When a conversation surfaces something worth keeping, this spawns three parallel reviewers (judgment, tooling, and divergent) to mine the transcript for durable patterns, then routes each finding to a concrete skill edit. It handles the full loop: locating your active transcript across three layout formats, running the review subagents with different models and lenses, synthesizing their findings into accepted/rejected/backlog buckets, and either applying trivial edits directly or handing substantive changes to the create-skill workflow. The structural enforcement check is a nice touch: it blocks anything that should live in a linter or runtime guard instead of prose. You approve edits before they land, which matters since skill changes affect every future agent. Use it after complex tasks that worked, dead ends that taught you something, or mid-task corrections you want captured.
npx -y skills add cursor/plugins --skill reflect --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Mine the current conversation for durable learnings, then route them into skill edits.
Skip when the conversation is trivial, off-topic, or already covered by an existing skill the parent followed correctly. One-offs are not learnings.
The parent finds its own transcript file before fanning out. The system prompt names the active workspace's agent-transcripts/ directory; use that path. Do not glob across ~/.cursor/projects/*/. That crosses workspace boundaries and reads private chats from unrelated projects.
ls -t <agent-transcripts>/*.jsonl <agent-transcripts>/*/*.jsonl <agent-transcripts>/*/subagents/*.jsonl 2>/dev/null | head -10
Three transcript layouts: legacy flat (<id>.jsonl), current nested (<id>/<id>.jsonl), and subagent (<parent>/subagents/<child>.jsonl).
For each candidate, read the first JSONL line and check that message.content[0].text contains the conversation's opening user prompt. Take the matching path. If no path resolves, write a tight digest of the session and pass that instead.
One message, three Task calls, subagent_type: generalPurpose, explicit model: on each, agent mode (readonly: false). Reviewers need MCP access for context lookups (tickets, chat threads, observability traces referenced in the transcript); readonly strips MCPs. The prompt forbids file writes; the parent applies edits.
| Lens | model | Prompt template |
|---|---|---|
| Judgment | your configured reflect-judgment model (default claude-opus-4-8-thinking-xhigh) | references/judgment-reviewer.md |
| Tooling | your configured reflect-tooling model (default grok-4.5-fast-xhigh) | references/tooling-reviewer.md |
| Divergent | your configured reflect-judgment model (default claude-opus-4-8-thinking-xhigh) | references/divergent-reviewer.md |
Pass each template verbatim, substituting the transcript path or digest where marked. Reviewers return findings in the Task response body.
One Task call, subagent_type: generalPurpose, using your configured reflect-judgment model (default claude-opus-4-8-thinking-xhigh), agent mode (readonly: false). The synthesizer's quality check includes spot-verifying citations, which can require MCP access; readonly strips MCPs. Use references/synthesizer.md verbatim, with each reviewer's full output inlined where marked. The synthesizer returns a structured Accepted / Rejected / Backlog list.
Sanity-check the synthesizer's Accepted list. For any item that would be enforced more reliably by a lint rule, script, metadata flag, or runtime check, move it from Accepted to Backlog. The synthesizer already applies this criterion; this is a final pass before edits land. See the encode-lessons-in-structure principle skill.
Before applying any Accepted edit, present the synthesizer's full Accepted/Rejected/Backlog output to the user and wait for explicit approval. The user picks which subset to apply and may redirect routings. Skill changes affect every future agent in the org; do not auto-apply.
Backlog items file to whatever devex / backlog tracker your team uses automatically. Those are tracker submissions, not skill edits. Only the Accepted list waits for approval.
For each approved Accepted item, follow the Routing field exactly:
create-skill skill and run its draft / test / iterate loop.tune description: <skill path> (the skill exists but didn't trigger when it should have): hand to create-skill and run its description-optimization loop.new skill via create-skill: <kebab-name>: hand creation to create-skill. Do not invent the shape ad hoc.If your environment ships a SKILL.md validator, run it on every touched skill before declaring done. Skip this step if it doesn't.
Short list, no preamble:
<skill path>. What changed, one line each.<skill path>. One line each (rare).<issue title> (<tags>). One line each.github/awesome-copilot
microsoft/win-dev-skills
github/awesome-copilot