Problem
Two architectural gaps identified in v1:
1. Decay / Pruning (Growth Problem)
Bonsai v1 solves the search problem (boot tokens: 5K+ → ~400) but not the growth problem. Every new fact is added, nothing is ever removed. Over 6–12 months, memory/domains/ will bloat the same way MEMORY.md did.
There is no mechanism to ask "is this still relevant?" before writing. A reflection pass is needed — e.g. "is this older than 90 days and still accurate?" — to prune stale entries before they compound.
2. LLM-Dependent Ops in Heartbeat (Cost + Reliability)
Currently classify/reclassify/reindex are SKILL.md instructions — meaning an LLM reads and executes them on every heartbeat. This is:
- Expensive — tokens consumed per heartbeat
- Non-deterministic — LLM may behave differently each run
- Unnecessary — mechanical ops (stat files, count tokens, write index) don't need intelligence
A bash script that auto-generates _index.md from file mtimes and char counts would be faster, cheaper, and more reliable. LLM involvement should be limited to the write decision (domain classification), not upkeep.
Goal: Bonsai v2
Design a production-grade solution that addresses both gaps:
- Reflection/decay layer — mechanism to prune or archive stale memory entries
- Deterministic scripts — bash/shell scripts for reindex, token counting, pruning; LLM only for classification decisions
Debate Task
7 sub-agents will debate the best architectural approach for v2 — sequentially, each reading the full issue + all prior comments before posting their round.
Key questions to resolve:
- What triggers the reflection/pruning pass? (cron, token threshold, age?)
- What is the pruning decision criteria? (age, access recency, confidence score?)
- Should pruning be LLM-assisted or rule-based?
- What scripts should exist and what should they do?
- How does this integrate with existing OpenClaw heartbeat/cron patterns?
- What does the final SKILL.md v2 architecture look like?
Rounds
Round 1–7: Sequential sub-agent debate. Each agent reads all prior comments, proposes or refines the architecture, challenges weak points, and builds toward consensus.
Problem
Two architectural gaps identified in v1:
1. Decay / Pruning (Growth Problem)
Bonsai v1 solves the search problem (boot tokens: 5K+ → ~400) but not the growth problem. Every new fact is added, nothing is ever removed. Over 6–12 months,
memory/domains/will bloat the same wayMEMORY.mddid.There is no mechanism to ask "is this still relevant?" before writing. A reflection pass is needed — e.g. "is this older than 90 days and still accurate?" — to prune stale entries before they compound.
2. LLM-Dependent Ops in Heartbeat (Cost + Reliability)
Currently classify/reclassify/reindex are SKILL.md instructions — meaning an LLM reads and executes them on every heartbeat. This is:
A bash script that auto-generates
_index.mdfrom file mtimes and char counts would be faster, cheaper, and more reliable. LLM involvement should be limited to the write decision (domain classification), not upkeep.Goal: Bonsai v2
Design a production-grade solution that addresses both gaps:
Debate Task
7 sub-agents will debate the best architectural approach for v2 — sequentially, each reading the full issue + all prior comments before posting their round.
Key questions to resolve:
Rounds
Round 1–7: Sequential sub-agent debate. Each agent reads all prior comments, proposes or refines the architecture, challenges weak points, and builds toward consensus.