recall

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

recall: the vault answers first

检索（recall）：优先由知识库（vault）作答

The most expensive sentence an AI can say to a founder is "we have no notes on that" when the notes exist. Recall reads before it speaks, cites what it finds by exact file, and admits plainly when the vault is genuinely empty.

  the question
       |
  [ index ]     read index.md first, drill into pages
       |
  [ verify ]    list + grep BEFORE any "nothing on record"
       |
  [ answer ]    cited by file, confidence surfaced
       |
  [ bank ]      a real synthesis goes back into the vault

当相关记录实际存在时，AI对创始人说“我们没有相关记录”是代价极高的错误。检索（recall）技能遵循“先阅读再发言”的原则，会精确引用找到的文件来源，当知识库（vault）确实无相关内容时也会如实告知。

  the question
       |
  [ index ]     read index.md first, drill into pages
       |
  [ verify ]    list + grep BEFORE any "nothing on record"
       |
  [ answer ]    cited by file, confidence surfaced
       |
  [ bank ]      a real synthesis goes back into the vault

Step 0: Preflight

步骤0：预检（Preflight）

Read

${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../CONVENTIONS.md

and run its Universal preflight. A Fresh, Partial, or Wrong-folder result routes to

/co-founder:co-founder-setup

(re-sync for Partial) and stops; an absent vault cannot be searched honestly. On Ready, read the charter's path map.

Done when: the founder system is Ready and the catalog path is known.

读取

${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../CONVENTIONS.md

并执行其中的通用预检流程。若结果为“未就绪（Fresh）”、“部分同步（Partial）”或“路径错误（Wrong-folder）”，则跳转至

/co-founder:co-founder-setup

（若为部分同步则重新同步）并终止流程；若知识库不存在，则无法进行诚实的检索。当系统就绪后，读取章程中的路径映射。

完成标志：创始人系统处于就绪状态，且已明确目录路径。

Step 1: Retrieve

步骤1：检索（Retrieve）

Read

index.md

first: it is the catalog, and it says where to drill. Then read the pages that plausibly bear on the question, plus the matching fixed

hub/<section>.md

. Search wide before answering narrow: the useful lesson is often filed under the channel, the person, or the initiative rather than the topic word.

Done when: every plausibly relevant page has been looked at, not guessed at.

首先读取

index.md

：这是目录文件，指示了深入检索的方向。然后读取可能与问题相关的页面，以及匹配的固定文件

hub/<section>.md

。先广泛搜索再精准回答：有用的经验往往归类于渠道、人员或行动事项，而非直接按主题词归档。

完成标志：已查看所有可能相关的页面，而非仅凭猜测。

Step 2: The absence guard

步骤2：缺失验证机制

Before saying anything shaped like "we have no note on that": list the relevant

wiki/

folders and search the question's key words (and their obvious synonyms) across the vault with whatever the environment has (rg or grep where present, the harness's search or explicit listing plus reading otherwise, per CONVENTIONS). Absence gets VERIFIED, never remembered: answering from memory instead of searching is the single most common way systems like this fail. Genuinely empty: say exactly that, in one line, and offer the research skill to fill it.

Any durable absence statement or queue item records the shared verified-absence fields: paths or corpus, terms and synonyms, date, tool, and result count. Phrase only the scoped result. It can prove what is not recorded in the vault, never what the business or world has never done.

Done when: presence and absence are both grounded in an actual look.

在说出任何类似“我们没有相关记录”的表述前：列出相关的

wiki/

文件夹，并使用环境可用的工具（如有rg或grep则使用，否则按CONVENTIONS中的规定使用 harness 搜索或明确列出并读取内容）在知识库中搜索问题的关键词（及其明显同义词）。缺失状态必须经过验证，而非仅凭记忆：仅靠模型记忆而非实际搜索来回答是这类系统最常见的失误原因。若确实无相关内容：用一句话明确告知，并提供研究技能来补充该空白。

任何持久化的缺失声明或队列条目都需记录共享的已验证缺失字段：路径或语料库、术语及同义词、日期、工具和结果数量。仅表述限定范围的结果。该结果只能证明知识库中未记录相关内容，而非企业或业界从未做过相关事。

完成标志：存在性与缺失性均基于实际核查结果。

Step 3: Answer with receipts

步骤3：附来源作答

Cite the exact file for every claim:
```
wiki/learnings/warm-intro-beats-cold.md
```
, not "our notes." Run the shared durable claim admission gate: reopen the file, verify its current lifecycle and confidence, and quote the exact supporting passage. Trace derived claims to their original inputs. A page that calls a draft approved, or mentions a topic without the claimed evidence, does not pass merely because recall found it.
Surface confidence: a
```
stated
```
claim is repeated as a quote with its source, never as a truth. A
```
low
```
note gets its doubt said out loud.
Read canonical lifecycle fields before using status words. An offer is approved only at
```
offer_state: approved
```
or
```
active
```
; publication exists only at
```
content_state: published
```
with
```
published_at
```
. Contradictory index or hub prose is reported as drift, not repeated as truth.
Cross-file analogies and patterns pass the shared parameter gate. When no admitted receipt states the synthesis, label it
```
Unverified synthesis:
```
and offer the one founder question that could confirm it; rhetoric never upgrades itself into remembered fact.
Ask before you assert: never present a quantity, duration, sample size, date, or causal motive in prose before asking the founder for it or citing a receipt for it.
Notes past their
```
review_after
```
date get flagged as possibly stale.
Feeding another skill (gauntlet, plan, offer): deliver a task-scoped mini-brief, the 5-10 lines that bear on THIS decision, never a vault dump.
Exclude every
```
type: content
```
page from business-fact receipts. Drafts are proposals, and approved/published pieces are publication history, not the source of truth. Use
```
wiki/business/offer.md
```
for the current offer and
```
wiki/business/metrics.md
```
for current numbers.
This is the internal leg of the receipts law; when the question also needs external truth, say so and name research as the other leg.

Done when: the founder can click through to every fact in the answer.

每一项声明都需精确引用文件：例如
```
wiki/learnings/warm-intro-beats-cold.md
```
，而非“我们的记录”。执行共享的持久化声明审核流程：重新打开文件，验证其当前生命周期状态和可信度，并引用精确的支持段落。将衍生声明追溯至其原始输入。若某页面称草稿已获批，或提及某主题但无声称的证据，即使检索到该页面也不能作为依据。
明确可信度：
```
stated
```
（已陈述）的声明需作为引用内容并标注来源，而非当作事实陈述。
```
low
```
（低可信度）的记录需明确说明其存疑之处。
使用状态词前需读取标准生命周期字段。只有当
```
offer_state: approved
```
或
```
active
```
时，方案才算获批；只有当
```
content_state: published
```
且包含
```
published_at
```
字段时，才算发布完成。索引或中心文档中的矛盾表述需报告为偏差，而非当作事实重复。
跨文件的类比和模式需通过共享参数审核。若没有已认可的来源支持该综合结论，需标注为
```
Unverified synthesis:
```
（未验证的综合结论），并提出一个可向创始人确认的问题；推断内容绝不能自行升级为已记录的事实。
先确认再断言： 在陈述数量、时长、样本量、日期或因果动机前，必须先向创始人确认或引用来源。
超过
```
review_after
```
日期的记录需标注为可能已过期。
为其他技能（如gauntlet、plan、offer）提供输入时：交付针对当前决策的迷你简报，即5-10行相关内容，而非整个知识库的内容 Dump。
所有
```
type: content
```
的页面均不得作为业务事实的来源。草稿是提案，已获批/发布的内容是发布历史，而非事实来源。当前方案需使用
```
wiki/business/offer.md
```
，当前数据需使用
```
wiki/business/metrics.md
```
。
这是“来源法则”的内部环节；若问题还需要外部事实，需明确说明并指出研究是另一必要环节。

完成标志：创始人可通过点击链接访问答案中的每一项事实来源。

Step 4: Bank real syntheses

步骤4：留存有效综合结论

A recall that produced genuine new synthesis (a comparison, a pattern across notes, a connection nobody had written down) is itself a finding. Append one pending entry to

queue.md

addressed from recall to steward. The request carries the exact synthesis and the

source_paths

list names every note it came from; recall reads, it never creates the wiki page. Narrate the queue ID in one line. A synthesis that evaporates into chat history has to be paid for again next month. Routine lookups do not get banked; the test is whether the answer contains something no single existing page says.

若检索过程产生了真正的新综合结论（如记录间的对比、跨记录的模式、无人记录过的关联），则该结论本身就是一项发现。需在

queue.md

中添加一条待处理条目，由检索（recall）技能提交给管理员（steward）。该请求需包含精确的综合结论，

source_paths

列表需注明所有来源记录；检索（recall）技能仅负责读取，不负责创建wiki页面。用一句话说明队列ID。若综合结论仅留存于聊天记录中，后续还需重复付出成本。常规检索无需留存；判断标准是答案中是否包含任何单个现有页面未提及的内容。

Mandatory filing gate

强制归档审核

When recall writes a queue item, run
```
scripts/graph-audit queue.md
```
.
Fix every violation and rerun it. The queue item is not durable and no queue ID is narrated until it exits zero. A read-only lookup writes nothing and has no filing gate.

Done when: anything newly true has a durable pending queue ID, and everything else is cited.

当检索技能写入队列条目时，运行
```
scripts/graph-audit queue.md
```
。
修复所有违规项并重新运行。只有当脚本返回零错误时，队列条目才算持久化，才可告知队列ID。只读检索无需写入内容，也无需经过归档审核。

完成标志：所有新增的有效结论都有持久化的待处理队列ID，其他所有内容均已标注来源。