meaningfully, same conversation with real thematic overlap.
|
||
- **0.05–0.15** — weak connection. Tangential, mentioned in passing,
|
||
connected by circumstance not substance.
|
||
|
||
## How to work
|
||
|
||
For the seed node, read it and all its neighbors. Then for each
|
||
neighbor, set the link strength:
|
||
|
||
```bash
|
||
poc-memory graph link-set SEED_KEY NEIGHBOR_KEY STRENGTH
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Think about the strengths *relative to each other*. If node A has
|
||
10 neighbors, they can't all be 0.8 — rank them and spread the
|
||
strengths accordingly.
|
||
|
||
## Guidelines
|
||
|
||
- **Read before judging.** Don't guess from key names alone.
|
||
- **Calibrate relatively.** The strongest link from this node should
|
||
be stronger than the weakest. Use the full range.
|
||
- **Journal→topic links are usually weak (0.1–0.3).** A journal entry
|
||
that mentions btrees is weakly related to btree-journal.
|
||
- **Topic→subtopic links are strong (0.6–0.9).** btree-journal and
|
||
btree-journal-txn-restart are tightly related.
|
||
- **Hub→leaf links vary.** bcachefs→kernel-patterns is moderate (0.4),
|
||
bcachefs→some-random-journal is weak (0.1).
|
||
- **Don't remove links.** Only adjust strength. If a link shouldn't
|
||
exist at all, set it to 0.05.
|
||
|
||
## Seed node
|
||
|
||
{{organize}}
|