Skill: andyhcwang/principles (version 1.0.0)

--- name: principles description: "Ray Dalio-inspired personal knowledge system. Capture thoughts, track source credibility, detect conflicts with existing beliefs, and graduate wisdom into principles over time. Use when the user says /reflect, /inbox, /principles, /wisdom, /questions, or asks to capture a thought, process their inbox, review principles, or log wisdom." --- # Principles — Personal Knowledge System A structured system for turning raw observations into tested wisdom and personal principles. Inspired by Ray Dalio's "Principles" methodology. ## Overview You manage a pipeline that transforms raw input into lasting knowledge: ``` Inbox (raw capture) → Wisdom (claims with sources) → Principles (tested beliefs) ``` Everything lives in `personal/` under the user's workspace. Create the directory structure on first use if it doesn't exist. ## Directory Structure ``` personal/ ├── _system.md # These instructions (copy from SKILL.md on init) ├── inbox.md # Raw thought capture ├── journal.md # Daily reflections ├── wisdom/ │ └── collected.md # Claims organized by domain ├── principles/ │ ├── _index.md # Master list of all principles │ ├── life.md # Personal philosophy │ ├── business.md # Business principles │ └── leadership.md # Leadership principles └── open-questions.md # Genuine dilemmas ``` ## Commands ### `/reflect` or `/reflect process` Process the inbox. Parse each thought, check for conflicts, route to the right file. ### `/reflect inbox` or `/inbox` Add a raw thought to `inbox.md`. User just dumps text — you clean it up later during processing. ### `/reflect wisdom` Show collected wisdom, optionally filtered by domain. ### `/reflect principles` Show current principles across all domains. ### `/reflect questions` Show open questions and their status. ### `/reflect sources` Show a summary of all sources and their credibility ratings across domains. ### `/reflect journal` Add a journal entry for today with timestamp. ## Processing Inbox (`/reflect`) This is the core workflow. When triggered: 1. **Read** `inbox.md` 2. **Parse** each thought — identify type: - External wisdom (from someone else) → `wisdom/collected.md` - Personal belief or stance → check against `principles/*.md` - Factual learning → `wisdom/collected.md` - Question or uncertainty → evaluate if genuine dilemma - Just context/event → extract insight if any, discard the rest 3. **Check for conflicts** against existing wisdom claims: - Same claim, new source → add as corroborating evidence - Conflicting claim in same domain → **STOP**. Present conflict. Ask user to resolve. 4. **Check consistency** against existing principles: - If new input conflicts with a principle → **STOP**. Present conflict. Ask user to resolve. 5. **If ANY conflict found** → STOP and ask user: - Show the conflict clearly - Offer options: update existing, keep existing, split claims, convert to open question - Do NOT silently file conflicting information 6. **Route content** based on user decisions 7. **Clean up** `inbox.md` after processing 8. **Update** `principles/_index.md` if new principles were added ## Content Formats ### Wisdom Claims (`wisdom/collected.md`) Claims are organized by **domain**, not by source. Multiple sources can corroborate the same claim. ```markdown ## [Domain/Aspect] ### [Claim stated plainly] **Domain**: [category/aspect] **Confidence**: [Low / Medium / High] **Sources**: 1. [Person/Book] - [proven/plausible/untested] in this domain - [brief context] **Your experience**: [Untested / Confirmed / Contradicted] **Added**: YYYY-MM-DD | **Last updated**: YYYY-MM-DD ``` **Source credibility is assessed PER DOMAIN:** - A source can be `[proven]` in one domain and `[plausible]` in another - Example: Alex Hormozi on business = `[proven]`. Alex Hormozi on health = `[plausible]`. - Credibility levels: `[proven]` (demonstrated expertise), `[plausible]` (reasonable but not their domain), `[untested]` (no track record) **Domain format:** `category/aspect` (e.g., `health/sleep`, `business/pricing`, `productivity/focus`) ### Principles (`principles/*.md`) ```markdown ## [Principle stated as a clear belief] **Confidence**: [certain / hypothesis / exploring] **Added**: YYYY-MM-DD **Context**: Why you believe this **Reasoning**: Evidence and experience supporting it **Related**: Links to related principles or wisdom claims ``` ### Open Questions (`open-questions.md`) Only genuine dilemmas — not todo items or simple unknowns. ```markdown ## [Question] **Status**: [exploring / gathering-evidence / leaning-toward-X] **Goal**: What are you actually trying to achieve? **Problem**: What's blocking it? **Options**: 1. [Option A] - pros/cons 2. [Option B] - pros/cons **What would resolve this**: Specific criteria or evidence needed ``` ### Journal (`journal.md`) Append-only daily entries: ```markdown ## YYYY-MM-DD [Observations, reflections, what happened today] ``` ## Graduation: Wisdom → Principles When a wisdom claim reaches **High confidence** (multiple credible sources + personal experience confirms it), prompt the user: > "This claim has strong evidence and you've confirmed it personally. Want to graduate it to a principle in [domain]?" If yes, create the principle entry and cross-reference it. ## Assumption Surfacing When user input has unstated assumptions: - Make them explicit - Ask: "This assumes X — is that accurate?" - Don't proceed until confirmed ## Language & Tone - Clean up sloppy writing but preserve original meaning exactly - User may write in any language — process accordingly - Be direct, not preachy. This is a tool, not a lecture. ## First-Time Setup If `personal/` doesn't exist, create the full directory structure with empty template files. Tell the user: > "Set up your principles system. Start by dumping thoughts into `/inbox` — I'll help you process and organize them with `/reflect`."


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)