Agent Skill design knowledge base — mechanisms, philosophy, patterns, pitfalls. Use when: designing new skills, reviewing skill quality, or deciding whether something should be a skill.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Persistent vector memory for Claude Code via LanceDB. Use when: remembering across sessions, storing lessons, recalling past decisions, maintaining context continuity. Tools: memory_store, memory_recall, memory_update, memory_forget, memory_merge.
インストール方法を見るインストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Long-term memory that persists across sessions. Store facts, decisions, lessons, preferences — recall them later via semantic search.
Vector memory is a retrieval layer, not a source of truth. Files and code are the source of truth; vector memory helps you find relevant context fast.
| Signal | Category | Example |
|---|---|---|
| User states a preference | preference | "I prefer tabs over spaces" |
| A fact is established | fact | "The API uses OAuth 2.0 with PKCE" |
| A decision is made with rationale | decision | "Chose PostgreSQL over MongoDB because..." |
| A mistake was made and corrected | lesson | "CSS not applying → check for syntax errors above" |
| An important entity is introduced | entity | "Acme Corp is the client, contact: jane@acme.com" |
| A reusable technique is learned | skill | "Remotion animations use interpolate()" |
memory_recall first to avoid duplicates| When | Action |
|---|---|
| Session start | memory_recall with keywords from user's first message |
| After a decision | memory_store with category decision |
| After a mistake | memory_store × 2 — dual-layer (see below) |
| Tool fails / error occurs | memory_recall first — you may have hit this before |
| Session end | Review: any new facts, decisions, or lessons worth persisting? |
When a tool fails or you encounter an error, search memory before retrying. You may have solved this exact problem before:
memory_recall(query: "npm install native module EPERM Windows")
This one habit prevents repeating the same mistakes across sessions.
Every mistake or lesson learned gets stored twice:
# Layer 1: Technical fact (what happened)
memory_store(
text: "npm publish with noEmit: true ships no dist/ — bin entry fails in npx",
category: "fact",
importance: 0.8
)
# Layer 2: Actionable rule (what to do next time)
memory_store(
text: "Always build to dist/ before npm publish, never rely on runtime transpilers for published packages",
category: "lesson",
importance: 0.9,
lesson_trigger: "publishing npm packages with TypeScript",
lesson_rule: "always build to dist/ before publish",
lesson_principle: "published packages must be self-contained"
)
Why two? Different queries find different layers. "Why did publish fail?" hits the fact. "How should I publish TypeScript?" hits the lesson.
| Meaning | Category | Importance | Typical use |
|---|---|---|---|
| User preference | preference | 0.8 | "I prefer TypeScript" |
| Objective fact | fact | 0.7–0.8 | "The API uses LanceDB for vector storage" |
| Decision with rationale | decision | 0.85 | "Chose LanceDB because it's embedded, no server needed" |
| Entity info | entity | 0.7 | "DeepInfra is the embedding provider" |
| Technique or method | skill | 0.8 | "Use interpolate() for Remotion animations" |
| Lesson from mistakes | lesson | 0.85–0.9 | With trigger/rule/principle fields |
| Other | other | 0.5–0.7 | Doesn't fit above categories |
| Score | When |
|---|---|
| 0.3–0.5 | Nice to know, low impact |
| 0.5–0.7 | Useful context (default: 0.7) |
| 0.7–0.85 | Important decision or recurring pattern |
| 0.85–1.0 | Critical — wrong action has serious consequences |
The Category Reference above gives default importance values. Adjust based on how confident the memory is:
| Confidence | Importance | Tier | When to use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Explicitly stated | 0.9 | core | User directly said "I want X", team decision, preference confirmed multiple times |
| Verified in practice | 0.7–0.8 | working | Learned from a mistake, technical fact verified by implementation |
| Exploratory | 0.4–0.5 | peripheral | One-time question, hypothesis under discussion, unconfirmed direction |
Rule of thumb: How many times has this come up?
coreworkingperipheralMemories can be scoped for multi-agent or multi-project setups:
| Format | Use case |
|---|---|
global | Shared across all agents/projects |
agent:<id> | Agent-private (default) |
project:<id> | Project-scoped |
user:<id> | User-scoped |
memory_store(text: "...", scope: "project:acme")
memory_recall(query: "...", scope: "project:acme")
memory_store(text: "...", category: "fact", importance: 0.7)
memory_recall(query: "database migration strategy", category: "decision", limit: 5)
Good queries describe the situation, not the exact stored text. Vector search finds semantic matches.
memory_update(memoryId: "a0e8d0fb", text: "Updated: now using OAuth 2.1")
For preference and entity, text changes create a new version (supersede) — history is preserved.
memory_merge(primaryId: "a0e8d0fb", secondaryId: "3c31e862", mergedText: "Combined memory")
memory_forget(memoryId: "a0e8d0fb")
memory_forget(query: "outdated migration plan")
memory_history(memoryId: "a0e8d0fb", direction: "both")
Requires @cablate/memory-lancedb-mcp — see mcp.example.json for configuration.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Agent Skill design knowledge base — mechanisms, philosophy, patterns, pitfalls. Use when: designing new skills, reviewing skill quality, or deciding whether something should be a skill.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Claude Code 專案配置審計。觸發:review/優化 CLAUDE.md、skills、settings、定期清洗累積內容、新專案上線前檢查。
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Agent 配置設計指南 — 基於 Claude Code 6 個 built-in agent 的逆向分析。Use when: 設計新 agent、優化現有 agent prompt、決定工具/模型配置、撰寫 dispatch prompt。
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
AI Agent 成本工程 — 基於 Claude Code 的成本追蹤、prompt cache 最佳化、token 預算控制逆向分析。Use when: 優化 token 消耗、設計成本控制機制、分析 cache 效率、選擇模型配置。
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Harness Engineering 設計模式 — 基於 Claude Code 原始碼逆向分析的 12 條可遷移原則。Use when: 設計 agent 系統架構、實作 tool orchestration、設計 context 管理策略、建構 agent loop。
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
System Prompt 工程 — 基於 Claude Code 914 行系統提示詞的逆向分析。Use when: 撰寫 system prompt、設計 prompt 動態組裝、最佳化 prompt cache 效率、撰寫安全指令。
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。