A second brain that talks back

You have access to my notes in [Notion / the notes/ folder].
Don't answer any substantive question yet — just give me an inventory.

1. What are the main topic areas that show up in the notes?
   For each one, estimate how many pages or files it covers.
2. What time range do the notes cover, and where are the gaps in
   time (periods with almost nothing written).
3. Which notes look like binding rules or decisions
   (price lists, procedures, agreements), and which are more like
   ideas and unfinished business?
4. Where is there clearly more than one version of the same thing
   (several price lists, several versions of a procedure) that could
   get confused?
5. What's missing from the notes, given the kind of work I actually
   do according to them?

For each point, cite the specific page or file names you're basing
this on. Don't guess or make anything up.

You're connected to my Notion. Before I start asking questions,
check your scope:

1. List the top-level pages or databases you can see.
2. For three of them, note when they were last edited.
3. Try to find a page containing the word [price list / procedure /
   contract], and give its name and path.
4. State explicitly whether you can see anything that looks personal
   or sensitive by its title (journal, payroll, health, passwords).

Don't edit or create anything. Just describe what you see.

notes/
  daily/          daily notes, one per day
  people/         one file per person or client
  projects/       one file per project
  decisions/      one file per decision, dated in the name
  reference/      procedures, price lists, checklists — current truth
  archive/        old versions, closed-out projects

Project instructions "My notes":

You are my assistant over my personal notes archive.
Structure: reference/ = currently valid rules and procedures,
decisions/ = individual decisions with a date, daily/ = daily notes,
people/ = notes on clients and colleagues, archive/ = invalid and old
versions.

Rules that always apply:
1. Answer exclusively from my notes. Don't add general knowledge.
2. For every claim, cite the name of the page or file it comes from,
   and the date of the note if it can be determined.
3. When the answer isn't in the notes, say so explicitly with the
   sentence "there's nothing on this in the notes" and suggest where
   I might have it.
4. When you find more than one version of the same thing, list all
   of them with dates and flag which one is most likely valid based
   on location and date — but leave the decision to me.
5. Never edit, delete, or create anything until I explicitly ask
   you to.

Search my notes and answer this question:
[what did we decide about hourly rates for new clients].

Answer in this structure:
1. The decision in one sentence, as it currently stands.
2. When it was made and who was involved, if the notes let you tell.
3. The reasons given in the notes — verbatim, not paraphrased.
4. Alternatives that were considered and not used, and why.
5. Later changes or exceptions, if the notes revisit the topic.

For every point, cite the source note and its date.
Where the information isn't in the notes, write "not in the notes" —
don't guess at what we probably meant.

Go through all my notes and build a client profile for [name].
I'm interested in the period [the last 3 years].

Put together:
- a timeline of the relationship: what, when, at what scope
- agreed terms that applied at each point (prices, deadlines,
  exceptions)
- what works with them and what doesn't — based on what I wrote down
- open items, promises, and unfinished business that never got
  marked "done"
- the people on their side and what I know about them
- risks and sensitive points I've ever complained about

Sort chronologically, and for each item cite the source note and
date. Distinguish what's a recorded fact from what was my impression
at the time.
At the end, give me 5 questions I should clarify before the next
meeting.

I'm looking at this problem right now:
[describe the problem in 3-5 sentences, imprecisely is fine, just as
you see it]

Search my notes and find out:
1. Have I ever dealt with this problem, or something very similar,
   before?
2. If so: when, in what context, and how did it turn out?
3. What solution did I use back then, and did it work?
4. Did I note anything I'd do differently next time?
5. Are there things in my notes related to this problem, even if
   they don't address it directly?

Search by meaning too, not just by words — I might have described it
differently back then. If you don't find anything, say so clearly
and don't offer general advice instead.

Go through my notes from [the past year] and find patterns:

1. Which topics keep coming back without me ever resolving them?
   For each one, note how many times and over what span it appeared.
2. Where do I contradict myself across the notes — where did I claim
   one thing at one point and the opposite at another?
3. What types of problems repeat across different clients or
   projects?
4. What did I promise myself I'd change, with no trace of it
   happening in the notes?
5. Which of my recorded assumptions weren't borne out by later
   notes?

For every finding, cite at least two specific notes with dates that
it's based on. If you only have one, it's not a pattern — leave that
finding out.

Go through the notes in the [reference/] folder (or the [name]
database) and run a discoverability audit. For each note, assess:

1. Can you tell from the title what it's about and from when?
   If not, suggest a better title in the form
   "YYYY-MM-DD Topic — what it's about".
2. Does the text contain the date and who was involved?
3. If it's a decision: is the reason stated?
4. Does it link to related notes, or does it stand alone?
5. Is there a newer version of the same thing somewhere else?

Output as a table: current title | what's missing | suggested title.
Don't rename or edit anything — just propose.
Sort worst cases first, so I know where to start.

Go through my conversations from this week and prepare a distillation
for my notes. I only care about what still has value a year from now.

Split the output into four groups:
1. DECISIONS — what I decided to do, including the reason and the
   alternatives considered.
2. PROCEDURES — walkthroughs and solutions I had explained to me
   that I'll need again.
3. FACTS AND DATA — specific numbers, names, terms I learned, noting
   where they came from.
4. OPEN QUESTIONS — what remained unresolved.

For each item, write:
- a suggested note title in the form "YYYY-MM-DD Topic — what it's
  about"
- the note text, 5-10 lines, ready to paste in
- which folder or database it belongs in
- which of my existing notes it should link to

Leave out anything that was one-off (wording for a single email, a
text fix). Don't include sensitive data. Don't save anything
yourself — just prepare it for me to review.

Based on my notes from [the last quarter], figure out what's missing
from my archive:

1. Topics I clearly spend a lot of time on, according to the notes,
   but have no summary or reference note for.
2. Decisions the notes refer back to, where the decision itself was
   never actually written down anywhere.
3. Procedures I repeat, according to the notes, but haven't written
   up as a procedure (and should, so they can be handed off).
4. Clients or projects with notes scattered around but no summary.

For each gap, suggest a title for a note I should create, and three
bullet points of what should be in it. Sort by what I'm missing the
most.

I've uploaded all the documents for project [name] into the
notebook: the brief, the contract, meeting notes, and ongoing notes.

Build me a handover overview from them:
1. What the project is about and what state it's in.
2. All agreed-on rules and deadlines, with a source citation for
   each.
3. Decisions made during the project, chronologically.
4. Open items and risks.
5. Who's responsible for what, and who to go to for what.
6. What's missing from the materials — what the successor should
   track down from people.

Base this exclusively on the uploaded sources. For each point, note
which document it comes from. Take point 6 seriously: admit a gap
rather than fill it in with a guess.