Source triage

Repo-only skill. It lives in this repo's .claude/skills/ so Claude Code auto-loads it whenever you work in Materialize. It's kept out of plugin.json's skills array and marked metadata.internal: true — the skills CLI scans .claude/skills/ directly, so the manifest omission alone isn't enough; the internal flag is what hides it from npx skills add (installable only with INSTALLINTERNALSKILLS=1). It keeps [LOG.md](./LOG.md) — the durable record of every source item we've looked at and what we decided. The point is incremental: each run only triages items not already in the log, so harvesting the watch-list compounds instead of repeating.

Sources. The watch-list is the Inspiration section of README.md — upstream plus every repo we credit or watch (incl. brooks-lint and Claude Code /code-review). LOG.md's ## Sources registry mirrors it as owner/name rows with per-track last synced markers; sync iterates the registry. A row marked credit-only — a deprecated/no-public-repo source, or one we deliberately exclude from harvesting (e.g. a single-domain skill we credit for an idea but never port from) — is an inspiration credit only and is skipped by sync.

Standalone — ideas, not code. Per CLAUDE.md we no longer rebase onto or copy any source. Nothing arrives automatically: a COMPLETED-closed upstream issue or a slick commit in another repo is a candidate idea to reimplement our way, never code we inherit. implement means port the idea, terse and our-style — never paste theirs.

Tracks (per source): Issues (open), Discussions, Closed, and Code (ideas harvested from commits / implementation). All share the verdict vocabulary. Every row cites an exact ref: issues/discussions by #N, code by <sha> path:Lstart-Lend so a later run can re-find it. Discussions skew to watch/skip (ideas without a repro; Q&A / show-and-tell rarely imply a change). Code and Closed are where the richest sources (e.g. a review skill) pay off — work them down incrementally.

Verdicts: new (synced, not yet deliberated), done (ported into our fork), implement (decided to port, not yet done), watch (good idea, needs design or the source may evolve it), skip (not relevant — other tools/platforms, pure discussion, already-have, collides-keep-ours). A row is resolved at done/skip; new/ implement/watch stay in the backlog.

Two flows. "sync"/"reconcile"/"check for new" → Flow 1; "review one"/"what should I port" → Flow 2. The scheduled [glean](../../../docs/routines/glean.md) routine drives both autonomously (sync all, then port from the backlog into a PR). No steer → ask which.

Flow 1 — Sync the list

Pure list maintenance across every source in the ## Sources registry. No deliberation, no code changes.

1. Pull, per source, since its last synced:

- Open issues: gh issue list --repo <owner/name> --state open --limit 100 --json number,title. - Closed issues: gh issue list --repo <owner/name> --state closed --limit 500 --json number,title,stateReason. - Discussions: gh api graphql for the repo's discussions (number, title, category, closed). - Code: gh api repos/<owner/name>/commits since the last code-sync date; capture notable commits as <sha> — subject for examination in Flow 2.

1. Reconcile against [LOG.md](./LOG.md): any item (issue / discussion / closed / commit) not already in that source's track → append a new row with a factual one-line note and its exact ref (#N or <sha>). A logged open issue that's since closed → move to the Closed track, preserving its note. Don't deliberate.
2. Update each source's last synced markers (highest issue number + today's date; latest commit sha).
3. Report the delta per source: new issues / discussions / closed / commits, moves, and the new unresolved count. No fixes here.

Flow 2 — Review one item

1. Pick one unresolved item (new / implement / watch) from any source and any track. Vary across runs — rotate sources and tracks; don't always pick open issues over code or closed. None unresolved → say so, suggest Flow 1.
2. Study it at the source. Issue/discussion → read its body + comments. Code/commit → read the actual diff and the exact path:Lstart-Lend. Map it to a skill/mode we ship (plugin.json + bucket READMEs; items about tools we don't ship are an immediate skip), and grep our modes to see whether we already do it.
3. Assess against our modes — already-have / collides-keep-ours / genuinely-new (materialize's review disprove-before-emit applies: a vague "could be better" isn't a finding). State which skill/mode it touches, whether we already handle it, and a recommended verdict with one-line rationale, citing the exact source ref.
4. Decide. Interactive: ask the user, wait. Autonomous (via glean): port the implement-worthy item.

- Port → reimplement the idea our way (never paste source code), match the target mode's voice, run the [writing-for-agents](../../../skills/productivity/writing-for-agents/SKILL.md) lens, verify (grep / run any repro). Record done with the PR link. - Discard / defer → record skip or watch with the reason.

1. Record the row in its track with the exact ref and verdict. One item per run unless asked for more.