Extract Workflow from Session

Why This Skill Exists

Sessions produce breakthroughs — an agent figures out how to communicate intent correctly, or discovers a methodology that finally produces output the person can validate instantly. But that methodology lives in the session's context. When the context gets compacted, the breakthrough is reduced to a summary. The next agent reads "use /speak-human" but doesn't know the specific corrections that made it work. The quality degrades back to the baseline.

This skill exists to capture the exact methodology — including the person's verbatim corrections as quality gates — into a permanent, reproducible workflow that any future agent can invoke and get the same quality output.

The Sequence

When invoked, run these steps in order. Each one builds on the previous.

Step 1: /reflect

Reflect on what was accomplished in this session. Identify:

• What was the breakthrough? What shifted?
• What specific corrections from the person drove the shift?
• What was the wrong output before each correction?
• What was the right output after?
• What sequence of steps produced the final approved result?

Step 2: /align

Confirm the intent of the extraction with the person:

• What exactly should the workflow reproduce?
• Which parts are specific to this session vs generalizable?
• What quality level does the output need to match?
• Present the intent map with checkboxes for the person to validate

Step 3: boost

After alignment is confirmed, predict and fill gaps:

• What edge cases would break the workflow?
• What auditing agents are needed at each step?
• What verbatim corrections should become validation rules?
• Query /insight or agent_find for related institutional knowledge

Step 4: /plan (or your own planning skill, e.g. /superpowers-writing-plans-v2, if you have it)

Create a technical plan for the workflow:

• Define each step with inputs, outputs, and quality gates
• Map the person's corrections to specific auditing agent prompts
• Design the wrong→right test fixtures from session examples
• Determine which model each auditing agent should use (haiku for mechanical checks, sonnet for nuance)

Step 5: /workflow-design

Design the full workflow as a skill file:

• The skill file itself with frontmatter and triggers
• Embedded auditing agent prompts for each quality gate
• The wrong→right examples as inline test fixtures
• The consumption pattern (how the person reviews the output)
• The trace key for finding all invocations

What Makes This Different from Just Writing a Skill

A normal skill says "do X." This workflow captures WHY X works — the specific failure modes that were discovered, the exact corrections that fixed them, and the auditing agents that prevent regression. The person's verbatim words ARE the quality standard. Not a paraphrase. Not an interpretation. The actual words they used when something was wrong, preserved as the validation criteria.

Intent of This Workflow (example from a first use, Apr 14, 2026)

These intent statements were approved during the /align step of the first extraction — kept here as a labelled example of the shape a confirmed intent map for this skill looks like, not as a fixed requirement:

• A single workflow that reproduces the exact methodology that produced an approved document — not just the steps, but the quality gates derived from the person's actual corrections
• The person's verbatim corrections become validation rules — each one is a specific failure mode that an auditing agent checks before the output reaches them
• Auditing agents validate each step independently — sequencing, variable name translation, intentionality statements, reader-guessing prevention
• Wrong→right transformations from the session become test fixtures — concrete examples auditing agents compare against, not abstract rules
• This becomes a skill any future agent can invoke to produce the same quality output without needing the original session's context
• Once the workflow exists, the person can work freely without worrying about compaction destroying the methodology

Feedback Loop

If a future session invokes this workflow and the output doesn't match the quality of the original session's approved output, that's signal. The auditing agents need to be refined, or a new correction needs to be added as a quality gate. Report what failed and what the person's correction was — that becomes a new test fixture.