Nm Sanctum Workflow Improvement

> Night Market Skill — ported from claude-night-market/sanctum. For the full experience with agents, hooks, and commands, install the Claude Code plugin.

Workflow Improvement

When To Use

This skill focuses on improving the *workflow assets* (skills, agents, commands, hooks) that were involved, not on feature work itself.

When NOT To Use

Required TodoWrite Items

Step 0: Gather Improvement Context (context-gathered)

Before analyzing the current session, gather existing improvement data:

0.1: Check Skill Execution History

Query memory-palace logs for recent performance issues:

# Recent failures (last 7 days)
/skill-logs --failures-only --last 7d
Performance metrics for involved plugins
pensive:skill-review --plugin sanctum --recommendations

Capture:

0.2: Query Knowledge Base

Search for previously captured workflow lessons:

# If memory-palace review-chamber is available
/review-room search "workflow improvement" --room lessons
/review-room search "efficiency" --room patterns

Look for:

0.3: Check Git History

Identify recurring issues through commit patterns:

git log --oneline --grep="improve\|fix\|optimize" --since="30 days ago" \
  -- plugins/sanctum/skills/ plugins/sanctum/commands/
Look for unstable components (frequent fixes)
git log --oneline --since="30 days ago" --follow \
  -- plugins/sanctum/skills/workflow-improvement/

Extract:

Output Format:

## Improvement Context
Skill Performance Issues
sanctum:workflow-improvement: stability_gap 0.35 (5 failures in 7 days)
Error pattern: "Missing validation in Step 2"
Knowledge Base Lessons
PR #42 lesson: "Workflow validation should happen at start, not end"
Pattern: Early validation reduces iteration time by 30%
Git History Insights
workflow-improvement skill: 8 commits in 30 days (instability signal)
Recurring theme: "Add missing prerequisite checks"

Step 1: Capture the Session Slice (slice-captured)

Identify the most recent command or session slice in the current context window and capture:

If the slice is ambiguous, pick the most recent *complete* attempt and state the exact boundary you chose.

Step 2: Recreate the Workflow (workflow-recreated)

Reconstruct the workflow as a numbered list of 5 to 20 steps, identifying inputs, branch points for decisions, and outputs such as file changes or state modifications. During this reconstruction, identify specific friction points that reduce efficiency. These often include repeated steps or redundant tool calls, as well as missing guardrails where validation occurs too late or prerequisites are unclear. Other common issues are a lack of automation for tasks that should be scripted, and discoverability gaps caused by confusing naming conventions.

Cross-reference with Step 0 context:

Step 3: Generate Improvements (improvements-generated)

Generate 3 to 5 distinct improvement approaches and score each on impact, complexity, reversibility, and consistency with existing sanctum patterns. The scoring should specifically address whether the change prevents the recurrence of patterns identified in Step 0. Prioritize improvements that address components with a high stability gap (greater than 0.3) or recurring issues found in the git history. You should also incorporate lessons from the review-chamber and aim to reduce failure modes identified in the skill logs. Prefer small, high-use changes such as tightening a skill's exit criteria, adding missing command options, improving hook guardrails for better observability, or splitting overloaded commands into clearer phases.

Step 4: Agree on a Plan (plan-agreed)

Choose 1 approach and define:

Keep the plan bounded: aim for ≤ 5 files changed unless the workflow truly spans more.

Step 5: Implement (changes-implemented)

Apply changes following sanctum conventions:

Step 6: Validate Substantive Improvement (validated)

Validation should include at least 2 of:

Record the before/after comparison as *metrics*, not prose:

Metrics Comparison Template

## Validation Results
Before Improvement
Step count: 15
Tool calls: 23
Failure points: 3
Duration: ~8 minutes
Manual interventions: 5
After Improvement
Step count: 11 (-4, -27%)
Tool calls: 17 (-6, -26%)
Failure points: 0 (-3, -100%)
Duration: ~5 minutes (-37%)
Manual interventions: 2 (-3, -60%)
Verification
[E1] Command: python3 plugins/sanctum/scripts/test_workflow.py
Output: All tests passed (0.5s)
[E2] Command: /validate-plugin sanctum
Output: No issues found

Step 7: Close the Loop (Store Lessons)

After validation, capture the improvement for future reference:

7.1: Update Git History

Commit with descriptive message that future searches will find:

git add 
git commit -m "improve(sanctum):  - 
Addresses recurring issue: 
Reduces  by 
Evidence: stability_gap reduced from 0.35 to 0.12
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 "

7.2: Post Tooling Learnings to Discussions (Preferred)

Observations about night-market tooling (skill behavior, agent coordination, hook timing, command UX) belong in https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market/discussions, not local memory. Always target the night-market repo regardless of which repo you are currently working in.

# Post to night-market Learnings category
See fix-pr Step 6.7 for the full GraphQL pattern
targeting athola/claude-night-market explicitly

> Repo-specific learnings stay in the current repo. Tooling > learnings always go to > https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market/discussions > so the framework can improve.

7.3: Capture Lesson in Memory Palace (Optional, Local Only)

If the improvement addresses a repo-specific pattern (not tooling), store it locally:

# Store in review-chamber lessons
/review-room capture --room lessons --title "Workflow: "

7.4: Update Improvement Metrics

Track the improvement's impact:

# Check post-improvement stability
pensive:skill-review --skill sanctum: --recommendations

This creates a feedback loop where future /fix-workflow and /update-plugins runs will reference this lesson.

Supporting Modules

Troubleshooting

Common Issues

If a command is not found, confirm that all dependencies are installed and accessible in your PATH. For permission errors, check file system permissions and run the command with appropriate privileges. If you encounter unexpected behavior, enable verbose logging using the --verbose flag to capture more detailed execution data.

Common Issues

If a command is not found, confirm that all dependencies are installed and accessible in your PATH. For permission errors, check file system permissions and run the command with appropriate privileges. If you encounter unexpected behavior, enable verbose logging using the --verbose flag to capture more detailed execution data.