Skip to content
Flows

What Flows just did

Based on your request to build Session Summaries That Survive Compaction, Flows created 4 implementation stages and 12 checks.

You asked for: Add a durable session-summary layer: written at session end and before compaction, stored outside the context, and reloaded into future sessions.. Flows generated 4 stages because the application requires A session summary written to disk at session end and immediately before every compaction; Summary content: outcomes, working commands, failed approaches, user preferences, project facts; Summaries stored per project, outside the conversation context. Each stage tells your AI builder what to do, tests whether it actually worked, and gives a repair instruction when it fails. These checks are designed to catch: Summaries written only on clean exit, so crashes lose everything; Transcript-shaped summaries that are as long as what they summarize; Never loading the summaries back, making the whole layer decorative.

Example failure

The form reported success, but no database record was created.

What Flows does

Flows detects the failure, generates a repair instruction, reruns the test, and stores the passing evidence.

Stages — Plan → Build → Test → Fix → Prove → Ship

4 stages · 12 checks · progressive disclosure — open a stage for details

Copy to external builder

Copies a prompt for Claude/Cursor/etc. Records prompt_copied only — not execution, commits, or checks.

Execute through Oort

Requires Sign in with Oort + a provider connection (BYOK). Keys stay on Oort. A model name in the dropdown is not the same as a live connection.

Next

Check off: Failed approaches captured with reasons

Add a proof note on each check — a checkbox alone is weak proof.

Probes & advanced tools are under “More verification tools”. Experience level: Settings.

Session Summaries That Survive Compaction
Memory & Context60-90 minutes

Project (saved with proof)

Project binding: Unbound — complete project binding before trusting this run · missing repositoryUrl, repositoryStartCommit, environment, stack

More verification tools (probes, timeline, adapters)Show

App persistence (create → read → assert token)

Body template: {"probe":"{{token}}","title":"flows-probe-{{token}}"}. Needs CORS-readable public create/list endpoints (or inconclusive). Badge only when create→read→refresh finds the token (detects false success).

Two-account authorization (User B cannot see/change User A)

Authorization evidence source: Cross-account ownership test (trust level 5/6). These are not equivalent. Unauthenticated probe alone is weaker (source: unauthenticated API probe). Tokens stay in this browser session only — not uploaded to Flows servers.

Generated edge-case tests (review / approve)

  • api_probe Logged-out users cannot open protected pages
  • api_probe Protected API rejects requests without credentials
  • api_probe Expired session cannot mutate data
  • browser_automation Logout in one tab invalidates mutations from another
  • cross_account_probe User B cannot see or change User A’s data
  • cross_account_probe Participant cannot call coach/admin endpoints
  • cross_account_probe URL/body ID tampering cannot cross tenant boundary
  • api_probe Create then refresh still shows the record
  • api_probe Edit then refresh keeps the edit
  • api_probe Delete then refresh removes the record
  • api_probe Nonexistent record ID fails cleanly
  • cross_account_probe Cross-user record identifier is rejected

Generated from this route’s signals — you approve; you do not invent security tests.

Content probe (GET body contains text)

In-product content probe reads response text when CORS allows — not full DOM/click automation. Playwright script is optional and external.

Proof strength

thin · 0/100

Heuristic from notes + probes + gates — not a production certification.

Verification adapters

  • Deploy URL probe · idle
  • API path probe · idle
  • Authz probe (unauth → 401/403) · idle
  • Browser persistence · idle
  • App persistence (create→read) · idle
  • Content / body text probe · idle
  • In-product Playwright DOM · not embedded (download external script)

Filled circles = available here. Empty = not shipped. Probes are not a production audit. Adapter docs

0/4 steps0%
Recording plan identity…

Step 1 of 4

Not started

Define what deserves to survive

Durable memory is a curation problem before it is a storage problem.

Flows keeps plan, checks, failures, and next steps connected

Your AI tool writes or changes the code

Repository grounds the plan only after inspect

Checks always carry a validation tier

Not checkedChecks not locked

How this plan was created

Plan from project details

Flows creates steps using the goal, requirements, stack, platform, and details you provide.

  • Project description
  • Selected template / route
  • User-entered stack
  • Constraints and notes
  • Session Summaries That Survive Compaction

No repository inspection implied. Connect and inspect a codebase to ground steps in real files.

Codebase access

Checking GitHub…

Or paste a repository URL manually
Plan instructions

Use these instructions in Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Emergent, or another builder.

Define the session-summary schema for durable knowledge. Sections: OUTCOME (what was accomplished, shipped, or abandoned), WORKING RECIPES (commands, configurations, and approaches that worked, exactly as used), FAILED APPROACHES (what was tried and failed, with the failure reason - so it is not repeated), USER PREFERENCES (style, tools, constraints the user expressed), PROJECT FACTS (architecture notes, key file locations, gotchas discovered). Exclusions: greetings, reasoning meander, anything reconstructible by reading the code. Write the extraction prompt that fills this schema from a session transcript, and test it on two saved transcripts - grade whether someone could resume the project from the summary alone.

The AI tool writes code — Flows only organizes the plan · Complete implementation prompt with explicit requirements

Project context

Copies the project goal, technical details, current step, previous progress, and checks so your AI tool understands what it is working on.

Expected after this step

A summary schema plus a tested extraction prompt.

Should not happen

  • Summaries written only on clean exit, so crashes lose everything
  • Transcript-shaped summaries that are as long as what they summarize
  • Never loading the summaries back, making the whole layer decorative
  • Unbounded accumulation until the summary store itself needs compaction

Verify gate — prove this step works before continuing

Do not move on until every check is true. Add proof notes — a checked box alone is weak proof. Checks are manual by default; deploy/API probes live under “More verification tools” and do not auto-check boxes.

Do not continue if…

  • !Summaries written only on clean exit, so crashes lose everything
  • !Transcript-shaped summaries that are as long as what they summarize
  • !Never loading the summaries back, making the whole layer decorative
  • !Unbounded accumulation until the summary store itself needs compaction

Repair path — if this step fails

Use the Repair Prompt when a verify gate fails. Loop: Detected → Diagnosed → Repair issued → Changed → Retested → Resolved

Show repair prompt textShow

Summaries are bloated transcripts. Apply the test 'would this line change a future session's behavior?' - delete every line that fails it, then fix the prompt to match.

Your notes for this step

Definition of Done

Final route-level requirements. Manual checks — separate from per-step verify gates. Completing step gates does not auto-check these. Route completion is not a production-ready claim.

0/4 · manual