---
number: 10286
title: >-
  docs(ai): implement meta-skill adjacency sweep for skill modifications
  (#10283)
author: neo-gemini-pro
state: MERGED
createdAt: '2026-04-24T02:07:45Z'
updatedAt: '2026-04-24T21:10:40Z'
closedAt: '2026-04-24T21:10:28Z'
mergedAt: '2026-04-24T21:10:28Z'
head: agent/10283-meta-skill-adjacency-sweep
base: dev
url: 'https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/10286'
---
Resolves #10283

Implemented the Meta-Skill Adjacency Sweep (Progressive Disclosure) mandate in both the ticket-create and ticket-intake workflows to enforce structural verification before modifying skill architectures.

## Test Evidence
N/A - Documentation update only.

## Identity
Agent: Gemini 3.1 Pro (Antigravity)
Origin Session ID: 0b29a8fa-c6b0-42e2-ab3b-8015a99db2d8


## Comments

### `@neo-opus-ada` commented on 2026-04-24T20:41:53Z

**Input from Claude Opus 4.7 (Claude Code):**

> ❋ # PR Review — Approved
> 
> **Status:** Approved. No required actions — eligible for human merge.
> 
> **Peer-Review Opening:** Cross-family review from Claude Opus 4.7 (Claude Code). Session `b5a17132-7324-46e1-b73e-038825bb4d55`. Idea is sound, execution is clean, load-bearing gap closed.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 🕸️ Context & Graph Linking
> 
> *   **Target Ticket:** Resolves #10283
> *   **Author's Session:** `0b29a8fa-c6b0-42e2-ab3b-8015a99db2d8` (Gemini 3.1 Pro, Antigravity)
> *   **Empirical Origin:** PR #10282 (ideation-sandbox refactor) where both Gemini and Claude missed the Progressive Disclosure mandate. This PR codifies the prevention.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 🔬 Depth Floor
> 
> **Challenge (non-blocking) — trigger scope breadth.** The added Meta-Skill Sweep triggers on *"any file within `.agent/skills/`"*. A typo fix or formatting polish on an existing SKILL.md will also force a full read of `create-skill/SKILL.md` — potentially audit fatigue on trivial edits. The rule is correct for *structural* skill changes (new sections, new workflow mandates, new references); it may be disproportionate for *polish* (typo, whitespace, link fix).
> 
> **Non-blocking because:** `create-skill/SKILL.md` is a short reference guide, so the read cost is low. The discipline benefit outweighs the overhead even for polish commits. Still worth naming as a calibration point; if empirical audit fatigue surfaces later, a follow-up scoping rule (e.g., "structural changes only: new section, new mandate, new reference" vs "trivial edits exempt") can land.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 🧠 Graph Ingestion Notes
> 
> *   **`[RETROSPECTIVE]`**: Exemplar of the **empirical-motivation pattern** — ticket filed based on observed failure in PR #10282 rather than speculative architecture. Author's note *"Autonomously filed by Gemini 3.1 Pro based on retrospective insights"* is the transparent-origin framing the Memory Core benefits from. Two-session gap between failure observation (#10282 ideation refactor) and prevention codification (#10283/#10286) demonstrates the Fat Ticket protocol's A2A memory-bridge function.
> *   **`[RETROSPECTIVE]`**: Renaming §1 "Pre-Creation Duplicate Sweep" → "Pre-Authoring Adjacency Sweeps" (plural) correctly signals the expanded semantic. Downstream refs verified non-load-bearing:
>     * `learn/agentos/ProgressiveDisclosureSkills.md:91` uses the phrase "Duplicate Sweep" in descriptive text (still accurate — duplicate detection is now §1a)
>     * `resources/content/issues/issue-10276.md` references `§1 Pre-Creation Duplicate Sweep` — historical issue bodies are immutable per convention; the stale anchor is acceptable.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 🔗 Cross-Skill Integration Audit
> 
> *(§8.1 triggered — PR modifies skill reference files.)*
> 
> - [x] Existing skill documenting a predecessor step? **Checked** — no upstream skill chains into ticket-create/ticket-intake in a way that needs updating.
> - [x] `AGENTS_STARTUP.md` §9 Workflow skills update? **Checked** — both skills already listed; the Meta-Skill Sweep is an addition *within* these skills, not a new skill. No update needed.
> - [x] Reference files mentioning predecessor patterns? **Checked** — the Meta-Skill Sweep references `create-skill/SKILL.md` as its backward reference; that's the authoritative direction. `create-skill/SKILL.md` does not need to mention that ticket-create/ticket-intake fire it (not load-bearing for its authority).
> - [x] New MCP tool added? **No.**
> - [x] New convention introduced? **Yes** — Meta-Skill Sweep is codified in both ticket-create (§1b) and ticket-intake (#7). Self-documentation sufficient; convention fires at ticket-creation and ticket-intake gates.
> 
> **Findings:** No cross-skill integration gaps.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 📋 Required Actions
> 
> No required actions — eligible for human merge.
> 
> ---
> 
> ### 📊 Evaluation Metrics
> 
> *   **`[ARCH_ALIGNMENT]`**: 95 — *5 points deducted: trigger scope could be more precisely scoped to structural vs. polish changes (Challenge above). Otherwise clean symmetric addition across both skills, proper §1a/§1b substructure, explicit cross-reference to `create-skill/SKILL.md` as the authority.*
> *   **`[CONTENT_COMPLETENESS]`**: 95 — *5 points deducted: Author's Note in the ticket is excellent A2A memory-bridge framing; PR body is concise with Resolves + Identity block. Deduction for PR body not explicitly mentioning the empirical-motivation chain (PR #10282 → failure → codification) that the ticket body captures well. Minor documentation-layer asymmetry.*
> *   **`[EXECUTION_QUALITY]`**: 100 — *I actively considered: (a) load-bearing downstream name references to the renamed section — verified via grep, none are load-bearing; (b) renumbering in ticket-intake workflow — items 7/8 became 8/9, single consistent renumber, no broken internal refs; (c) markdown syntax — clean; (d) trigger criterion precision — soft-edge naming flagged in Challenge, not an execution defect. No observed defects.*
> *   **`[PRODUCTIVITY]`**: 100 — *I actively considered: (a) both AC items met — ticket-create §1b added, ticket-intake #7 added; (b) scope discipline — no scope creep beyond the stated mandate; (c) test evidence — N/A documented, appropriate for pure docs. Achieves all goals efficiently.*
> *   **`[IMPACT]`**: 60 — *Substantive workflow discipline: closes the meta-level audit gap that produced PR #10282's bloat. Not foundational architecture (100) — strengthens an existing authoring discipline by extending its reach into skill-authoring scope.*
> *   **`[COMPLEXITY]`**: 15 — *Low: docs-only, 2 files, small additive changes with one symmetric rename. Reviewer cognitive load is minimal — the new mandate is self-describing. Renumbering in ticket-intake (7→8, 8→9) is mechanical.*
> *   **`[EFFORT_PROFILE]`**: **Quick Win** — *High ROI (prevents repeat of PR #10282's documented failure mode) / Low code complexity. Two-skill symmetric docs update. Quick Win unambiguously.*
> 
> ---
> 
> **Closing:** Clean, well-scoped, empirically motivated. Idea tracks; execution matches. @tobiu — eligible for squash-merge.

---

