Skill v1.0.1
currentAutomated scan100/1002 files
version: "1.0.1" name: replay-learnings description: Surface past learnings relevant to the current task before starting work. Searches correction history, recalls past mistakes, and applies prior patterns. Use when starting a task, saying "what do I know about", "previous mistakes", "lessons learned", or "remind me about".
Replay Learnings
Like muscle memory for your coding sessions. Find and surface relevant learnings before you start working.
Trigger
Use when starting a new task, saying "what do I know about", "before I start", "replay", or "remind me about".
Workflow
- Extract keywords from the task description (e.g. "auth refactor" →
auth,middleware,refactor). - Search learnings/memory for matching patterns:
``bash grep -i "auth\|middleware" .claude/LEARNED.md 2>/dev/null grep -i "auth\|middleware" .claude/learning-log.md 2>/dev/null grep -A2 "\[LEARN\]" CLAUDE.md | grep -i "auth\|middleware" ``
- Check session history for similar work — what was the correction rate?
- Surface the top learnings ranked by relevance.
- If no learnings found, suggest starting with the scout agent to explore first.
Output
REPLAY BRIEFING: <task>=======================Past learnings (ranked by relevance):1. [Testing] Always mock external APIs in auth tests (applied 8x)Mistake: Called live API in tests, caused flaky failures2. [Navigation] Auth middleware is in src/middleware/ not src/auth/ (applied 5x)3. [Quality] Add error boundary around auth state changes (applied 3x)Session history for similar work:- 2026-02-01: auth refactor — 23 edits, 2 corrections (8.7% rate)- 2026-01-28: auth middleware — 15 edits, 4 corrections (26.7% rate)^ Higher correction rate — review patterns before startingSuggested approach:- Mock external APIs (learning #1)- Check src/middleware/ first for auth code (learning #2)
Guardrails
- Rank by relevance, not recency.
- Include the original mistake context so the learning is actionable.
- Flag high correction-rate sessions as areas requiring extra care.
- If no learnings match, say so explicitly rather than forcing irrelevant results.