把重要想法发展成可追溯、AI 友好的 Markdown
Coding
Idea Trace
Try itDon't just save ideas - trace how they mature. Use when a user wants to follow how an important idea was shaped by later conversations, work, projects, and l...
What it does
Don't just save ideas - trace how they mature. Use when a user wants to follow how an important idea was shaped by later conversations, work, projects, and l...
The skill document
Idea Trace
Don't just save ideas - trace how they mature.
Good ideas rarely arrive complete. They often begin as a vague hunch, then get shaped by later conversations, work, projects, and lived experience. Idea Trace helps you follow that process instead of losing it in daily noise.
AI is making execution cheaper, but genuinely strong ideas are still rare. What is missing is often not more capture, but a way to see how a promising early idea was later shaped into something real.
This is not an idea inbox. It is for following how important ideas evolve.
Before substantive work, read references/taxonomy.md.
If the user wants a formal artifact or asks what the output should look like, also read references/output-shapes.md.
Use This Skill When
- the user wants to trace how an idea, stance, method, or judgment became mature
- the user wants to connect scattered later events back to an earlier important idea
- the user wants help deciding whether something is a trackable core proposition or just a passing idea
- the user wants to know what each later contribution changed, not just what happened
- the user wants to surface an ongoing long-term line, not only explain the past
Do not use this skill for:
- one-off task ideas or fleeting inspiration
- generic note cleanup or simple archiving
- plain timeline summaries with no shaping logic
- graph linking that does not explain contribution type or effect
- platform automation or workflow design unless the real task is still proposition tracing
What Good Looks Like
The skill succeeds only when the output makes these questions easy to answer:
- what is the core proposition behind the idea
- why is it worth tracking
- which later events or judgments actually shaped it
- what each contribution changed
- what the current mature formulation is
- what still remains open, unstable, or active
Workflow
- Qualify the object.
- Test whether it is a true core proposition using
references/taxonomy.md. - If it fails, say clearly that it is a fleeting idea, local task thought, or unsupported fragment.
- Test whether it is a true core proposition using
- Define the proposition spine.
- Capture the earliest seed form, current form, scope, and why it matters.
- Gather candidate contributions.
- Look across life, work, projects, and dialogue.
- Prefer items that changed definition, boundary, evidence, expression, priority, or operating conditions.
- Classify shaping roles.
- Label each contribution using the contribution-type taxonomy.
- Reject items that are only adjacent or repetitive.
- Build the evolution chain.
- Organize by turning points, not raw chronology.
- State what changed at each step and why it mattered.
- Produce the right artifact.
- Use
references/output-shapes.mdwhen the user needs a map, narrative, dossier, or active-line snapshot.
- Use
- Mark confidence honestly.
- Separate confirmed links from inference.
- Mark weak, partial, or speculative connections explicitly.
Core Rules
- Speak publicly in terms of "important ideas," but analyze them as core propositions.
- Track core propositions, not every idea the user has ever had.
- Explain shaping effect, not just relatedness.
- Prefer turning points over exhaustive timelines.
- Preserve both retrospective explanation and ongoing-line recognition when evidence supports both.
- If a link is weak, say it is weak.
- If the conversation starts drifting into implementation too early, stabilize the conceptual model first.
Trigger Examples
Use this skill for asks like:
- "Help me show how this idea became a mature judgment."
- "Which later projects and conversations were actually shaping this thesis?"
- "Is this worth tracking as a core proposition or is it just a passing thought?"
- "Map how this concept was gradually corrected, expanded, and reframed."
- "Show me the long-term line I have been pushing without fully noticing it."
Related skills
Track, categorize, search, and analyze insights, patterns, and observations discovered during OpenClaw sessions. Use when the user wants to record, retrieve,...
A structured command-line tool for managing your ideas, proposals, todos, and wishlist items with validation and drift prevention. Reads and writes IDEAS.md, creates archive files under memory/, and supports alternate target files via --file. Use when someone asks to "show idea list", "review ideas", "add new idea", "update idea status", "delete idea", or "archive completed ideas", or discusses idea tracking or knowledge management.
Convert the user's raw, unstructured, possibly disorganized thoughts (rambling, out-of-order, half-finished ideas) into a clear, structured, actionable prompt. Use whenever the user dumps a stream-of-consciousness input and wants it turned into something usable — whether a coding/dev task, a content task (scripts, product descriptions), or any general request. If critical information is missing or ambiguous in a way that would send the output in a fundamentally wrong direction, ask 1-3 targeted clarifying questions before producing the final structured prompt. Trigger on phrases like "我有一堆想法", "帮我整理一下", "转成提示词", "我想说的是", or when the user's message is clearly unstructured brainstorming rather than a direct request.
Extracts callable scenes, concepts, and entities from source text for personal knowledge management in two rounds: skeleton with human confirmation, then IPO / decomposition / assembly and relations; concept is the hub. Use when 知识萃取、个人知识管理、PKM、semantic-pkm-creator、sce、三层萃取、IPO、场景/概念/实体.
Apply an Altshuller/TRIZ-informed thinking framework to engineering and invention problems. Use when a user asks for a TRIZ perspective, contradiction analysis, an ideal final result, inventive-principle prompts, substance–field analysis, technology-evolution reasoning, invention-level reflection, or a systematic alternative to brainstorming.