Narrows theb7d6fc7widening per the operator's call, and fixes a regression it introduced. Decision recorded as note 2094. Two scopes now, deliberately different: readable_notes_clause — everything the ACL permits, including records reached only via a direct/group note share. For EXPLICIT acts: a search the caller typed, a fetch by id. browsable_notes_clause — the caller's own records plus anything in a project they can reach. For PASSIVE surfaces: browse lists, facet counts, the process->skill manifest. The split is a trust boundary. Anything appearing unasked — in your own list, your own counts, or as a skill installed on your machine — reads as material you endorsed. A one-off someone shared with you hasn't earned that standing, so it waits until you go looking. This also dissolves the shared-Process problem by construction rather than by special case: the manifest is a passive surface, so a directly-shared Process is never installed as an auto-surfacing skill. Regression fix (#2093):b7d6fc7widened the list queries but left the fetch path owner-only, so on the MCP path a record could be listed and then not opened — get_snippet raised not-found, get_process couldn't resolve, and the manifest emitted stubs whose get_process call would fail. snippets.get_snippet and notes.resolve_process now resolve the read scope. delete_snippet gained an explicit can_write_note guard, since being able to SEE a shared snippet must not imply being able to bin it. Provenance, so nothing arrives looking like the operator's own work: - access.describe_provenance / label_shared_items add shared/owner/permission; labelling costs no query when everything is the caller's own. - MCP: get_snippet, list_snippets, get_process and list_processes carry it, and get_process now says outright NOT to follow a shared process verbatim — its follow-as-written contract was the sharpest instance of the problem. - The skill stub for a shared Process names its author and asks for a go-ahead, instead of describing it as "the operator's saved Scribe process". - Policy stated once in the MCP _INSTRUCTIONS and the reusing-code skill: a shared record is that person's suggestion, weigh it, attribute it, ask before adopting it. - UI: shared snippets show "by <owner>" in the list and a notice above the code in the detail view, reusing SharedWithMeView's vocabulary. Plugin 0.1.15 -> 0.1.16 (skill text changed). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01RLwAaV4DQEmVyn496HnEvt
4.8 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| reusing-code | Use when you're about to write a helper, utility, hook, or reusable component — search recorded snippets FIRST so prior art is reused instead of re-solved. And the moment you build or notice something reusable, record it as a snippet so a later session finds it. Triggers on "write a util/helper", "I need a function that…", "let me add a component", or just having built something worth reusing. |
Reusing code — recall before you rebuild
Reusable code is worth writing once. Scribe stores snippets — a named, reusable function or component recorded with its language, signature, canonical location (repo · path · symbol), a one-line "when to reach for it," and the code itself — so prior art can surface before it's re-written as a one-off. Snippets are ordinary embedded notes, so a recorded one also surfaces on its own through recall/auto-inject; this skill is the active reflex around that.
Before you write a new helper — search first
- About to write a utility, hook, formatter, adapter, or a reusable component?
Search snippets before writing it.
list_snippets(q="…")(or a plainsearch) — a matching one may already exist, in this project or another.list_snippetssearches every project by default; that's deliberate, since a helper you need here was quite possibly written somewhere else. Narrow withproject_idonly when you specifically want this project's own. - If a snippet fits, pull it in full with
get_snippet(id)and reuse it — itslocationpoints at the reference implementation. Adapt, don't re-derive. - If auto-inject already surfaced a snippet title that looks relevant, that's
your cue to
get_snippetit rather than start from scratch.
The moment you build something reusable — record it
- Just wrote (or noticed) a helper, hook, pattern, or component worth repeating?
Record it with
create_snippetwhile it's fresh:- name — what it's called, e.g.
useDebouncedRef. - code — the implementation.
- when_to_use — one sharp line on when to reach for it. This becomes part of the title, so it's what a later recall menu shows — make it earn the pull.
- language, signature, and location (
repo/path/symbol) so the recorded copy points back at the canonical source. - project_id / system_ids to associate it with the work it belongs to.
- name — what it's called, e.g.
- Record the reference implementation, not every call site — one good entry
per reusable thing. If it already exists,
update_snippetit instead of recording a second copy (the create gate will flag a near-duplicate anyway).
A shared snippet is a suggestion, not a standard
Scribe is multi-user, so a search can return snippets other people own. Those
come back marked shared: true with an owner.
- Read one as that person's suggestion, not as the way things are done here. Judge the code on its merits before reaching for it.
- Say whose it is when you propose it — "there's a snippet from alex that does this" — so the operator can weigh the source, not just the code.
- Don't treat it as the house pattern, and don't build on it at scale, without the operator agreeing to adopt it.
- Snippets shared directly with the operator only appear when you search for
them, never in a plain
list_snippets— so anything ambient is genuinely theirs.
Keep the record honest
A recorded snippet is offered as prior art on every matching turn, so a wrong one costs more than a missing one.
- Details gone stale — a renamed symbol, a moved file, a signature that's
changed? Fix it with
update_snippet. Passing an empty string clears a field, so a wrong signature or location can be removed, not just written over. - Recorded something that turned out not to be reusable, or that no longer
exists? Retire it with
delete_snippet— it goes to the trash and can be restored. Don't leave it competing for attention.
Found the same thing in several places — unify it
When you notice the same reusable thing recorded (or written) as several
one-offs, don't leave the duplicates competing in recall — merge them.
merge_snippets(canonical_id, [other_ids]) keeps one canonical record, folds in
the others' call sites as locations, and retires the duplicates to the trash.
The result is a single entry that shows every place the thing is used — which is
exactly the signal that it was worth consolidating. This is the cure the create
gate only hints at when it blocks a near-duplicate.
Why this pays off
A one-off written a second time is the cost this avoids. Recording a snippet once — with a location and a crisp "when to use" — means the next session is offered the prior art instead of re-solving it. Search before writing; record what's worth reusing.