Install
openclaw skills install @tenequm/okf-project-knowledge-baseDurable project knowledge as Git-native OKF bundles (docs/knowledge/, one concept per file, with provenance and trust tiers). Use to record a decision, finding, or rule that must outlive the session. Not session state or agent instructions.
openclaw skills install @tenequm/okf-project-knowledge-baseDurable project knowledge - decisions with rationale, findings with evidence,
rules with what they protect against - lives in the repository as an
Open Knowledge Format (OKF) v0.2
bundle: plain Markdown concepts with YAML frontmatter, readable by humans,
parseable by any agent, diffable in git. This skill is the discipline for
creating, writing, reading, and maintaining such bundles. It standardizes the
mechanics; without it every model invents its own incompatible structure
(measured in evals/runs.md).
A bundle root is any directory whose index.md declares okf_version in its
frontmatter. That marker, not the path, is authoritative: to discover bundles,
search the repository's index.md files for okf_version. The canonical
location for a NEW bundle is docs/knowledge/ at the scope it serves - the
repo root for project knowledge, <subproject>/docs/knowledge/ for a
subproject - but respect existing bundles wherever they live (knowledge/ at
the root is a common alternative).
Before reading or writing anything else, read the bundle's root index.md.
Its preamble states what belongs in this bundle and its local conventions
(type vocabulary, directory layout). The preamble may tighten the rules
below; it never loosens them.
Route by what the information is about, never by how you discovered it. A finding about a tool this project depends on is project knowledge even when a session-local tool surfaced it; the admission test is whether it is true and useful in a fresh clone, to a reader who never used this session's tools.
stale_after to absorb
the decay.Every concept is one Markdown file: YAML frontmatter, then a body. Minimal
conformance is a parseable frontmatter block with a non-empty type;
everything else below strengthens trust and should be present.
---
type: Decision
title: OAuth2 flow standardized on PKCE
description: One sentence a reader or index can reuse verbatim.
tags: [auth, security]
status: stable
generated: { by: claude-code/fable-5, at: "2026-09-07T14:00:00Z" }
sources:
- id: rfc
resource: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7636
title: RFC 7636 (PKCE)
---
# Decision
Chosen because public clients cannot hold a secret.[^rfc]
[^rfc]: RFC 7636 (PKCE)
Field reference (all optional except type):
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
type | Kind of concept, producer-defined: Decision, Finding, Reference, Runbook, ... The bundle preamble may fix a vocabulary. |
title, description | Display name; one-sentence summary reused by indexes and search. |
tags | Cross-cutting labels, a YAML list of short strings. |
status | draft / stable (default) / deprecated. |
stale_after | Absolute ISO 8601 instant after which the content needs review. |
generated | { by, at } - who produced the current content and when it last meaningfully changed. |
verified | List of { by, at } confirmation events. See Actors below for who may write it. |
sources | What the concept derives from. Each entry has a resource (URL, bundle-relative path, or an honest scope descriptor for things no link reaches) and an id when body claims cite it. |
Attribute specific claims with Markdown footnotes whose labels are
sources[].id values - keyed, never positional, so reordering the list
cannot misattribute. Link concepts to each other with normal Markdown links,
bundle-relative (starting with /) preferred. All timestamps are ISO 8601
with explicit UTC offset.
Identity is derived from the environment, never hardcoded:
human:<id> where <id> is the git user.name configured in
the repository holding the bundle.<harness>/<model> as the session knows itself, e.g.
claude-code/fable-5, codex-cli/gpt-5.6-sol.process:<id>.generated is written on every create or content update. verified with a
human: actor is written ONLY when the human explicitly instructs it or made
the edit themselves - an agent never volunteers human verification. An
unverified concept is honest, not deficient; consumers derive trust tiers
(unverified, machine-confirmed, human-reviewed) from what is actually there.
sources for whatever the concept
derives from; when no durable link exists, write an honest scope
descriptor rather than dropping the source or inventing a URL.index.md (a bullet with title, link, and
the concept's description) and adds a dated entry to the bundle's
log.md (newest date first, ## YYYY-MM-DD headings), in the same
change.status: deprecated and, when replaced, a link to its successor. History
and inbound links survive.index.md and open only
the concepts the task needs; never bulk-dump a bundle into context.type is non-empty, links you
added resolve, and the index matches the directory. Use whatever tools
the session has; the checks, not the commands, are the contract.Cold start (a repo with knowledge to keep and no bundle): create
docs/knowledge/ with a root index.md whose frontmatter declares
okf_version: "0.2" and whose preamble states, in a few sentences, what this
bundle holds and what it refuses (the three fences, localized); a log.md;
and the first real concept (invariant 2). Then add one line to the repo's
agent instruction file naming the location, telling agents to load this
skill before reading or writing the bundle, and asking for an end-of-task
capture review.
Capture (mid-work or on request): decide with the fences whether it is knowledge; search first (invariant 1); write or update the concept with full frontmatter; update index and log (invariant 4); verify (invariant 7). If the knowledge also implies a standing order, apply the instructions fence: one line in the instruction file, linking here.
Recall ("why did we choose X", "have we established Y"): find the bundle
by its marker, read the index, open only matching concepts. Treat status,
stale_after, and the trust tier as part of the answer - a deprecated or
stale concept is reported as such, not as current truth.
End-of-task review (after substantial work, when the repo's instruction file asks for it): scan the work for decisions taken, findings established, or rules adopted; capture what passes the fences; say plainly when nothing does.