Agent skill

learning-from-history

Analyzes history/ directories to extract patterns, writes learned rules to .claude/rules/learned/ (auto-loaded), updates CLAUDE.local.md with personal preferences.

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/other/learning-from-history

SKILL.md

Learning from History

Overview

Mines patterns from versioned outputs in history/ directories. Extracts success patterns, failure patterns, and personal preferences. Writes findings to .claude/rules/learned/ (auto-loaded by Claude Code) and CLAUDE.local.md (personal preferences).

This skill closes the "Learn" loop : Observe → Think → Plan → Build → Execute → Verify → Learn → Improve.

When to Use

  • Automatic: Triggered weekly by session hook
  • Manual: When you want to analyze a specific skill's history
  • After major milestone: Post-launch, post-quarter, post-strategy cycle

Core Pattern

Step 1: Identify Analysis Scope

Ask user (or determine from hook trigger):

  • "Which skill should I analyze?" (e.g., generating-quarterly-charters)
  • "What time period?" (e.g., last 6 months, all time)
  • "Looking for anything specific?" (e.g., what makes charters get approved?)

Step 2: Read History Files

For the target skill, read all files in history/[skill-name]/:

  • Count total outputs
  • Note date range
  • Identify versions (e.g., charter v1, v2, v3)

Also read related decision logs:

  • outputs/decisions/*.md for outcome data
  • Look for feedback ratings, success/failure notes

Step 3: Pattern Detection

Analyze for:

Success Patterns

  • What do successful outputs have in common?
  • Format patterns (tables vs bullets, length, structure)
  • Content patterns (evidence types, specificity, metrics format)
  • Process patterns (review cycles, stakeholder involvement)

Failure Patterns

  • What do rejected/reworked outputs have in common?
  • What causes revisions?
  • What warnings were ignored?

Personal Preferences

  • User's consistent choices (format, detail level, tone)
  • User's typical review cycle
  • User's stakeholder patterns
  • User's domain-specific patterns

Step 4: Quantify Patterns

For each pattern, provide evidence:

  • Sample size: N outputs analyzed
  • Correlation: X/Y successful outputs had this pattern
  • Confidence: Strong (>80%), Medium (50-80%), Weak (<50%)

Example: "Charters with ≤3 strategic bets: 10/12 approved on first review (83% → Strong correlation)"

Step 5: Generate Learned Rules File

Write to .claude/rules/learned/[skill-name]-patterns.md:

markdown
---
generated: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
skill: learning-from-history
analyzed_skill: [skill-name]
sample_size: [N]
date_range: [YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD]
paths:
  - "outputs/[output-dir]/**/*.md"
  - "history/[skill-name]/**/*.md"
---

# Learned Patterns: [Skill Name]

## Analysis Summary
- **Outputs analyzed:** [N] files from history/[skill-name]/
- **Time period:** [Date range]
- **Outcomes tracked:** [M] decision logs with results
- **Confidence:** Patterns based on [N] data points

## Success Patterns (Correlate with Approved/Successful Outputs)

### Pattern 1: [Title]
**Observation:** [What we see in successful outputs]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] successful outputs had this ([%])
**Recommendation:** Default to this pattern

**Example from history:**

[Snippet from successful output showing pattern]


### Pattern 2: [Title]
**Observation:** [What we see]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] successful outputs ([%])
**Recommendation:** [What to do]

## Failure Patterns (Correlate with Rejected/Reworked Outputs)

### Anti-Pattern 1: [Title]
**Observation:** [What we see in failed outputs]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] rejected outputs had this ([%])
**Recommendation:** Avoid this pattern

**Example from history:**

[Snippet from rejected output showing anti-pattern]


### Anti-Pattern 2: [Title]
**Observation:** [What we see]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] rejected outputs ([%])
**Recommendation:** [What to avoid]

## Recommendations for [Skill Name]

Based on analysis of [N] outputs:

1. **[Recommendation 1]:** [Specific guidance]
   - Evidence: [X/Y outputs ([%])]
   - Confidence: Strong/Medium/Weak

2. **[Recommendation 2]:** [Specific guidance]
   - Evidence: [X/Y outputs ([%])]
   - Confidence: Strong/Medium/Weak

3. **[Recommendation 3]:** [Specific guidance]
   - Evidence: [X/Y outputs ([%])]
   - Confidence: Strong/Medium/Weak

## Quality Trends Over Time

| Time Period | Outputs | Approved First Try | Avg Revisions | Quality Trend |
|-------------|---------|-------------------|---------------|---------------|
| [Q1 YYYY] | [N] | [%] | [N] | ↗/→/↘ |
| [Q2 YYYY] | [N] | [%] | [N] | ↗/→/↘ |
| [Q3 YYYY] | [N] | [%] | [N] | ↗/→/↘ |

**Trend:** [Improving / Stable / Declining]
**Why:** [Hypothesis about cause]

## Unknowns / Need More Data

- [Pattern needs more data points to confirm]
- [Outcome data missing for X outputs]
- [Confounding variable Y not tracked]

## Next Analysis
Run this analysis again after [N more outputs] or [time period] to validate patterns.

Step 6: Update Personal Preferences

Append or update CLAUDE.local.md:

markdown
# Learned Preferences (from history analysis)

## [Skill Name] Preferences
**Last updated:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Based on:** [N] outputs

- User prefers [format/style choice] ([X/Y times, [%]])
- User's typical review cycle: [N rounds before approval]
- User always requests [specific thing] ([observed pattern])
- User's common stakeholders: [Names from stakeholder maps]

## Domain Context
- Key terms user uses: [Terms from outputs]
- User's product area: [Context from outputs]
- User's success metrics: [Metrics user tracks]

Step 7: Generate Analysis Report

Write detailed analysis to outputs/learning/learning-summary-[skill-name]-YYYY-MM-DD.md:

markdown
---
generated: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
skill: learning-from-history
analyzed_skill: [skill-name]
sample_size: [N]
---

# Learning Analysis: [Skill Name]

## Data Analyzed
- **History files:** [N] from history/[skill-name]/
- **Decision logs:** [M] from outputs/decisions/
- **Date range:** [YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD]
- **Outcomes available:** [X/N] outputs have outcome data ([%])

## Methodology
1. Read all files in history/[skill-name]/
2. Extract structural patterns (format, length, sections)
3. Extract content patterns (evidence types, specificity)
4. Cross-reference with decision logs for outcomes
5. Identify correlations between patterns and success/failure
6. Quantify confidence based on sample size

## Key Findings

### Finding 1: [Title]
**Pattern:** [Description]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] successful outputs ([%])
**Confidence:** Strong/Medium/Weak
**Implication:** [What this means for future outputs]

### Finding 2: [Title]
**Pattern:** [Description]
**Evidence:** [X/Y] outputs ([%])
**Confidence:** Strong/Medium/Weak
**Implication:** [What this means]

## Recommended Skill Updates

### Update: `skills/[skill-name]/SKILL.md`

**Section:** [Which section]
**Current instruction:**

[Old way if it exists]


**Recommended addition:**

[New guidance based on learned patterns]


**Rationale:** Analysis of [N] outputs shows [pattern] correlates with success.

## Personal Preferences Detected

- [Preference 1]: Observed in [X/Y] outputs
- [Preference 2]: Observed in [X/Y] outputs
- [Preference 3]: Observed in [X/Y] outputs

## Limitations

- **Small sample:** Only [N] outputs (need [M] for high confidence)
- **Outcome data incomplete:** [X/N] outputs lack outcome tracking
- **Confounding variables:** [Other factors that may explain patterns]
- **Recency bias:** Recent outputs may not reflect long-term patterns

## Next Steps

1. **Apply patterns:** Use learned rules in next [skill-name] execution
2. **Validate:** Track whether patterns improve outcomes
3. **Re-analyze:** After [N more outputs] or [time period]
4. **Update skill:** Implement recommended changes to skill file

Step 8: Copy to History

  • Copy analysis to history/learning-from-history/learning-[skill-name]-YYYY-MM-DD.md

Quick Reference

Pattern Confidence Levels

Confidence Sample Size Correlation Interpretation
Strong N ≥ 10 ≥80% Reliable pattern, use as default
Medium N ≥ 5 50-80% Promising pattern, test more
Weak N < 5 <50% Insufficient data, need more

What to Look For

Pattern Type Examples
Format Table vs bullets, length (short vs detailed), section order
Structure Presence/absence of sections, level of nesting, use of examples
Content Evidence types cited, specificity level, metric formats, tone
Process Review cycles, stakeholder involvement, timing of creation
Outcomes Approved/rejected, revision count, time to approval

Common Mistakes

  • Overfitting: Seeing patterns in noise (need sufficient sample size)
  • Confirmation bias: Only looking for patterns you expect
  • Ignoring context: Not considering external factors (team changes, market shifts)
  • No validation: Not tracking whether patterns actually improve outcomes
  • Stale patterns: Not re-analyzing as data grows

Verification Checklist

  • Read all history files for target skill
  • Counted outputs and date range
  • Cross-referenced decision logs for outcomes
  • Identified 3-5 success patterns with evidence
  • Identified 3-5 failure patterns with evidence
  • Quantified confidence levels
  • Wrote learned rules to .claude/rules/learned/
  • Updated CLAUDE.local.md with preferences
  • Generated detailed analysis report
  • Copied to history

Evidence Tracking

Claim Type Source
[Pattern X correlates with success] Evidence [Analyzed N=X outputs]
[User prefers Y] Evidence [Observed in M outputs]
[Pattern will improve outcomes] Assumption [Needs validation]

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results