Paperclip Distill

Paperclip Distill

Distill Paperclip project, issue, comment, and document activity into durable wiki pages. The success criterion is wiki-insightful, not procedural: a reader who has never seen Paperclip should learn what the project is, what was decided, what is at risk, and what the current state is — without scanning a list of ## [YYYY-MM-DD] headers.

When this skill is needed

• Cursor-window distillation: the routine fed you a bounded source bundle of recent Paperclip activity for one project or root issue.
• Backfill: the user asked to seed the wiki with the historical activity of a project or root issue. Source window may be wide.
• Manual distill-paperclip-now request from the UI.

If the operation issue is operationType: "ingest" (raw file) or operationType: "query", this is the wrong skill — use wiki-ingest or wiki-query.

Destination space

In Phase 1, every Paperclip distill, backfill, and cursor-window operation writes into the default wiki space. The operation issue should always carry spaceSlug: "default". If an operation issue passes any other slug, stop and surface the mismatch in a comment — do not write Paperclip-derived pages into a non-default space.

This rule is destination-only. The Paperclip source scope (which projects, root issues, comments, documents are read) is set elsewhere in the operation issue and is independent of the destination.

Inputs

• A Paperclip source bundle (issue list, comment refs, document refs, source hash, cursor window).
• An existing or planned wiki/projects/<slug>/standup.md page path.
• An existing or planned wiki/projects/<slug>/index.md page path.
• The operation issue's target wikiId, spaceSlug, space root, and the target space's AGENTS.md for page conventions.
• The current wiki/projects/<slug>/standup.md, wiki/projects/<slug>/index.md, decisions.md, and history.md if they already exist (so you write a patch, not a rewrite).

Paperclip Asset Gate

Do not treat Paperclip assets/attachments or issue work products as source text for this skill.

• Allowed Paperclip body text: issue descriptions, comment bodies, document bodies.
• Assets/attachments are metadata-only until a separate approved extraction policy exists.
• Work products are metadata-only until a separate approved extraction policy exists.
• Never fetch /api/assets/:id/content.
• Never dereference a work-product url, preview URL, artifact URL, or other linked destination from this skill.
• If an operator asks for attachment/work-product content distillation, stop and point them at the Phase 5 asset/work-product security gate policy instead of improvising.

Anti-patterns to avoid

The deterministic templating this skill replaces produced these failure modes — do not reproduce them:

1. Datestamp-as-section-header. Lines like ## [2026-04-15] paperclip-distill | proposed belong in wiki/log.md, not in the project page. The project page is durable knowledge; the log is the audit trail.
2. Procedural status lists. Issue mix: 3 todo, 5 in_progress, 2 done tells the reader nothing they could not read off Paperclip directly. State what is happening and why it matters, then cite the issues that constitute the evidence.
3. One-line-per-issue dumps. A page that is mostly - PAP-1234: title (in_progress, updated 2026-...) is an issue list, not a wiki page. Group issues by what they are about (a decision, a risk, a workstream) and cite multiple issues per bullet when they share a story.
4. Mechanical "Current as of" timestamps everywhere. One current_as_of in frontmatter is enough.
5. No interpretation. "Active issues: PAP-A, PAP-B, PAP-C" is bookkeeping. "The team is concentrating on the schema migration ([PAP-A], [PAP-B]) and has parked the index work pending capacity ([PAP-C])." is wiki-insightful.
6. Opaque identifiers in prose. UUIDs, cursor ids, source hashes, run ids, and raw metadata belong in logs or frontmatter when needed, not in executive-facing project narrative.

Workflow

1. Read the bundle in full. Don't sample. Read every issue title, every comment, every document key the bundle includes. Note: which issues are decisions, which are risks/blockers, which are recently completed, which are inflight.
2. Read the existing project page (if any) so you write a patch, not a rewrite. The "Decisions" section in particular accumulates over time — never wipe accepted decisions; supersede them with > ⚠ reversed by ... callouts when something later overrides them.
3. Read the target space's AGENTS.md for page conventions: filename style, YAML frontmatter shape, link style, voice. Always pass the operation issue's wikiId and spaceSlug to LLM Wiki tools.
4. Write wiki/projects/<slug>/standup.md first. Every Paperclip project represented in the wiki must have this file. It is the executive standup: where the project stands today, what changed recently, what is blocked or risky, and what happens next. Use stable sections, in this order:
   • Frontmatter (type: project-standup, project: <slug>, current_as_of: YYYY-MM-DD, sources).
   • Executive Readout — one short paragraph that explains the current project posture in plain language.
   • What Changed — the meaningful work completed or advanced since the last window. Group by concept; cite issues/comments/documents only as evidence.
   • Decisions — accepted/rejected/reversed decisions that changed the project direction. Omit when none exist.
   • Blockers / Risks — current blockers and risks with named owner or next action when the source provides one.
   • Next Actions — concrete next actions and owners inferred from Paperclip issues, not vague aspirations.
   • Links — durable wiki project page and relevant Paperclip project/issues/documents. Rewrite the standup to today's state. Do not append endless dated sections; the audit trail belongs in wiki/log.md and Paperclip comments.
5. Write wiki/projects/<slug>/index.md with these stable sections, in this order:
   • Frontmatter (type: project, current_as_of: YYYY-MM-DD, tags, sources).
   • Overview — 2–4 sentences saying what the project is and why it exists. Use the project description if it exists; otherwise synthesise it from the root issue.
   • Current Direction — narrative paragraph naming the active workstreams, the immediate next concrete deliverable, and the stance on risks. Cite 2–4 issues, do not list 20.
   • Workstreams — a short, grouped list. Each line is a workstream or idea, not an issue.
   • Decisions — accepted and reversed decisions with one paragraph each. Each decision cites the issue / approval / comment that ratified it. Format: ### Decision — short title then a paragraph; never a bare bullet list.
   • Open Risks / Blockers — what could derail the project, with the issue ref that surfaces it. Skip this section when the bundle has no risk signal — do not pad with _(none)_.
   • References — readable links to the current standup and supporting Paperclip tasks/documents. Keep hashes and cursor ids out of the narrative.
6. Optionally write wiki/projects/<slug>/decisions.md when the project has accumulated more decisions than the project page can carry without becoming a wall of text. Each decision is a ## section with: short title, accepted/reversed/superseded status, one-paragraph rationale, citing the source. Do not duplicate decisions already on the project page — link instead.
7. Optionally write wiki/projects/<slug>/history.md for a compact narrative timeline of meaningful project changes. Not an issue dump — group by phase ("Discovery", "Architecture", "Build", "Stabilisation"), not by date. Each phase is a paragraph that cites the 2–4 issues that defined it.
8. Refresh wiki/index.md under the ## Projects section — one line per durable project page with a one-sentence summary of the project's purpose, plus a link to the current wiki/projects/<slug>/standup.md when present.
9. Append wiki/log.md entry — this is where the datestamp belongs:

   ## [YYYY-MM-DD] paperclip-distill | <project name>
   - standup: wiki/projects/<slug>/standup.md
   - page: wiki/projects/<slug>/index.md
   - source hash: `<hash>`
   - cursor window: <start> → <end>
   - notes: <one line on what changed in this distill, e.g. "decisions section grew with PAP-X reversal", "low-signal window, no page changes">

10. Surface bundle warnings (clipped sources, low signal, stale hash). Bundle warnings → human_review_required: true on the patch. Do not paper over them.