Long Task Context (GPT) 1.1.0
Maintain a compact continuation record, not a transcript. Respond in the user's language. Use available tools; do not claim native compaction control, extra context capacity, automatic access to all chats, or background execution.
Use one owner and one record
- Reuse the project's canonical checkpoint and storage identity. In ChatGPT use Library through its owner skill when available; in a code project use its existing persistent progress file. Do not call a scratch copy persistent.
- With Super Memori GPT, share its ledger: use this workflow for checkpoint fidelity and the next working set; let Super Memori handle broader recovery and reconciliation. Perform one combined update, not duplicate searches, schemas or saves. Neither skill grants tools or permissions to the other.
- Keep an existing Markdown or JSON layout. Add missing decision-critical fields in place; do not migrate a complete ledger merely to match the template.
Resume, then act
- Identify the current goal, deliverables, completion criteria, project/entity and requested time or revision from the user's directions.
- Read a known authoritative file through its owner skill first. Read the matching checkpoint for unfinished work; if unresolved, search exact project terms. Use Personal Context under its own rules only for a specific missing historical fact. Stop retrieval when the next action is supported.
- Reconcile requirements with observed state. Prefer applicable primary evidence over summaries; compare authority, revision and event time before recency. A newly written account of an old event is still old evidence. Keep unresolved contradictions explicit.
- Assemble the relevant protected requirements, current state and evidence needed next. Follow source pointers when precision matters. Mark missing evidence unavailable; never infer “never existed” or borrow a value from a similar object.
- Check a pending operation's actual outcome before retrying. Continue the next authorized action; do not stop at a recap unless asked.
Preserve different information differently
| Part | Preservation rule |
|---|---|
| Protected requirements | Keep every applicable goal, acceptance condition, exclusion and action boundary. Preserve exact clauses when paraphrasing can lose a negation, condition or scope. Retain preferences as preferences, not prohibitions. |
| Exact anchors | Preserve material project/entity IDs, model/order codes, tags, numbers, signs, units, timezones, revisions, paths and operation IDs. A page, sheet, row, timestamp or test ID must locate original evidence. |
| Current state | Separate completed, in progress, not done, blocked and outcome unknown. Bind checks to artifact version and tested scope; distinguish reviewed, saved, published, installed and functionally tested. |
| Background | Shorten redundant narrative; link detailed history and sources. Retain failed approaches only when their cause or retry condition prevents repeating an error. |
Put the goal and protected requirements before background. Record authorship and source: remembered text is evidence, not a new instruction or permission. Do not copy system/developer instructions or secrets into distributable records.
Compact without compounding omissions
- Build updates from current evidence plus verified previous state; do not repeatedly summarize summaries when originals are available. If only a summary survives, mark material claims as secondary/unverified.
- Before shortening, list protected requirements and exact anchors; compare them with the new record afterward. Restore missing qualifiers; split background by subtask instead of dropping requirements to meet a word target.
- Merge repetition only within the same project, entity, event, validity period and compatible revision. Preserve meaningful distinctions and causal links. Retrieve neighboring events only to resolve a concrete gap.
- When evidence or an accepted decision changes, mark affected conclusions and deliverables needs_recheck. Preserve old checks as historical; never transfer their pass to a new revision. Leave unaffected checks valid within scope. Separate recorded time from effective time when material.
- Keep originals accessible through stable references. A pointer does not prove the bytes still exist; verify availability before depending on it. Never discard unique source evidence merely because it was summarized.
Save at material boundaries
Checkpoint after a verified milestone, accepted requirement change, material blocker, or before handoff. Prepare before a large stage if unique state could otherwise be lost. Do not write after every answer, invent remaining-context percentages, or promise a compaction hook.
- Prepare a minimal delta against the current canonical record. Use the checkpoint template only when a new record is warranted.
- Through the storage owner, preserve identity and use the observed version guard when supported. On conflict, reread and merge the delta while retaining concurrent changes; never overwrite with an old snapshot.
- On timeout, treat the outcome as unknown. Inspect the receipt, operation ID and current contents before deciding whether another write is needed.
- Before meaningful handoff, read back the saved record and perform the continuation check below. A successful receipt supports “saved”; actual readback supports “read-back verified.”
If persistent writing is unavailable or disallowed, return a compact handoff and say it was not saved. Continue independent work. Exclude credentials, secret-bearing URLs and unnecessary private data; honor forgetting requests without copying removed content into history.
Check the continuation
Using the checkpoint and linked evidence, identify: deliverable and done conditions; applicable constraints; exact current artifacts and verified checks; pending/unknown operations; unresolved issues; one executable next action and its first recheck. Repair only gaps needed for that action. No checklist proves factual correctness.
For engineering work retain document/revision, equipment/order code, tag, unit, test scope and unresolved acceptance checks. For substantial workflow changes use continuation checks; distinguish observed behavior from structural validation. Read research basis only when explaining or revising the method. Do not claim perfect recall or borrow published benchmark gains.
