Problem
career-ops is designed to learn from user feedback after evaluations. Today, if the user says "this score is too high" or "you missed that I have experience in X", the agent is expected to update modes/_profile.md, config/profile.yml, or article-digest.md directly.
That is useful, but it has two risks:
- feedback may be applied too eagerly without user confirmation
- there is no audit trail of what the system learned and why
Proposed solution
Introduce a lightweight learning queue, for example data/learning-queue.md, where the agent records proposed profile updates as pending items:
- source interaction/date
- feedback summary
- proposed target file
- proposed wording/config change
- status: pending/applied/rejected
The agent can then ask for confirmation before applying each learning item to User Layer files.
Why this fits
It preserves the project rule that personalization belongs in the User Layer while making learning more reviewable and reversible.
Non-overlap audit
I checked open PRs before proposing this. This does not overlap with:
This is about user-feedback workflow and auditability, not adding generic scoring heuristics.
Suggested implementation scope
- Define
data/learning-queue.md format
- Add mode guidance in
modes/_shared.md or a small docs page
- Optionally add
learning-queue.mjs for list/apply/reject operations
- Keep all actual personalization writes behind explicit user confirmation
Test plan
- Markdown format documented
- Optional script self-test if implemented
- Existing data contract continues to treat
data/* as User Layer
Problem
career-ops is designed to learn from user feedback after evaluations. Today, if the user says "this score is too high" or "you missed that I have experience in X", the agent is expected to update
modes/_profile.md,config/profile.yml, orarticle-digest.mddirectly.That is useful, but it has two risks:
Proposed solution
Introduce a lightweight learning queue, for example
data/learning-queue.md, where the agent records proposed profile updates as pending items:The agent can then ask for confirmation before applying each learning item to User Layer files.
Why this fits
It preserves the project rule that personalization belongs in the User Layer while making learning more reviewable and reversible.
Non-overlap audit
I checked open PRs before proposing this. This does not overlap with:
This is about user-feedback workflow and auditability, not adding generic scoring heuristics.
Suggested implementation scope
data/learning-queue.mdformatmodes/_shared.mdor a small docs pagelearning-queue.mjsfor list/apply/reject operationsTest plan
data/*as User Layer