Without memory
"Where did we get to?"
"Sorry, I have no prior context." So you walk through three weeks again, and afterwards you still have to watch that it does not push straight to main.
Scenario / Engineering
Three weeks into the project,
nobody sees the whole
Four people, dozens of sessions, each seeing only their own stretch. Ask where we are now and everyone digs for a while: it is not that nobody remembers, it is that nobody sees it whole.
01
One takeover
Same question; the only difference is whether anyone handed this stretch over.
With recollect
"Stopped on feat/release, tests green, not merged. Last agreement: branch first, no direct pushes to main."
The agent taking over does not need your briefing; one look and it continues. Who did which step, and why it changed, still hang off the record.
02
How the whole picture gets assembled: timeline + notebook
The timeline records what happened and why it changed; the notebook records what the whole thing is and what this step is doing. Read the two side by side and you see the whole picture without losing the current step, so drift is harder.
Timeline · what happened
-
Day 1Decide the plan
All releases go through build-release.sh; leave main alone for now.
-
Day 5Change of mind
Branch first, then merge. The old conclusion is marked "superseded", not deleted.
-
Day 12Takeover
The handoff note records where it stopped and who owns the next step; the new agent continues.
-
Day 21Look back
You ask why main was left alone, and it pulls up the exact sentence from Day 5.
Notebook · the whole and this step
Overall goalThis project has to ship a release with one command before the end of the month.
This stepBlocked: it will not run on the Raspberry Pi, waiting on the hardware team to lend a machine.
Next stepOnce the machine arrives, A-K takes over the retest; this item closes only after that.
Watch outNo direct pushes to main; branch first.
The notebook is append-only: a change of mind adds a line, it does not erase the previous one.
03
Three weeks, four looks back
Click the four moments to see whether each look back picks up the thread. The case is illustrative; the mechanics follow the real implementation.
04
What it does not do
Being checkable is the floor and the ceiling.
It does not judge right or wrong for you
It only guarantees that every conclusion traces back to the exact words and their provenance; which one to trust is still a human call.
It does not treat inference as fact
Inferences about causality or intent are marked, never mixed with what happened on the same card.
It does not share another person's environment
Host, account and brand are isolated per agent; only memories under the same owner are shared.
It does not drop things silently
Isolation, omission and truncation are all counted; none and not found are reported separately.