Skip to content
Skill Authoring
Skill

/rederive

This skill should be used when a contributor names a skill whose Lean contract is to be re-derived — a core protocol, or a utility skill whose formal block is or becomes Lean — or invokes /rederive. Runs the per-skill flow: gather the pre-understanding, derive the skill's

BOOST
From plugin
epistemic-protocols
17427 skills
Install
$ npx -y skills add jongwony/epistemic-protocols --skill rederive --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/rederive

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

This skill should be used when a contributor names a skill whose Lean contract is to be re-derived — a core protocol, or a utility skill whose formal block is or becomes Lean — or invokes /rederive. Runs the per-skill flow: gather the pre-understanding, derive the skill's

SKILL.md

rederive.SKILL.md
name: rederive
description: "This skill should be used when a contributor names a skill whose Lean contract is to be re-derived — a core protocol, or a utility skill whose formal block is or becomes Lean — or invokes /rederive. Runs the per-skill flow: gather the pre-understanding, derive the skill's epistemic solution and fuse it with the contributor's horizon, then read the current contract against it, through sketch, edit, dogfood, review, merge, the chart close and a retrospective on this skill. Project-local contributor tooling."
allowed-tools: Bash, Read, Grep, Glob, Agent, Skill

Re-derive a protocol contract

One skill per run, whose formal block is Lean or becomes Lean in the run: a core protocol in `scripts/load-protocols.js` `CANONICAL_PROTOCOL_SET`, or a utility skill in `LEAN_CONTRACT_UTILITIES` there, which a utility still carrying a text-DSL block enters in its run. Below, *the protocol* names that skill whichever kind it is. The object is the protocol itself — its `SKILL.md` on `origin/main`; an open PR whose branch carries the chart id, where one exists, is one more piece of material, never the anchor. Anchor chart: the protocol's own `ROO-*` chart, which for a utility may be one chart several skills' runs share; suite-wide ground: ROO-67.

**What a re-derivation answers to.** The target is the morphism that the `AGENTS.md` Northstar and the premise axiom Context and Utterance as First-Class Ground (`premise/recognition-and-authority.md`) admit, in the form `lean/EpistemicProtocols/Ground.lean` fixes: the fused context — turns bound to who sent them — and the person's utterance are the ground; the structure fixes only what the harness knows; everything else is the model's inference, declared as a documented judgment inside the types. The solution is derived from the gathered pre-understanding and taken at the fusion gate before the current contract is read; the pre-Lean DSL, the current block, any open PR and earlier decides are evidence read against that solution, never the target.

Steps

1. **Trigger** — a contributor names the protocol. Resolve its chart; where the protocol's earlier chart is Done, open a new chart linked to it and to ROO-67 (ROO-67 decide 5e64392d). The order across protocols is the contributor's and session-local; nothing here fixes it. 2. **Gather the pre-understanding** — afresh every run, since what it holds moves between runs:

  • Ground: the Northstar, the premise axiom above, `Ground.lean`, and the protocol's declared deficit and resolution type — its Type line and Definition only, not the formal block; the fusion gate may revise them.
  • Decide coordinates: both charts' decide comments, the protocol chart's Open questions and its related issues; a later decide that supersedes an earlier one says so (ROO-67 decide 78e615b4).
  • Literature: delegate to a subagent — primary sources on the cognitive deficit this protocol takes and the resolution it yields; where a source's setting differs from the one the protocol runs in, the claim names that transfer. Every claim carries its verification strength and names the weakest link (`AGENTS.md` §Settled Directions, Academic grounding).
  • Definition history: for each suite-level definition the protocol's contract leans on — the COMPOSITION operator, a GROUND term, a convention another surface states for it — the commit that introduced it and each later commit that narrowed or widened it, in the definition itself and at the places this contract uses it (`git log -L` on the definition, `git blame`, `git log -S` on its terms at each use site), read as the intent the current text carries forward.
  • Real use: `~/.claude/projects/*/*.jsonl` sessions where the skill ran — typed by the contributor or invoked through its delivery path (exclude `-private-tmp*`); what the deficit looked like there, and where the run went wrong or right. Where the skill runs rarely by nature, its sessions leave little; the commit history of the artifact its deficit is resolved in — each time that deficit came up and was resolved, by this skill or another route — is the real use read instead.

3. **Derive the solution** — the protocol's epistemic solution, from the gathered material, not from the current block: deficit → resolution, first stated as its solution sentence, one sentence of what the person can then say or recognize — the repair direction every later finding is read against; the coordinates only the person fills, the closure kinds, the domain boundary — what the transformation itself carries and what lies past its hand-off, which the contract names at its delegation point and does not prescribe (ROO-67 decide dad26302) —, and the conditions that hold only where a ground carries them — Northstar, premise, literature, the contributor's utterance, a decide, or observed use; any other morphism step is scaffolding, carried as guidance on a documented judgment (ROO-67 decide 0d3b1e3b). Each part names what grounds it. A shape carried from a sibling protocol's re-derivation is pre-understanding: each carried clause, constructor, or slot is tested against this protocol's deficit and governing surfaces before it enters the solution.

  • Independent derivation: `/codex-plus:codex` with an English prompt carrying the locations of the gathered material, the literature findings as a file, and the question this step answers — never this session's solution; it may read beyond the list. Compare the two derivations part by part.

4. **Fusion gate** — present the derived solution beside the ground of each part, its domain boundary among them, where the independent derivation agrees and splits, the real-use reading, the contrary grounds and live alternatives with their consequences, and the limits of what was searched. Branches:

  • the contributor takes it → write the solution decide on the protocol chart (`/unfold decide`) and go to the reading step;
  • the contributor corrects or replaces part of it → fuse the
Read more
Ships withepistemic-protocols

한국어 When AI collaboration goes off-track, you redo everything. These protocols bring the decisions that set the direction to you early — often at the plan level, before a wrong one hardens into code or other downstream work — and leave each one yours to

Get the whole plugin
Stats
174
Stars
15
Forks
Active
Maintenance
JavaScript
Language
MIT
License
5h ago
Last commit
10mo ago
Created
1d ago
Added

Repo: jongwony/epistemic-protocols

Other skills on epistemic-protocols.