# Shelf Find

> Search the user's saved tool library before recommending or choosing any tool, library, service, vendor, or technique. USE THIS AGGRESSIVELY — the user rarely asks for it by name. Trigger on "what should I use for", "do I have anything saved about", "I need a tool that", "how do I approach", "any recommendations for", "is there something that does", "what's good for", "which library", "how should I build" — AND on any moment where the user is evaluating, comparing, or picking a tool/service/approach for a task, even with zero mention of saved links, notes, or a library. If the user is about to pick something, check here first. Under-triggering is the main failure mode; when in doubt, run it.

- Skill: `ranveersingh1113/shelf-find` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add ranveersingh1113/shelf-find`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/ranveersingh1113/shelf-find/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Productivity
- License: MIT
- Author: Ranveersingh1113 (https://skillmd.com/u/ranveersingh1113)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/ranveersingh1113/shelf-find

---


# shelf-find

Read-only search of the user's saved tool library.

**This skill must never write anything.** No notes, no index, no inbox, no
config file. Read only.

## Step 0 — find the library

Read `~/.tool-library-path` (in the user's home directory). It holds one line:
the library folder. Call it `<LIB>`. Notes live in `<LIB>/notes/`.

**If the file is missing**, the library was never set up. Say so, and tell the
user to run `shelf-save` to set it up. Do not create it here and do not guess a
path.

## Run

1. **Restate the need in one line** — including constraints you inferred from
   the surrounding conversation, not just the literal question. Stage, budget,
   existing stack, language, self-host vs SaaS. Say what you inferred so the
   user can correct a wrong assumption before it skews the ranking.
2. **Map to 2–3 likely categories** from: `dev-tool` `ai-agent` `marketing`
   `design` `data` `fundraising` `ops` `research` `reading` `other`.
   This is a starting set the user is free to edit; if they change it, the same
   list in `shelf-save` must match, or notes land under a category recall never
   looks for. The list guides the search — it doesn't limit what you may find.
3. **Search the notes by content.** Plain text search, not vectors — the corpus
   is a few hundred small files. Use whatever search your harness gives you
   (`Grep` in Claude Code, `grep -r` in a shell, file search elsewhere).
   - by category: lines matching `^category: dev-tool`
   - by tag: lines matching `tags:.*email`
   - **the high-signal move** — dump every line matching `^problem_solved:`
     across all notes and scan them. Those lines are written as problems, which
     is the shape of the question. Usually the fastest path, and cheaper than
     guessing keywords.
   - Search **several phrasings**. The note was written months ago in different
     words than today's problem: literal term (`websocket`), problem shape
     (`realtime`, `push`, `subscription`), adjacent tech.
4. **Read the top ~10 candidates in full.** Never report on search hits alone —
   a filename or tag match tells you nothing about whether the thing fits.
5. **Return 3–5 ranked picks.** Each one:
   - Tool name + URL
   - **One line: why this fits *this specific situation*.** Not a description of
     the product — a connection to the constraints from step 1. If you can't
     write that line without being generic, the note doesn't belong in the list.
   - Pricing + maturity
   - One honest caveat
6. **Close with the single strongest pick** and a one-sentence reason.

## Guardrails — non-negotiable

- **Nothing genuinely matches → say "Nothing in your library covers this."**
  Then offer a fresh web search as a clearly-labelled separate step the user
  opts into. Do not stretch a weak match to fill out the list. A library the
  user stops trusting is worse than no library — one bad recommendation costs
  more than ten honest misses.
- Fewer real hits beat more maybes. Two is a fine answer.
- **Flag `confidence: low` notes explicitly as unverified** — that note was
  built from a search result, not the actual page.
- **Never recommend something not in the library while implying it was saved.**
  If you add outside knowledge, label it clearly as not-from-the-library.
- Library is thin or empty → say that. "Nothing saved yet" and "nothing
  relevant" are different answers and the user needs to know which one they got.