Ingest
You just came out of a meeting, or someone sent you a spec, or a competitor shipped something that changes your plans. Hand it to your agent and it goes into the record — not as a pasted blob, but folded into what the project already knows: decisions updated, commitments captured, and anything the material just made wrong, retired.
Reading the material is the easy half
Your agent already knows how to read a transcript. The part that has no obvious answer is the record: your project already holds decisions, open tasks, and risks about the exact things that meeting was about. Every fact in the new material has to be placed against them.
So ingest recalls before it writes, every time. It pulls what the record already says about each subject the material touches, and only then asks what this new thing does to it. That is the difference between adding knowledge and adding noise on top of it — a record that asserts two contradictory things, with nothing to say which one is live.
It decides two things about everything it finds
What shape is it? A durable fact is knowledge — a decision, a risk, a lesson, a gap. Something a person committed to doing is a task, with their name on it and the date they said. A real spec is a document, kept whole. A structure or a flow becomes a diagram. Most of the material — the chatter, the scheduling, the restatement — is nothing, and it says nothing about it.
And what does it do to what's already there? That's the question in the diagram above:
| Effect | When |
|---|---|
| New | Nothing on record is about this. |
| Grows | The fact is already recorded, and the material adds specifics — a date, a number, an outcome. The node gets bigger, rather than getting a near-duplicate next to it. |
| Corrects | What was recorded was never true. The text is fixed. |
| Supersedes | It was true, and this material makes it wrong to act on — a decision the room just reversed. The old node is retired: still there, still findable, marked superseded, ranked below what's live. |
The reversals are the whole reason this is worth doing. A decision that quietly stopped being true, with nothing marking it, is the single most expensive thing a record can contain — every agent that reads it afterwards does the wrong thing with total confidence.
A meeting is the case it was built for
Point it at a call transcript and your agent does what the person taking the notes was supposed to do: what did we actually decide, what's still open, and who said they'd do what.
Note the last two lines. The commitment became a real task with a name and a date, because "I'll take that" is the highest-value thing in any meeting and the thing most likely to evaporate into a document nobody reopens. And the thing the room didn't settle was recorded as an open question — not smoothed into a decision that was never made.
Anything that retires a node, rewrites one, or puts someone's name on a task gets shown to you first. You were in the room; it wasn't. When everything it found is purely additive, it just writes it and tells you what it did.
Anything you can hand it
A path, a URL, or something pasted straight into the chat. Your agent reads it on your machine — nothing is uploaded and no crawler runs on a server. If the material is too big for one pass, it splits it up and reads the pieces in parallel.
We had a big meeting about the new billing flow today — lots of opinions. Get it into the graph: what we locked in, what's still open, and who took what. Here's the transcript.
This announcement affects our launch. Read it, and tell me what it means for what we've already decided.
Jason wrote a full design for the export feature. Read it, check it against what we've already got, and set up the work.
You can also call it by name — /stele:ingest — but you rarely need to. Handing over material and saying what you want done with it is enough.