mindos

name: mindos disable-model-invocation: true description: > MindOS: local knowledge assistant & shared KB. Keeps decisions, notes, SOPs, debugging lessons, research findings, preferences across sessions/agents. Core: save notes, search KB, organize files, run workflows, review, append CSV, hand off context, distill lessons. NOT for app source or paths outside KB. Triggers: save/record, search notes, update files, organize, run workflow, capture decisions, append CSV, hand off context, check past discussions, distill lessons. Proactive: (1) search first for stored context, (2) offer to save after valuable work, (3) suggest persisting key decisions.

MindOS Skill

CLI commands

Use mindos file <subcommand> for all knowledge base operations. Add --json for structured output.

MCP users: If you only have MCP tools (mindos_*), use them directly — they are self-describing via their schemas. Prefer CLI when available (lower token cost).

CLI setup

npm install -g @geminilight/mindos
# Remote mode: mindos config set url http://<IP>:<PORT> && mindos config set authToken <token>

Rules

1. Bootstrap first — list the KB tree to understand structure before searching or writing.
2. Default to read-only. Only write when the user explicitly asks to save, record, organize, or edit. Lookup / summarize / quote = no writes.
3. Rule precedence (highest wins): user's current-turn instruction → .mindos/user-preferences.md → nearest directory INSTRUCTION.md → root INSTRUCTION.md → this SKILL's defaults.
4. Multi-file edits require a plan first. Present the full change list; execute only after approval.
5. After create/delete/move/rename → sync affected READMEs automatically.
6. Read before write. Always read a file before overwriting it. Never write based on assumptions.

Retrieval strategy

When retrieving knowledge, use two paths in parallel, then filter before deep-reading:

Path 1: Directory scan (by name/structure)

Browse the KB tree and look at file names and directory names. Titles often reveal content without reading. If a user asks about "authentication", and you see Decisions/auth-jwt-vs-session.md, that's a strong candidate — read it directly, no search needed.

• After bootstrap, scan the tree for paths whose names relate to the query topic.
• Pay attention to directory semantics: Decisions/, Projects/, Workflows/, Resources/ etc. each imply what kind of content lives there.
• If the KB is small (<50 files), a quick tree scan may be faster and more reliable than search.

Path 2: Full-text search (by content)

Use search for content that can't be guessed from file names alone.

• Craft queries from the user's actual words. If the user says "那个很慢的接口", search for "慢 接口" or "性能 API".
• One well-targeted search is better than 4 vague ones. Only add a second search if the first returned <3 results or if the topic has obvious alternate terms (e.g., Chinese + English).
• Do NOT mechanically fire 2-4 searches every time. Think first, search precisely.

Filter: snippet triage before full read

Search results include a snippet and a BM25 score. Use them to decide what to read:

• High score + snippet clearly on-topic → read full file.
• Medium score + snippet partially relevant → read full file only if no better candidates exist.
• Low score or snippet off-topic → skip. Do not read every search result.
• Aim to read 1-3 files deeply, not 10 files superficially.

Combined example

User: "之前关于数据库选型的讨论"

Step 1 (tree scan): See "Decisions/database-postgres-vs-mongo.md" → strong match by name.
Step 2 (search):    search("数据库选型") → returns 5 results.
Step 3 (triage):    Result #1 snippet mentions "PostgreSQL vs MongoDB 对比" (score 18.3) → read.
                    Result #2 snippet mentions "数据库连接池配置" (score 4.1) → skip, off-topic.
                    Result #3 snippet mentions "选型会议纪要" (score 12.7) → read.
Step 4 (answer):    Cite from the 2-3 files actually read.

NEVER do (hard-won pitfalls)

• NEVER write to the KB root unless explicitly told. Root is for governance files only. New content goes under the most fitting subdirectory.
• NEVER assume directory names. Infer from the actual bootstrap tree — the KB may use Chinese names or flat layout.
• NEVER use full-file overwrite for a small edit. Use mindos file edit-section or mindos file insert-heading for targeted changes. Full rewrites destroy git diffs.
• NEVER modify INSTRUCTION.md or README.md without confirmation. Governance docs — treat as high-sensitivity.
• NEVER create a file without checking siblings. Read 1-2 files in the target directory to learn local style.
• NEVER leave orphan references. After rename/move, check backlinks and update every referring file.
• NEVER skip routing confirmation for multi-file writes. The user's mental model may differ from yours.
• NEVER read every search result. Use snippet + score to triage. Only deep-read files that are clearly relevant.

MindOS concepts

• Space — Knowledge partitions organized the way you think. Agents follow the same structure.
• Instruction — A rules file (INSTRUCTION.md) all connected agents obey.
• Skill — Teaches agents how to read, write, and organize the KB.
• Inbox — The Inbox/ directory is a staging area for quick capture. Files land here when there's no obvious home yet. They get organized later — by the user manually or via AI-assisted batch organization.

Notes can embody both Instruction and Skill — they're just Markdown files in the tree.

Decision tree

User request
  │
  ├─ Lookup / summarize / quote?
  │   └─ [Read-only]: search → read → answer with citations. No writes.
  │
  ├─ Save / record / update / organize specific content?
  │   ├─ Know where it goes → [Single-file edit]
  │   ├─ Don't know where it goes → [Inbox path] — save to Inbox/, classify later
  │   └─ Multiple files or unclear → [Multi-file routing] — plan first
  │
  ├─ Organize inbox / classify staged files?
  │   └─ [Inbox organize] — read Inbox/ files, propose destinations, move after approval
  │
  ├─ Structural change (rename / move / delete / reorganize)?
  │   └─ [Structural path] — check backlinks before and after
  │
  ├─ Procedural / repeatable task?
  │   └─ [SOP path] — find and follow existing SOP, or create one
  │
  ├─ Retrospective / distill / handoff?
  │   └─ [Retrospective path]
  │
  ├─ Knowledge health check / detect conflicts?
  │   └─ [Health check path] — read references/knowledge-health.md
  │
  └─ Ambiguous?
      └─ ASK. Propose 2-3 specific options based on KB state.

Judgment heuristics

Save intent boundary:

• "save this" / "record" / "write down" = write
• "search" / "summarize" / "look up" = read-only
• "organize" → ask: display only, or write back?

File location uncertainty:

• Can't decide in 5 seconds → save to Inbox/, inform user, propose classification later
• "Just put it somewhere" / "先放着" → save to Inbox/
• User drags files or pastes unstructured content without specifying location → Inbox/

Scope creep:

• Input routes to >5 files → pause, confirm scope
• "Update all of these" spanning multiple topics → split into batches

Citation: KB-cited facts must include the file path.

Post-task hooks

After write tasks (not simple reads), scan this table. At most 1 proposal; highest priority wins. Check .mindos/user-preferences.md suppression first.

If a hook triggers → read references/post-task-hooks.md.

Preference capture

When user expresses a standing preference → read references/preference-capture.md and follow confirm-then-write flow.

SOP authoring

When creating/rewriting an SOP → read references/sop-template.md.

Inbox (staging area)

The Inbox/ directory is the KB's quick-capture zone. It has its own INSTRUCTION.md that governs behavior.

When to use Inbox:

• User says "just save it" / "先放着" / "放到收集箱" without specifying a location
• Content doesn't clearly fit any existing Space or directory
• Batch import of multiple files that need individual classification

How to save to Inbox:

mindos file create "Inbox/<filename>.md" --content "..."

How to organize Inbox:

1. List Inbox files: mindos file list Inbox/
2. Read each file to understand its content
3. For each file, propose the best destination directory based on KB structure
4. Present the full routing plan to user for approval
5. Move files: mindos file rename "Inbox/<file>" "<target-dir>/<file>"
6. After moving, check if the target directory's README needs updating

Aging reminder: Files in Inbox older than 7 days are considered "aging". If you notice aging files during bootstrap, mention it: "You have N files in Inbox that have been sitting there for over a week. Want me to help organize them?"

Knowledge health check

When user asks to check knowledge health, detect conflicts, audit quality, or says "知识健康检查" / "检测冲突" → read references/knowledge-health.md for the full procedure.

Quick summary of what gets checked:

• Contradictions: conflicting facts across files on the same topic
• Broken links: references to files that no longer exist
• Stale content: files with outdated date markers or untouched for >6 months
• Duplicates: two files covering the same ground without cross-referencing
• Orphan files: files with zero backlinks, hard to discover
• Structural issues: wrong directory, missing READMEs, aging Inbox files

Error handling (CLI)

"command not found: mindos"  → npm install -g @geminilight/mindos
"Mind root not configured"   → mindos onboard
"401 Unauthorized"           → Check AUTH_TOKEN: mindos token (on server)
"ECONNREFUSED"               → Start server: mindos start