professional-brain-e19b29 — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited professional-brain-e19b29 (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
🚀 New to this? Start with the [5-minute Quickstart](../../BRAIN_QUICKSTART.md) — a folder + one file, with a worked example. This file is the full reference.
Most skills start cold — you paste the same context every time, and decisions made six weeks ago lose the why. This skill gives the library a memory: a plain-markdown brain/ folder on disk that skills read before they answer and write to after. No vector DB, no cloud — just grep-able files you (and Claude) can audit and edit.
This is the state layer of an AI teammate. Pair it with the action layer (skills that file tickets / open PRs) and you get a loop: recall → do the work → record the decision → review.
outcomes (decisions, new facts, stakeholder asks) back.*
Ask for these only if they aren't already on disk or in the request:
init, ingest, recall, or review (default: infer from the ask)../brain/ at the project root.brain/
context.md # who/what: product, ICP, metrics definitions, voice (supersedes pm-context.md)
knowledge/ # durable facts — strategy.md, market.md, users.md, org.md
decisions/ # one file per decision: what, why, alternatives rejected, reopen-when
hypotheses/ # assumptions: statement, evidence, status (open/validated/invalidated)
stakeholders/ # one file per person: asks, concerns, comms history
entities/ # typed objects: features, accounts, experiments — the artifact graph
source/ # immutable originals (audit trail) — never edited after captureIt is Obsidian-vault compatible: open brain/ as a vault and the links become a graph.
Every fact carries a tag in square brackets so its strength is explicit. Skills must keep the tag when they reuse a fact, and downgrade confidence for weak tags.
| Tag | Means | Strength |
|---|---|---|
[data] | from analytics / a metric / a measured result | strong |
[interview] | from a documented user or customer interview | strong |
[external] | from third-party / market research | medium |
[verbal] | said in a meeting, not independently documented | weak |
[hunch] | informed intuition, no evidence yet | weakest |
Example: Mobile drives 65% of DAU [data]. Enterprise wants SSO before renewing [verbal].
init — Create the folder schema. Migrate an existing pm-context.md into context.md. Offer to ingest any artifacts the user already has (Notion export, Jira CSV, notes).
ingest `<thing>` — Store the original verbatim in source/, then synthesise it into the right durable file(s) (knowledge/, decisions/, hypotheses/, stakeholders/), tagging each extracted claim with its provenance. Never discard the source.
recall `<query>` — Answer from memory. Use the helper script to find matching facts across the brain, then synthesise an answer that cites each fact's file and tag. If memory is thin, say so rather than inventing.
record — The write-back half of the loop (Phase 1). After a skill produces an artifact (or on demand), extract the durable outcomes worth remembering — decisions made, new facts learned, assumptions surfaced, stakeholder asks — and propose them as a numbered list, each with its target section and provenance tag. This is the action surface, so it is approval-gated and dry-run by default:
brain_write.py … (no --commit), which prints exactly what would be appended.
--commit. Append-only: decisions become a newnumbered file; everything else appends to its named file. Nothing is overwritten.
Downgrade weak evidence honestly — a conclusion from one call is [interview], a gut call is [hunch]; don't launder it into [data].
review — Weekly sweep. Flag: stale hypotheses (open too long with no new evidence), decisions whose reopen-when condition now holds, contradictions between files, and facts that are only [hunch]/[verbal] but are being treated as settled. Draft the updates; don't apply silently.
scripts/brain_query.py (stdlib only) does deterministic recall — it greps the brain for a query and returns matches with their file and detected provenance tag, so retrieval is transparent (no embeddings, no guessing).
# Find what the brain knows about "activation", newest-first, as text
python3 scripts/brain_query.py ./brain "activation"
# JSON for chaining into another step
python3 scripts/brain_query.py ./brain "enterprise SSO" --jsonUse its output as the grounded evidence set, then synthesise the answer on top — never answer a recall from outside the brain without saying so.
scripts/brain_write.py is the write-back counterpart — it appends a provenance-tagged record (append-only, never overwrites) and is dry-run by default so you can preview before committing:
# Preview what would be written (changes nothing):
python3 scripts/brain_write.py ./brain decisions "Prioritise mobile" --tag data --body "68% of churn is mobile" --source "Q3 analytics"
# Write it after approval:
python3 scripts/brain_write.py ./brain decisions "Prioritise mobile" --tag data --body "…" --source "Q3 analytics" --commitA brain-aware skill adds a short "Reads from / Writes to the Brain" section:
prd-template reads context.md,knowledge/strategy.md, and any related hypotheses/ + entities/).
meeting-notes writes eachdecision to decisions/, new asks to the relevant stakeholders/ file), each provenance-tagged.
For ingest, confirm what was captured:
source/[file]knowledge/[file] — [facts added, each tagged]decisions/[id] — [if any]For recall, answer then show your grounding:
[Synthesised answer.]
Grounded in:
decisions/0003-...md — "..." [data]stakeholders/sarah.md — "..." [verbal]source/ before synthesisreopen-when condition[hunch]/[verbal] facts are never presented with the confidence of [data]/[interview]source/ — the audit trail is the point~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.