Knowledge Consistency Vision

---

Problem

The Forge agentic system has evolved through multiple projects and iterations. Knowledge files, Bot system prompts, and Skills may have drifted out of alignment — containing deprecated content, outdated references, inconsistencies between documents, omissions where functionality is documented but not implemented, and contradictions with the Forge Charter. Without a systematic audit, these defects compound and degrade agent reliability and organizational trust in the system.

Research Instructions

Research must cover three pillars of the Forge system — Knowledge, Prompts, and Skills — and cross-reference against the Forge Charter. Specifically:

1. Read all published Knowledge files in the Forge department root and Functions.
2. Read the system prompts of all Bots in the “forge” group.
3. Read all Skills (SKILL.md files) in the Forge department.
4. Read the Forge Charter in full.
5. For each finding, categorize as: deprecated, outdated, inconsistent, omitted, or charter contradiction.
6. Present findings grouped by category with specific file references and recommended actions.

---

Requirements

R1: Comprehensive System Review

Review all Forge Knowledge files, Bot system prompts in the “forge” group, and all Forge Skills for consistency, correctness, and completeness. Cross-reference each pillar against the others and against the Forge Charter.

R2: Deprecated Items

Identify anything in Knowledge, Prompts, or Skills that is deprecated — no longer in use, superseded, or marked as retired — and should be removed.

R3: Outdated Items

Identify anything that is outdated — references to old processes, stale URLs, incorrect tool names, obsolete procedures, or content that no longer reflects current implementation.

R4: Inconsistencies

List any inconsistencies between Knowledge files, Bot prompts, and Skills — where two or more sources describe the same thing differently or contradict each other on facts, procedures, or conventions.

R5: Omissions

List any and all omissions — features or functionality that is documented but not implemented, or implemented but not documented.

R6: Charter Alignment

List any contradictions or omissions with regards to the Forge Charter — where Knowledge, Prompts, or Skills fail to uphold, contradict, or omit charter principles.

R7: Recommendations and Spec

Present research findings and recommendations organized by category. After user approval or rejection of each recommendation, produce a Spec to fix the approved defects.

Success Criteria

#	Criterion	Measured by
V1	All Forge Knowledge files reviewed	Checklist of every published .md file in Forge department root and Functions
V2	All forge-group Bot system prompts reviewed	Checklist of every Bot in the “forge” group
V3	All Forge Skills reviewed	Checklist of every SKILL.md in the Forge department
V4	Deprecated items listed with file references	Itemized list with file path and removal recommendation
V5	Outdated items listed with file references	Itemized list with file path, what’s outdated, and update recommendation
V6	Inconsistencies listed with cross-references	Itemized list citing conflicting sources side by side
V7	Omissions listed (documented-but-unimplemented and implemented-but-undocumented)	Itemized list with file references
V8	Charter contradictions/omissions listed	Itemized list citing Charter section vs. conflicting source
V9	Recommendations presented for user approval	Categorized findings document with recommended actions
V10	Spec created for approved fixes	Spec document covering each approved recommendation

Out Of Scope

• Reviewing departments other than Forge

• Reviewing the Forge project folders (Projects/) — only Knowledge, Skills, and Bot prompts are in scope

• Code-level implementation review of the Forge platform itself (app code, not docs)