weekly-summary

Generate a weekly summary of the user's AI coding sessions.

Steps

1. Get the date range. Calculate the start date (7 days ago) and end date (today) in YYYY-MM-DD format.

2. Fetch the digest. Call get_activity_digest with:

   • startDate: 7 days ago
   • endDate: today
   • detail: "highlights" (first + last user messages for substantive sessions)

3. Review the digest. Read the response directly — do NOT send it to a subagent. The highlights mode is compact enough to process inline. For each day, identify:

   • Which projects were worked on and what was accomplished
   • Key decisions, pivots, or discoveries (visible in the first/last message pairs)
   • Recurring themes across projects

4. Drill into key sessions (optional). If any sessions look particularly significant (high message count, interesting topic) but the highlights don't capture enough detail, call get_session_messages on those specific sessions (up to 5) using the filePath from the digest.

5. Write the summary. Structure it as:

Week of {start} - {end}

By the numbers: {total sessions} sessions, {total messages} messages across {project count} projects.

Day-by-day: For each day with activity, write 2-4 bullet points capturing the most significant work. Be specific — name projects, features, and outcomes. Skip days with no meaningful activity.

Highlights: The 3-5 most significant accomplishments across the entire week.

Themes: Recurring work streams or focus areas (e.g., "SDK development", "infrastructure", "bug fixes").

1. Surface new memory candidates. Run sessions memory mine --all --since-last --json, then sessions memory pending --json. The mine picks up only transcripts that changed since the last run, so this is cheap; --all is deliberate — a weekly summary spans every project, not whichever repo you happen to be sitting in.

   --all advances the watermark for every repo, not just this one. That is the point (nothing gets skipped), but it means a later sessions memory mine --since-last inside any single repo reports nothing changed until that repo's transcripts move again — this step has already mined them. Say nothing about it here; it is noted so the interaction is not rediscovered as a bug.

   pending prints {"count": N, "preview": [{"id", "text"}]}. If the count is zero, say nothing. Do not add an empty section, do not write "no new memory", do not mention that you checked. Most weeks have nothing, and a recurring empty section trains the user to skim past the whole summary.

   Otherwise close the summary with a short block: the count, up to three candidate texts from the preview (the preview holds five; showing three is deliberate), and one line saying to run /memory to triage. Do not triage here and never approve, reject, or snooze anything — this is a nudge, not the workflow.

   This step must never damage the summary. Unlike /memory, which stops loudly when the binary is missing, this one fails silently: if sessions is not installed, either command exits non-zero, or the output does not parse, skip the block entirely and finish the summary as written. The summary already succeeded before this step ran.

Guidelines

• Process the digest inline. Do not spawn a subagent to read it.
• Be specific. Quote project names, feature descriptions, and tool names.
• The first message shows intent; the last message shows outcome. Use both to capture the arc.
• Skip noise — 1-message sessions and test sessions are not worth mentioning.
• If a project appears across multiple days, note the arc of progress.
• Write for the user to review, not for a third party. Use "you" not "the user".