affaan-m/ECC/skills/growth-log/SKILL.md
growth-log
Use after a complex task, failure, or when reviewing what was learned. Teaches how to write growth logs that extract reusable patterns — not diary entries.
- Source repository stars
- 234,327
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 1
- Last source update
- 2026-07-27
- Source checked
- 2026-07-28
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
The problem: Most people write "fixed a bug in X" as a learning log. That's a diary entry, not a learning artifact. A real growth log extracts the pattern so you recognize it next time. This skill teaches: How to write learning entries that compound across sessions. Works with a…
Not for
- Avoid: "Fixed bug in payment module" (event, not pattern)
- Avoid: Copying the git commit message verbatim (commits describe what changed; logs extract why it matters)
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/affaan-m/ECC --skill "skills/growth-log"Inspect the Agent Skill "growth-log" from https://github.com/affaan-m/ECC/blob/4e973d3eaf92d97f8d2e2d8abb39d8bdc8711b38/skills/growth-log/SKILL.md at commit 4e973d3eaf92d97f8d2e2d8abb39d8bdc8711b38. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
When to Activate
When NOT to activate: Trivial changes (typo fixes, single-line tweaks, config value changes with no debugging). The threshold: did this task involve debugging, redoing, rollback, or a non-obvious decision? If yes → write an entry. If no → skip.
After completing a complex task (multi-file, new feature, architecture change)After a failure, mistake, or "that was harder than expected" momentWhen you want to review what you've learned over a period - 02
The Three Rules
A failure is nutritionally denser than a success. One bug that took 2 hours to find teaches more than 3 features that worked first try.
State what happened in one sentenceAsk "why?" iteratively until you reach root cause (usually 3-5 whys)Generalize: "What class of problem is this?" (not "Chrome 128 bug" but "browser default change breaking existing behavior") - 03
Rule 1: Failures Achievements
A failure is nutritionally denser than a success. One bug that took 2 hours to find teaches more than 3 features that worked first try.
A failure is nutritionally denser than a success. One bug that took 2 hours to find teaches more than 3 features that worked first try.Bad: "Successfully implemented the login flow." Good (web dev): "Login flow: session token wasn't persisting because the cookie SameSite defaulted to Lax in Chrome 128+. Pattern: always explicitly set SameSite=None; Sec… - 04
Rule 2: The Bole Principle (伯乐原则)
Before writing a new entry, ask: "Is this fundamentally the same as something I already recorded?"
Before writing a new entry, ask: "Is this fundamentally the same as something I already recorded?"Same root cause, different symptom → merge, don't duplicate. New root cause → new entry.How to check: Search existing entries for keywords from your root cause before writing. If you find a match, add your new symptom as an additional example under the existing entry rather than creating a duplicate. - 05
Rule 3: Must Be Transferable
Every entry must answer: "Next time I face a similar situation, what do I do differently?"
State what happened in one sentenceAsk "why?" iteratively until you reach root cause (usually 3-5 whys)Generalize: "What class of problem is this?" (not "Chrome 128 bug" but "browser default change breaking existing behavior")
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
*Example:** "Forgot to update the output index after creating a file" and "Forgot to update skill ratings after a task" — same root cause (no automatic capture trigger). Merge into one entry about "post-task capture gaps."Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
The `delivery-gate` Stop hook checks that learning files were modified today via filesystem timestamps. This skill teaches *what to write* — so the file that delivery-gate checks actually contains useful patterns, not empty timestamps.Evidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 84/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 234,327 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- affaan-m/ECC
- Skill path
- skills/growth-log/SKILL.md
- Commit
- 4e973d3eaf92d97f8d2e2d8abb39d8bdc8711b38
- License
- MIT
- Collected
- 2026-07-28
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
Growth Log Skill
The problem: Most people write "fixed a bug in X" as a learning log. That's a diary entry, not a learning artifact. A real growth log extracts the pattern so you recognize it next time.
This skill teaches: How to write learning entries that compound across sessions. Works with any note-taking system — Markdown files, Notion, Obsidian, plain text. Templates are generic; adapt to your setup.
When to Activate
- After completing a complex task (multi-file, new feature, architecture change)
- After a failure, mistake, or "that was harder than expected" moment
- When you want to review what you've learned over a period
When NOT to activate: Trivial changes (typo fixes, single-line tweaks, config value changes with no debugging). The threshold: did this task involve debugging, redoing, rollback, or a non-obvious decision? If yes → write an entry. If no → skip.
The Three Rules
Rule 1: Failures > Achievements
A failure is nutritionally denser than a success. One bug that took 2 hours to find teaches more than 3 features that worked first try.
Bad: "Successfully implemented the login flow."
Good (web dev): "Login flow: session token wasn't persisting because the cookie SameSite defaulted to Lax in Chrome 128+. Pattern: always explicitly set SameSite=None; Secure when cross-origin. Signal to recognize: auth breaks after browser upgrade or when crossing origin boundaries."
Good (data pipeline): "CSV import failed silently on empty rows because pandas.read_csv(dropna=False) keeps zero-width rows that len() counts as valid. Pattern: always df.dropna(how='all', inplace=True) before row-count validation."
Rule 2: The Bole Principle (伯乐原则)
Before writing a new entry, ask: "Is this fundamentally the same as something I already recorded?"
Same root cause, different symptom → merge, don't duplicate. New root cause → new entry.
How to check: Search existing entries for keywords from your root cause before writing. If you find a match, add your new symptom as an additional example under the existing entry rather than creating a duplicate.
Example: "Forgot to update the output index after creating a file" and "Forgot to update skill ratings after a task" — same root cause (no automatic capture trigger). Merge into one entry about "post-task capture gaps."
Rule 3: Must Be Transferable
Every entry must answer: "Next time I face a similar situation, what do I do differently?"
If you can't write that sentence, you haven't extracted the pattern yet.
How to extract a pattern from a concrete event:
- State what happened in one sentence
- Ask "why?" iteratively until you reach root cause (usually 3-5 whys)
- Generalize: "What class of problem is this?" (not "Chrome 128 bug" but "browser default change breaking existing behavior")
- Formulate as: "Next time I see [signal], I will [action]."
- Name the signal: what specific observable tells you this pattern is active?
Entry Template
Scope: One entry per distinct root cause. Typical length: 4-8 sentences. If it takes >2 minutes to write, you're narrating events. If <30 seconds, you haven't gone deep enough.
## [Title: the pattern, not the event]
### Context
- What was I trying to do?
- What went wrong / what worked surprisingly well?
### Root Cause / Core Insight
- The underlying mechanism, not just the symptom
### The Pattern (transferable)
- Next time [similar situation], I will [specific action].
- Signal to recognize: [what observable tells me this pattern is active?]
### Related
- [entry-name](../path/to/related-entry.md)
Entry Types
All four types use the template above. The type determines which sections carry the most weight:
| Type | When to Use | Emphasis | Example Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure | Something broke, needed debugging, or required rework | Root Cause | "Config inheritance ≠ behavior inheritance across sessions" |
| Methodology | A repeatable process emerged from the work | Context / Pattern | "PPT → open-book exam study guide: three-layer structure" |
| Pattern Discovery | A reusable insight about tools, systems, or thinking | Pattern section | "PR description template: describe the gap, not the feature" |
| Capability Change | A measurable skill improvement | Context (before vs after) | "Git: from clone/push to independent PR with 12 commits" |
Quality Checklist
Before finalizing a growth log entry:
- Does the title name the pattern, not the event?
- Is there a "Next time I will..." sentence?
- Is the "Signal to recognize" specific enough to trigger the pattern next time?
- Did I search existing entries for duplicates before writing? (Bole Principle)
- Is the root cause distinguished from the symptom?
- Are related memories cross-linked?
- Is the entry 4-8 sentences? Shorter = too shallow; longer = narrating events.
Anti-Patterns
- Avoid: "Fixed bug in payment module" (event, not pattern)
- Avoid: Copying the git commit message verbatim (commits describe what changed; logs extract why it matters)
- Avoid: Writing an entry for every commit (only when a pattern emerges)
- Avoid: Skipping the transferable sentence (without it, it's just a diary — this is non-negotiable)
- Avoid: Duplicating the same pattern under different titles (violates Bole Principle — search before writing)
Storage
Store entries wherever you keep notes. Common patterns:
- Markdown files in a
growth-log/directory (one file per day:YYYY-MM-DD.md) - A dedicated section in Notion, Obsidian, or your note-taking app
- Plain text files with a consistent naming convention
Pick one convention and stick to it. Searchability matters more than format.
If You Use Delivery Gate
The delivery-gate Stop hook checks that learning files were modified today via filesystem timestamps. This skill teaches what to write — so the file that delivery-gate checks actually contains useful patterns, not empty timestamps.
Task completes → delivery-gate checks: was the learning file touched today?
→ Stale (no file modified): block — "what did you learn?"
→ Fresh (file touched): pass — this skill ensures the content is useful
Having enforcement without methodology → empty entries. Having methodology without enforcement → forgotten captures. Each is independently useful; together they close the loop.