Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
730
commands/expand-graph.md
Normal file
730
commands/expand-graph.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,730 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Discover missing relationships for a note via multi-strategy analysis
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Expand Graph
|
||||
|
||||
Discover missing relationships between a note and the rest of the knowledge graph through multi-strategy analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
## 0. Locate AZKG Repository
|
||||
|
||||
**Check for AZKG_REPO_PATH environment variable:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Use bash conditional: `if [ -z "$AZKG_REPO_PATH" ]; then REPO_PATH=$(pwd); else REPO_PATH="$AZKG_REPO_PATH"; fi`
|
||||
- **If AZKG_REPO_PATH is set:** Use that path as the repository root
|
||||
- **If AZKG_REPO_PATH is not set:** Use current working directory (pwd)
|
||||
- Store result as REPO_PATH for all subsequent file operations
|
||||
|
||||
**All file operations must use REPO_PATH:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Read: `Read(REPO_PATH/filename.md)` or `Read("$REPO_PATH/filename.md")`
|
||||
- Write: `Write(REPO_PATH/filename.md)` or `Write("$REPO_PATH/filename.md")`
|
||||
- Edit: `Edit(REPO_PATH/filename.md)` or `Edit("$REPO_PATH/filename.md")`
|
||||
- Grep: `Grep(pattern, path=REPO_PATH)` or with explicit path
|
||||
- Glob: `Glob(pattern, path=REPO_PATH)` or with explicit path
|
||||
|
||||
**Example usage:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# Check environment variable
|
||||
if [ -z "$AZKG_REPO_PATH" ]; then
|
||||
REPO_PATH=$(pwd)
|
||||
else
|
||||
REPO_PATH="$AZKG_REPO_PATH"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Then use REPO_PATH for all operations
|
||||
Read("$REPO_PATH/agents.md")
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Concrete examples:**
|
||||
|
||||
- If AZKG_REPO_PATH="/c/Users/dothompson/OneDrive/src/witt3rd/donald-azkg"
|
||||
→ Read("/c/Users/dothompson/OneDrive/src/witt3rd/donald-azkg/agents.md")
|
||||
- If AZKG_REPO_PATH is not set and pwd is /c/Users/dothompson/OneDrive/src/witt3rd/donald-azkg
|
||||
→ Read("agents.md") or use full path from pwd
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Parse Input and Load Note
|
||||
|
||||
**Input format:** User provides:
|
||||
|
||||
- A note name: `/expand-graph mcp_security.md`
|
||||
- Or just the topic: `/expand-graph mcp_security`
|
||||
|
||||
**Normalize and validate:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Add `.md` extension if missing
|
||||
- Use Glob to verify the target note exists
|
||||
- If not found, suggest similar notes using Glob
|
||||
|
||||
**Read the target note:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Use Read tool to get full content
|
||||
- Extract YAML tags
|
||||
- Extract main concepts and topics
|
||||
- Parse current "Related Concepts" section to see existing relationships
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Extract Key Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
**Analyze note content for:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical terms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Technologies mentioned (Python, Rust, MCP, OAuth, etc.)
|
||||
- Frameworks and tools (FastMCP, React, etc.)
|
||||
- Protocols and standards (HTTP, JWT, RFC 8707, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
**Domain concepts:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Core ideas discussed (authentication, security, agents, etc.)
|
||||
- Patterns mentioned (observer, factory, reactive, etc.)
|
||||
- Problem domains (enterprise, web, async, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
**Wikilinks:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Existing wikilinks in content `[[note]]`
|
||||
- Are these also in "Related Concepts"? If not, they're candidates to add
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:**
|
||||
|
||||
- YAML frontmatter tags provide high-level domains
|
||||
|
||||
**Output concept extraction:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
📖 Analyzing mcp_security.md...
|
||||
|
||||
🔍 Key concepts identified:
|
||||
Technologies: OAuth, JWT, SAML, Active Directory
|
||||
Domains: security, authentication, authorization, privacy
|
||||
Protocols: RFC 8707, Resource Indicators, OAuth flows
|
||||
Patterns: least privilege, defense in depth, audit logging
|
||||
Tags: #mcp #protocol #security #authentication #authorization
|
||||
|
||||
📊 Current relationships:
|
||||
✅ Prerequisites: 2 (mcp_overview, mcp_architecture)
|
||||
✅ Related Topics: 3
|
||||
✅ Extends: 1
|
||||
✅ Examples: 0
|
||||
✅ Alternatives: 0
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Multi-Strategy Relationship Discovery
|
||||
|
||||
**Strategy 1: Content-Based Search (Grep)**
|
||||
|
||||
For each key concept, search other notes:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Searching for "OAuth" across knowledge base...
|
||||
Found in:
|
||||
- oauth_fundamentals.md (15 mentions)
|
||||
- api_security.md (8 mentions)
|
||||
- enterprise_auth.md (12 mentions)
|
||||
|
||||
Searching for "authentication" across knowledge base...
|
||||
Found in:
|
||||
- fastmcp_auth.md (20 mentions)
|
||||
- api_security.md (18 mentions)
|
||||
- enterprise_auth.md (25 mentions)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Filter out:**
|
||||
|
||||
- The target note itself
|
||||
- Notes already in "Related Concepts" section
|
||||
- Low-relevance matches (1-2 mentions)
|
||||
|
||||
**Strategy 2: Tag-Based Discovery**
|
||||
|
||||
Use Grep to find notes with overlapping tags:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Target has tags: #mcp #security #authentication
|
||||
|
||||
Finding notes with overlapping tags...
|
||||
Use Grep to search for "tags: [" in YAML frontmatter
|
||||
Parse out tags and find overlaps:
|
||||
- #mcp + #security: mcp_implementation.md, mcp_tools.md
|
||||
- #security + #authentication: api_security.md, zero_trust.md
|
||||
- #mcp (any): 12 other MCP-related notes
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Strategy 3: Wikilink Analysis**
|
||||
|
||||
Use Grep to find wikilinks in target note content:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Checking wikilinks in content vs "Related Concepts" section...
|
||||
|
||||
Found in content but NOT in "Related Concepts":
|
||||
- [[mcp_overview]] - mentioned in text but not in prerequisites
|
||||
- [[oauth_fundamentals]] - referenced but not linked formally
|
||||
|
||||
Use Grep to find backlinks (other notes linking to this note):
|
||||
Found in other notes' "Related Concepts" sections pointing here:
|
||||
- fastmcp_auth.md lists this as "related" (we should reciprocate)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Strategy 4: Research with Perplexity**
|
||||
|
||||
Ask targeted questions:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Query 1: "What foundational knowledge is required to understand [main topic of note]?"
|
||||
Query 2: "What concepts are commonly related to [main topic] in practice?"
|
||||
Query 3: "What are concrete examples or implementations of [main topic]?"
|
||||
Query 4: "What are alternative approaches to [main topic]?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use Perplexity responses to:
|
||||
|
||||
- Discover conceptual prerequisites
|
||||
- Find related domains
|
||||
- Identify common patterns
|
||||
- Suggest examples and alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Classify and Score Relationships
|
||||
|
||||
**For each discovered note, determine:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Relationship Type
|
||||
|
||||
**Prerequisites:** Does target need this first?
|
||||
|
||||
- Contains foundational concepts mentioned in target
|
||||
- Target assumes knowledge from this note
|
||||
- Complexity: This note is simpler/more basic
|
||||
- Example: mcp_overview → mcp_security
|
||||
|
||||
**Related Topics:** Parallel/complementary topics?
|
||||
|
||||
- Same level of complexity
|
||||
- Different but connected domain
|
||||
- Solve similar problems differently
|
||||
- Example: api_security ↔ mcp_security
|
||||
|
||||
**Extends:** Does target build on this?
|
||||
|
||||
- Target is specialized version
|
||||
- Adds capabilities to base concept
|
||||
- Target assumes this as foundation
|
||||
- Example: mcp_security extends mcp_architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**Examples:** Is this a concrete implementation?
|
||||
|
||||
- Shows practical application of target concepts
|
||||
- Code/pattern implementing target ideas
|
||||
- Case study of target in practice
|
||||
- Example: fastmcp_auth is example of mcp_security
|
||||
|
||||
**Alternatives:** Different approach to same problem?
|
||||
|
||||
- Solves same problem differently
|
||||
- Competing technology or pattern
|
||||
- Different paradigm
|
||||
- Example: zero_trust vs traditional_security
|
||||
|
||||
### Confidence Score
|
||||
|
||||
**High (★★★★★):**
|
||||
|
||||
- Many shared concepts (10+)
|
||||
- Strong semantic relationship
|
||||
- Confirmed by Perplexity research
|
||||
- Explicitly mentioned in content
|
||||
- Example: OAuth fundamentals for OAuth-heavy security note
|
||||
|
||||
**Medium (★★★☆☆):**
|
||||
|
||||
- Moderate overlap (5-9 concepts)
|
||||
- Reasonable semantic connection
|
||||
- Supported by tag overlap
|
||||
- Mentioned indirectly
|
||||
- Example: General API security for MCP security
|
||||
|
||||
**Low (★★☆☆☆):**
|
||||
|
||||
- Minimal overlap (2-4 concepts)
|
||||
- Weak semantic connection
|
||||
- Speculative relationship
|
||||
- Not mentioned in content
|
||||
- Example: Zero trust model for MCP (valid but tangential)
|
||||
|
||||
### Evidence Collection
|
||||
|
||||
**For each relationship, capture:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Frequency:** How many concept matches?
|
||||
- **Quotes:** Specific text showing connection
|
||||
- **Location:** Where in note is this relevant?
|
||||
- **Research:** What did Perplexity say?
|
||||
- **Reasoning:** Why should these be linked?
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Present Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
**Format as organized report:**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Graph Expansion: mcp_security.md
|
||||
|
||||
Found **12 potential relationships** across 8 notes
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## 📚 Suggested Prerequisites (2)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. [[mcp_overview]] → prerequisite
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★★★ High
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- Mentioned 3 times in target note
|
||||
- Target references "MCP fundamentals" and "protocol basics"
|
||||
- Research confirms: "Understanding MCP basics required before security"
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Can't understand MCP security without knowing what MCP is.
|
||||
The security model builds directly on protocol concepts.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Referenced in content but missing from "Related Concepts"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. [[oauth_fundamentals]] → prerequisite
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★★★ High
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- 15 mentions of "OAuth" in target note
|
||||
- Entire section dedicated to "OAuth Flows"
|
||||
- Tags overlap: #authentication, #security
|
||||
- Research confirms: "OAuth knowledge essential for MCP auth"
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** OAuth is the primary authentication mechanism. Deep understanding
|
||||
needed before tackling MCP-specific OAuth implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## 🔗 Suggested Related Topics (4)
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. [[enterprise_architecture]] → related
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★☆☆ Medium
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- Both discuss: VNet integration, DLP, enterprise deployment
|
||||
- 8 shared concepts
|
||||
- Tags overlap: #enterprise
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Both address enterprise concerns at similar abstraction level.
|
||||
MCP security is part of broader enterprise architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. [[api_security_best_practices]] → related
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★☆☆ Medium
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- MCP is API protocol
|
||||
- 12 security best practices mentioned in both
|
||||
- Research: "General API security principles apply to MCP"
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** MCP security inherits from general API security principles.
|
||||
Provides broader context for MCP-specific patterns.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## 🏗️ Suggested "Extends" (1)
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. mcp_security extends [[mcp_architecture]]
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★★★ High
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- Security is explicit layer on architecture diagram
|
||||
- Target states: "Security model built on top of MCP architecture"
|
||||
- Architecture defines components, security defines protections
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Security adds protection layer to architectural components.
|
||||
Cannot exist without the architecture it secures.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Architecture listed as prerequisite, should be "extends"
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## 💡 Suggested Examples (3)
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. [[fastmcp_authentication]] → example
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★★★ High
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- Python implementation of MCP auth patterns
|
||||
- Shows OAuth flow implementation
|
||||
- Research: "FastMCP demonstrates MCP security in practice"
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Concrete Python code implementing concepts discussed in target.
|
||||
Shows theory in action.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. [[csharp_mcp_auth]] → example
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★★★☆ High
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- C# implementation of same patterns
|
||||
- Demonstrates enterprise auth integration
|
||||
- Tags: #csharp, #mcp, #authentication
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Alternative language implementation showing same concepts.
|
||||
Useful for enterprise/.NET developers.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## 🔄 Suggested Alternatives (2)
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. [[zero_trust_security_model]] → alternative
|
||||
**Confidence:** ★★☆☆☆ Low
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:**
|
||||
- Different security paradigm
|
||||
- Both address: authentication, authorization, least privilege
|
||||
- Research: "Zero trust can be applied to MCP deployments"
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Alternative security philosophy applicable to MCP.
|
||||
Different approach to similar goals.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current status:** Not currently linked
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 📊 Discovery Statistics
|
||||
|
||||
- **Total candidates examined:** 93 notes
|
||||
- **Content matches found:** 23 notes
|
||||
- **Tag overlaps found:** 15 notes
|
||||
- **After filtering:** 12 high-quality suggestions
|
||||
- **Confidence breakdown:**
|
||||
- High (★★★★★): 5 suggestions
|
||||
- Medium (★★★☆☆): 5 suggestions
|
||||
- Low (★★☆☆☆): 2 suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
## 💡 Insights
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical missing prerequisite:** oauth_fundamentals
|
||||
This note is heavily referenced but not formally linked. High priority addition.
|
||||
|
||||
**Weak example coverage:** Only 0 examples currently
|
||||
Consider adding fastmcp_authentication and csharp_mcp_auth to show practical application.
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture relationship:** Currently listed as prerequisite
|
||||
Should be "extends" relationship - security is layer on architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. User Review and Approval
|
||||
|
||||
**Offer interaction modes:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
How would you like to proceed?
|
||||
|
||||
[A] Accept all high-confidence suggestions (★★★★★)
|
||||
[R] Review each suggestion individually
|
||||
[C] Custom selection (specify which to add)
|
||||
[S] Save suggestions to file for later review
|
||||
[Q] Quit without changes
|
||||
|
||||
Choice: █
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If user chooses [R] (Review):**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
Review 1 of 12
|
||||
|
||||
Add [[mcp_overview]] as prerequisite?
|
||||
|
||||
Confidence: ★★★★★ High
|
||||
Evidence: Referenced 3 times, foundational concept
|
||||
Reasoning: Must understand MCP basics before security
|
||||
|
||||
[Y] Yes, add this relationship
|
||||
[N] No, skip this one
|
||||
[E] Edit relationship type (suggest different type)
|
||||
[?] Show full context from both notes
|
||||
[S] Skip remaining and finish
|
||||
|
||||
Choice: █
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Track decisions:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Accepted relationships
|
||||
- Rejected relationships (with reasons)
|
||||
- Modified relationships (type changes)
|
||||
|
||||
## 7. Update Markdown Files
|
||||
|
||||
**For each accepted relationship:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Update Target Note
|
||||
|
||||
Use Edit tool to update target note's "Related Concepts" section:
|
||||
|
||||
**Read the target note:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Use Read tool to get full content
|
||||
Parse "Related Concepts" section
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Add forward relationship:**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Related Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
### Prerequisites
|
||||
- [[mcp_overview]] - Must understand MCP basics first
|
||||
- [[oauth_fundamentals]] - OAuth is primary auth mechanism
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use Edit tool** to surgically insert new relationships in appropriate subsections.
|
||||
|
||||
### Update Related Notes
|
||||
|
||||
**For each note mentioned, add inverse relationship:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Read the related note:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Use Read tool to get its "Related Concepts" section
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Add bidirectional inverse:**
|
||||
|
||||
If target has "Prerequisites: [[mcp_overview]]"
|
||||
Then mcp_overview gets "Extended By: [[target]]"
|
||||
|
||||
If target has "Related Topics: [[api_security]]"
|
||||
Then api_security gets "Related Topics: [[target]]"
|
||||
|
||||
If target has "Extends: [[mcp_architecture]]"
|
||||
Then mcp_architecture gets "Extended By: [[target]]"
|
||||
|
||||
**Use Edit tool** to add inverse relationships to each related note.
|
||||
|
||||
### Maintain Bidirectionality
|
||||
|
||||
**Ensure every relationship has an inverse:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Forward Type | Inverse Type |
|
||||
|--------------|--------------|
|
||||
| Prerequisites | Extended By or Related Topics |
|
||||
| Related Topics | Related Topics (symmetric) |
|
||||
| Extends | Extended By |
|
||||
| Examples | Extended By |
|
||||
| Alternatives | Alternatives (symmetric) |
|
||||
|
||||
## 8. Provide Completion Report
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ Graph Expansion Complete!
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## Changes Applied
|
||||
|
||||
### mcp_security.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Added relationships:**
|
||||
✅ Prerequisites: 2
|
||||
- [[mcp_overview]] - Must understand MCP basics first
|
||||
- [[oauth_fundamentals]] - OAuth is primary auth mechanism
|
||||
|
||||
✅ Related Topics: 3
|
||||
- [[enterprise_architecture]] - Parallel enterprise concerns
|
||||
- [[api_security_best_practices]] - General API security principles
|
||||
- [[fastmcp_authentication]] - Moved from suggested examples
|
||||
|
||||
✅ Extends: 1 (modified)
|
||||
- [[mcp_architecture]] - Changed from prerequisite to extends
|
||||
|
||||
✅ Examples: 2
|
||||
- [[fastmcp_authentication]] - Python implementation
|
||||
- [[csharp_mcp_auth]] - C# implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**Rejected:**
|
||||
❌ [[zero_trust_security_model]] - User declined (too tangential)
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## Bidirectional Updates
|
||||
|
||||
Updated 9 additional notes with inverse relationships:
|
||||
- mcp_overview.md → added to Extended By
|
||||
- oauth_fundamentals.md → added to Extended By
|
||||
- enterprise_architecture.md → added to Related Topics
|
||||
- api_security_best_practices.md → added to Related Topics
|
||||
- mcp_architecture.md → moved to Extended By (from prerequisite inverse)
|
||||
- fastmcp_authentication.md → added to Extended By
|
||||
- csharp_mcp_auth.md → added to Extended By
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## Knowledge Graph Stats
|
||||
|
||||
**Before expansion:**
|
||||
- Total relationships in mcp_security.md: 6
|
||||
|
||||
**After expansion:**
|
||||
- Total relationships in mcp_security.md: 12 (+6)
|
||||
- Files modified: 10 (target + 9 related notes)
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Improvements
|
||||
|
||||
🎯 **Closed gaps:**
|
||||
- Connected heavily-referenced OAuth concepts
|
||||
- Added missing example implementations
|
||||
- Corrected architecture relationship type
|
||||
|
||||
📈 **Coverage increase:**
|
||||
- Prerequisites: 2 → 4 (+100%)
|
||||
- Examples: 0 → 2 (new coverage)
|
||||
- Related Topics: 3 → 6 (+100%)
|
||||
|
||||
🔗 **Network density:**
|
||||
- mcp_security.md now has 12 total relationships (was 6)
|
||||
- Better integrated into knowledge graph
|
||||
|
||||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
💡 **Suggestions:**
|
||||
1. Run `/learning-path mcp_security` to see updated prerequisite chain
|
||||
2. Run `/expand-graph oauth_fundamentals` to enrich that critical note
|
||||
3. Run `/graph-validate` to verify all bidirectional links
|
||||
|
||||
🔄 **Consider expanding:**
|
||||
- fastmcp_authentication.md (added as example, may need more connections)
|
||||
- csharp_mcp_auth.md (added as example, may need more connections)
|
||||
|
||||
📊 **Graph health:**
|
||||
✅ All relationships bidirectional
|
||||
✅ No orphaned nodes created
|
||||
✅ Relationship types semantically appropriate
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## 9. Handle Edge Cases
|
||||
|
||||
**No new relationships found:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Graph Analysis Complete
|
||||
|
||||
No new high-confidence relationships discovered for mcp_security.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Current coverage:**
|
||||
- Prerequisites: 3 (comprehensive)
|
||||
- Related Topics: 5 (well-connected)
|
||||
- Extends: 1 (appropriate)
|
||||
- Examples: 2 (good coverage)
|
||||
- Alternatives: 1 (adequate)
|
||||
|
||||
**Analysis:**
|
||||
- 93 notes examined
|
||||
- 0 high-confidence matches found
|
||||
- This note appears well-integrated
|
||||
|
||||
💡 This is actually good news - the note is already well-connected!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflicting relationships:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
⚠️ Potential Conflict Detected
|
||||
|
||||
[[mcp_architecture]] appears as both:
|
||||
- Prerequisite (current)
|
||||
- Should extend (suggested)
|
||||
|
||||
**Analysis:**
|
||||
A note cannot both be a prerequisite AND be extended by the same note.
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation:**
|
||||
Change to "extends" because:
|
||||
- Security is specialized layer on architecture
|
||||
- "extends" captures that security builds upon architecture
|
||||
- Prerequisites should be for foundational knowledge
|
||||
|
||||
**Action:**
|
||||
[Y] Accept recommendation (change to extends)
|
||||
[N] Keep as prerequisite
|
||||
[?] Explain difference between prerequisite and extends
|
||||
|
||||
Choice: █
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Circular dependency risk:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
⚠️ Circular Dependency Warning
|
||||
|
||||
Adding [[note_a]] as prerequisite would create cycle:
|
||||
mcp_security → oauth_fundamentals → mcp_implementation → mcp_security
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. Don't add this relationship
|
||||
2. Add as "related" instead of "prerequisite"
|
||||
3. Review and break the existing cycle
|
||||
|
||||
Recommended: Option 2 (related instead)
|
||||
|
||||
Choice: █
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## 10. Tools Used
|
||||
|
||||
- **Read** - Get full note content, parse "Related Concepts" sections
|
||||
- **Edit** - Update "Related Concepts" sections in target and related notes
|
||||
- **Grep** - Search for concepts across notes, find tag overlaps, find wikilinks
|
||||
- **Glob** - Verify notes exist, find candidates by file patterns
|
||||
- **mcp__perplexity-ask** - Research relationships using LLM reasoning
|
||||
- **Parse logic** - Extract concepts, classify relationships, score confidence
|
||||
|
||||
## 11. Important Notes
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality principles:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Evidence over guessing
|
||||
- Confidence scoring for transparency
|
||||
- User control over changes
|
||||
- Bidirectional integrity always
|
||||
- Clear reasoning for every suggestion
|
||||
|
||||
**Performance considerations:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Grep can search 93 notes quickly
|
||||
- Perplexity queries in parallel where possible
|
||||
- Cache concept extractions
|
||||
- Filter aggressively before showing to user
|
||||
|
||||
**User experience:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Make suggestions actionable
|
||||
- Provide escape hatches
|
||||
- Allow customization
|
||||
- Show clear before/after
|
||||
- Celebrate improvements
|
||||
|
||||
Execute graph expansion for the note provided by the user.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user