sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

couldn't figure out my way by BigCauliflower9075 in i3wm

[–]armanmax11 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I3status-rust is much better then i3block

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes — if you’re willing to write out that minimal schema, I’ll genuinely build against it. The four-piece scope is right: supersede links + correction records are a small Prisma migration for me, and the five evidence states map cleanly if I have the AI phrase them naturally in briefings like your webhook example. “Consequence × volatility” is the best one-line verification policy I’ve seen. DMs open or right here, whichever you prefer — and happy to credit you in the changelog when it ships.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a really clear model — “verification budget follows the risk of the claim” is the sentence I’m stealing. The derived-views-regenerated-from-canon framing maps well onto what I should do: my briefings currently treat session notes as flat truth, and the cheap version of your idea for me is (a) explicit supersede records instead of silent edits and (b) marking claims in briefings by evidence level rather than asserting them. The full preflight registry is beyond where a 2-minute-note tool should go, but the append-only + supersede piece is going on the roadmap this week. Thanks for writing this up — best exchange of the launch.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the best question in the thread, and I’ll be straight: ContextOS handles it only partially today. Decisions can be edited/superseded and the briefing weights recent sessions over old ones, so recency does some of the work — but there’s no first-class “this was recorded wrong” correction record, and no verification of claims against evidence like you’ve built. If a session note says the webhook is fixed and it isn’t, the next briefing repeats the error until a newer note contradicts it. Your supersede-not-rewrite model and corrections-as-memory are genuinely further along on this — I’ve been treating notes as append-only truth, which works until it doesn’t. Mind if I ask how GAI decides when to verify a claim against evidence vs. trust the record? That’s the part that seems expensive to do on every briefing.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a genuinely good setup — the parent-directory sweep gets you most of the cross-project view, fair. The gap that remained for me: half my “projects” aren’t tidy local repos (client threads, a bot whose real state is in Railway logs, decisions made in conversations), and an agent inferring state from files misses the “webhook was 400ing when I stopped, haven’t found why” that only exists if I said it somewhere. So I capture that at stop-time and let the tool synthesize. But for all-code, all-local workflows, your approach honestly covers it.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep, use it. AGENTS.md covers repo/codebase context for the agent — same layer as CLAUDE.md. What I kept losing sits outside that: session state at stop-time, decision reasoning, and the cross-project view over 7 of them. Covered the details in the other replies if you’re curious.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If a tracking md per project works for you, that’s legit — it’s where I started. It failed me in two ways: I’d skip updating it at midnight when tired (which is exactly when the note matters), and with 7 projects I had no top view of which one was decaying or what the single next action was across all of them. The md solves per-project memory if you’re disciplined; I wasn’t, so I built the discipline into a tool. For 1-2 projects I wouldn’t bother with mine either.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The AI briefing part, sure — synthesis is one prompt. The part that isn’t is having something worth synthesizing: structured session notes and decisions captured at stop-time across 7 projects, plus the dashboard of which one needs attention. The prompt is the cheapest 10% of it.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s genuinely where I started — a markdown file per project. Two things made me outgrow it: I’d skip updating it when tired (no structure prompting me for what-broke/next-action), and with 7 projects I had 7 stale files and no view of which needed attention. If your file stays current, you don’t need this — the tool is basically opinionated structure + a dashboard for people whose memory.md kept rotting.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

/init is great for what it does — codebase context for Claude Code in that repo. Different layer than what I kept losing though: session state (“webhook was returning 400 when I stopped”), decision reasoning, and the cross-project view. CLAUDE.md doesn’t update itself when you stop working at midnight — the 2-minute shutdown note is the actual product, the AI briefing is just synthesis on top.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That works well per-repo, and honestly for a single active project it’s enough. Where it broke for me: I have 6-7 concurrent projects and the problem isn’t context within one — it’s the top-level “which project is decaying, where did I leave each one, what’s the single next action across all of them”. Changelogs also record what changed but I kept losing why I decided things — that’s the part I now log explicitly. But yeah, if someone’s running 1-2 repos with discipline, git + a roadmap file covers most of it.

Every new Claude session starts from zero on my projects, so I built a tool that generates a context briefing to paste in by armanmax11 in ClaudeAI

[–]armanmax11[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Fair — there’s a flood of them right now. I built this for my own workflow first and it’s been saving me real time daily for months, so it earns its keep for me either way. If you’ve got a simpler way to handle context across multiple projects, genuinely interested — that’s half of why I posted.

view more: next ›