Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →sonichi/task-workstream-grouping
Infer stable semantic workstreams for ungrouped Sutando task history and apply the validated assignments to the durable workstream sidecar.
Passed 11 of 17 test cases with the skill, and 5 of 17 without it.
and 8 more in the full report
8 fixed7 passed either way9 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 7 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
When completing an internal task workstream grouping maintenance run, what exact tag must be included in the response message?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Includes [no-send] in the response message | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Group the pending task snapshot by enduring user goal, not by input channel, device, generic action type, or wording alone. Reuse an existing workstream when its meaning matches. Prefer a small number of useful workstreams over singleton labels.
python3 skills/task-workstream-grouping/scripts/workstreams.py snapshot.
Candidates are snap["tasks"], each carrying an id; prior groups are
snap["existing_workstreams"]. There is no candidates key — reading one
yields an empty list, and an empty proposal is applied as a real decision
that consumes every candidate the snapshot actually held.use concise two-to-six-word workstream names;
group follow-ups and status checks with the goal they continue;
group work across voice, web, Discord, and other sources when the goal is the same;
reuse an existing_workstreams[].id when appropriate — the stored workstream keeps
its own title, so name may be omitted on reuse;
omit isolated, ambiguous, or low-confidence tasks so they remain ungrouped;
give every proposed group a confidence from 0 to 1.
when reusing an existing workstream, rank with scripts/rank_workstreams.py
rather than by eye. best_match(candidates, keywords) returns the top id
only if it beats the runner-up by a margin, and None otherwise — on a tie
you must OMIT the task, not take the first candidate.
A ranking re-derived each pass cannot degrade gracefully: on a tie it falls back to whatever order the candidates arrived in, which is the arbitrary pick scoring was supposed to remove, and the printed shortlist makes it look deliberate. Measured: a three-way tie assigned a cinny UI task to an unrelated roadmap workstream, after five earlier passes had looked correct — those five all had wide margins, so the streak was evidence about the inputs, not about the method.
**Derive keywords from the task being classified, inside the per-task
test cases passed, vs 5 / 17 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.