Generated banner for Authoring Scouts
Generated logo for Authoring Scouts

Authoring Scouts

PostHogOfficialPublished by PostHog

  • Skill
  • Tool integration
  • Data and AI
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Write, edit, and adapt PostHog Signals scouts: scheduled agents that scan a project and report findings. Use to change a canonical scout's scope, thresholds, schedule, or dry-run settings; add a scout for an uncovered surface; record structured output from scheduled LLM scoring; or give feedback through notes. Covers SKILL.md structure, report requirements, follow-up report checks, structured output, duplicate detection, scratchpad memory, scout notes, per-team skills-store and canonical repository edits, and private prompt trials with saved rubrics. Trigger on "write/edit/customize a signals scout", "new scout for X", "tune my scout schedule", "make a scout that watches <event>", "score/judge/measure X with a scout", "test/compare scout prompts", "generate scout rubrics", "structured output from a scout", "scout output to Slack", "leave a note for / give feedback to a scout".
— the description by PostHog

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

This skill provides the framework for creating, editing, and managing PostHog Signals scouts—autonomous agents that run on a schedule to monitor project data and report insights. It covers the full lifecycle of a scout, including defining its scope, setting thresholds, configuring schedules, and managing output destinations. Users can adapt existing canonical scouts or build custom ones from scratch, ensuring they integrate seamlessly with the Signals inbox or other product surfaces. The skill also addresses advanced topics like structured output, duplicate detection, scratchpad memory, and private prompt testing.

What it does

  • Create new custom scouts for specific project surfaces or events.
  • Adapt canonical scouts by adjusting scope, thresholds, and schedules.
  • Configure scout output destinations, including the Signals inbox and Slack.
  • Implement structured output and memory patterns for intelligent reporting.
  • Test and compare scout prompts using private trials and rubrics.
  • Manage scout runtime posture, including precheck queries and network access.

When to use it

  • When you need to monitor a specific event or product surface not covered by canonical scouts.
  • When an existing scout is too noisy or broad and needs to be narrowed for your project.
  • When you want to automate reporting or monitoring tasks within a PostHog project.
  • When you need to compare different prompt strategies for a monitoring task.
  • When you need to provide feedback or notes to an existing scout's logic.

Advantages

  • Enables proactive monitoring of project data without manual intervention.
  • Reduces noise by allowing fine-tuned thresholds and disqualifiers.
  • Supports both per-team customization and canonical improvements.
  • Integrates directly with the PostHog Signals inbox and notification channels.
  • Provides robust mechanisms for deduplication and cross-run memory.

Usage examples

“new scout for tracking high-latency API calls”
The agent will guide you through creating a new scout, defining the latency threshold, and setting up the report-channel integration.
“tune my scout schedule for the error tracking scout”
The agent will list your current scout configurations and help you update the run interval or cron schedule for the specified scout.
“test and compare scout prompts for session replay analysis”
The agent will set up a private trial environment to run different prompt variants and compare their output against a saved rubric.
“leave a note for the generalist scout to ignore local dev traffic”
The agent will add a note to the scout's scratchpad memory to ensure it filters out identified local development event patterns.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/posthog/authoring-scouts/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip authoring-scouts.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by PostHog

Authoring Signals scouts

A scout is a scheduled agent that wakes on its own interval, looks at one PostHog project, decides what's genuinely worth surfacing, and writes it into the Signals inbox as a report — or closes out empty, which is a real outcome. PostHog ships a fleet of canonical scouts (a cross-product generalist plus per-surface specialists). This skill helps you and your agent adapt those canonical scouts to a specific project, or author new scouts from scratch for a use case the fleet doesn't cover.

A report-producing scout's output is the report channel: it lists emit_report / edit_report in its frontmatter allowed_tools and authors or edits full inbox reports 1:1 directly. Most of the canonical fleet runs this way, and every new report-producing scout should too — include the allowed_tools opt-in when you author one. A scout whose output is a product surface (for example, suggestions on a workflow page) omits both tools; see Scouts with a product-specific output. Where that output lands is a separate, per-scout config decision: the report goes to the Signals inbox, and the same report can be delivered to a Slack channel or DM at the same time (output_destinations under Run posture) — so don't rule a scout out of a job because the user wants the result in Slack. (A historical signal-emitting channel — weak emit-signal findings a pipeline consolidated — still exists in the harness for scouts that never opted in, but it is deprecated: don't author new scouts on it, and opt an old one in rather than extending it.)

A scout is an LLMSkill that holds a SignalScoutConfig. The harness loads the body verbatim as the agent's system prompt, and progressively reads any bundled reference files on demand. The config row is what makes a skill a scout. Any valid skill name works, so the signals-scout- prefix is optional. The prefix controls one thing: the coordinator globs signals-scout-* to auto-register a config for a skill that has none. A skill with any other name needs its config created alongside it, which is what scout-create does.

The job before the writing

Don't write a scout in the abstract. Ground it in the target project first — a scout is only as good as its fit to the data it watches. (The scout tools were recently renamed from signals-scout-* to scout-*; if a scout-* name comes back unknown, the server may still expose it under the legacy signals-scout-* name — search the tool catalog and call whichever name it returns.)

  1. Read the project. posthog:scout-project-profile-get returns the deterministic snapshot the scout itself cold-starts from: products in use, top events with reach/burst metrics, integrations, existing inbox counts. If the scout watches a specific event, confirm it exists and check its shape with posthog:read-data-schema. A scout for an event the project doesn't capture is dead on arrival.

  2. See what already runs. posthog:scout-config-list lists every existing scout on the project with its schedule, enabled, and emit posture, plus each scout's description (pulled from the skill's frontmatter) so you can tell what a scout watches without loading its body. Don't duplicate a surface a canonical scout already covers — adapt that one instead.

  3. Read the closest canonical scout. It's your template and your reference shape. Pull it with posthog:skill-get {"skill_name": "signals-scout-<x>"} (per-team rows) or read it from the repo at products/signals/skills/signals-scout-*/. The generalist (signals-scout-general) is the broad template; if your scope is domain-tight, pick the specialist closest to your surface — list the live roster with posthog:skill-list {"search": "signals-scout"} (specialists exist for most product surfaces: error tracking, logs, AI observability, experiments, feature flags, session replay, web analytics, surveys, and more).

  4. Skim the inbox. posthog:inbox-reports-list shows what reports are actually landing — calibrate so your scout adds signal, not noise.

Choose the path

There are two independent decisions: what you're building, and where it lives.

What
SituationApproach
A canonical scout is close but too broad / too noisy / missing a disqualifier for this projectAdapt it — narrow the scope, add disqualifiers, retune thresholds.
You want a surface no canonical scout covers (a custom event, a product-specific funnel)New scout from scratch — copy the closest canonical scout as scaffolding, replace the domain discriminator + explore patterns.
You want to compare prompts, models, or reasoning efforts before applying a changePrivate trial — keep the saved scout intact, review its rubric, and compare variants through the Test loop below.
You only want to change when / whether a scout runsNo authoring — just tune the config (see Run posture).
You have one-off feedback, a pointer, or short-lived context for a scoutNo authoring — leave a note (see Steering with notes).
Where
PathMechanismUse when
Per-team (the common user path)Create a new runnable scout via posthog:scout-create; edit its prompt or files later via posthog:skill-update / -file-create, and tune its runtime config via posthog:scout-config-update.Customizing for one project. The harness globs the row in on the next tick; canonical sync leaves your edited ("diverged") row alone.
Canonical (PostHog contributors)Edit disk under products/signals/skills/signals-scout-*/, lint/build, open a PR.Improving a scout for every enrolled project. lazy_seed mirrors it onto all enrolled teams on the next tick.

Adapting-in-place tradeoff: editing a canonical scout's row for your team marks it diverged — you stop receiving upstream improvements to that scout. If you only need an additional behavior, prefer authoring a new, differently-named scout (signals-scout-<your-scope>) and leaving the canonical one intact.

See references/lifecycle-and-testing.md for the exact skills-store calls, the build/lint commands, and how seeding works.

Write the scout

First pick the shape. references/scout-patterns.md is a cookbook of the reference architectures scouts fall into — anomaly watcher, liveness/absence watcher, zero-result/unmet demand, watchlist explore/exploit, cross-product correlation, recommendation/gap, warehouse-backed source, custom single-event, open-text theme, adversarial/abuse concentration, external-tool/code, state∩code intersection, custom issue-tracker/work-queue, daily digest/roll-up, triage over a pre-detected stream, first-person dogfooding/probe, recurring measurement/LLM-judge, maintainer/steward, owner-scoped book/queue, trigger-to-brief enrichment, dispatcher/campaign, fleet meta-scout/reviewer — each mapped to a canonical scout or a proven custom shape you can copy as scaffolding. It also makes the key point that a scout can watch any source PostHog ingests into the data warehouse, not just analytics events (a Slack channel sync, a billing system, a CRM, a support inbox), plus external systems reachable from the sandbox, other agents' output, and the scout fleet itself. And where a built-in signals source already covers the surface (GitHub and Linear issues), the issue-tracker pattern says where that source stops and a scout starts paying for itself. A scout does not have to stop at describing a fix: the maintainer / steward pattern is how a scout holding write_scopes keeps a family of dashboards, alerts, warehouse views, or scanner prompts healthy itself, with a write ladder that says which changes it applies, which it verifies and reports, and which it hands to a human. Find the closest pattern, then write the body.

Follow references/scout-anatomy.md — it has the frontmatter schema (including the allowed_tools report-channel opt-in every report-producing scout needs; a scout with a product-specific output omits it), the canonical body structure (quick close-out → orient → domain discriminator → explore patterns → save-memory → decide → disqualifiers → close-out), the lean-body rule, and copy-ready skeleton templates for both a specialist and the generalist.

Write the body feature-forward. The body is a prompt a run reads in full, every run, for as long as the scout lives — so it states what the scout watches and how it decides, and nothing else. Four things do not belong in it:

  • No rollout state. A preview flag, an early-access gate, a "recently renamed" tool, a port that is happening one scout at a time. It is true this month and misleading next month, and a run cannot tell which. Write the behavior the scout should follow now; if a capability may be absent, say how the run tells, not when it is due.

  • No backlog. Work that is planned, a field that does not exist yet, a lane somebody means to add. A run cannot act on it, so it only spends tokens and invites the run to wait for something.

  • No project-only facts. A metric, dashboard, event, id, or reviewer that exists in one project. A canonical scout ships to every project, so a fact from one of them is wrong for almost every run. Text about an optional product says how the run tells whether the project uses it, and never assumes it does.

  • No duplicated harness mechanics. The report-channel contract, the run gates, and the close-out format come from the harness prompt, which every report-channel scout is given. A copy in the body drifts from the real one and the run then holds two versions of the same rule. Keep the body to your scout's own domain framing.

The same four apply to a bundled reference: it is read at run time too, so it carries no more rollout state or backlog than the body.

Two craft references the whole fleet reasons in terms of — a good scout's Decide and memory sections are built on them, so read them before writing those sections:

  • references/report-contract.md — the report tools (scout-emit-report / scout-edit-report), the report bar (author 1:1 only for a finding you'd own end-to-end), suggested_reviewers routing, the dedup-via-report_id discipline (the channel isn't idempotent — reconcile against existing reports via the vanilla inbox-reports-list / inbox-reports-retrieve before authoring), and the accepted caveat that the pipeline may later rewrite an authored title/summary. This is how your scout decides what clears the bar and how to file it.

  • references/dedupe-and-memory.md — the four-states classifier (net-new / material-update / already-covered / addressed-or-noise), the scratchpad key-prefix vocabulary, and the cross-project noise patterns. This is how your scout avoids re-filing and learns across runs.

  • references/report-checks.md — the follow-up checks a scout attaches to a report so "did the fix hold?" is measured later instead of remembered. This is how your scout closes the loop on a finding after somebody acts on it.

A report is backward-looking; a check is the opposite direction — an expectation plus a time to test it, written onto a report with scout-report-check-create. Give your scout a checks section when its findings are the kind whose fix shows up in data later. Three rules belong in the body, and the reference has the rest:

  • List the report's existing checks first (scout-report-check-list), every time. An open check for the same claim makes a second one noise, and a report holds at most five open checks.

  • metric_threshold wherever one number settles the claim and an event or action series can carry it. The coordinator measures it itself, with no scout run.

  • agent when no single number settles it, or when the number lives outside events — a log rate, a fix whose effect shows in which entities fire rather than how many, a claim that needs a stack trace read.

The single most important design decision in any scout is its signal-vs-noise discriminator — the cheap profile-shape read that separates "worth investigating" from "baseline". For error tracking it's the count vs distinct_users ratio; for CSP it's reach over raw count. Your new scout needs its own. Name it explicitly near the top of the body so every run anchors on it.

(The one exception: a measurement scout on the structured-output channel holds no bar — it applies a rubric to every sampled item, and the rubric takes the discriminator's slot as the design surface to name, dogfood, and calibrate. See the recurring measurement / LLM-judge pattern in references/scout-patterns.md.)

A second design consideration applies to a metric-shaped scout — one that scores, ranks, or reports a named, reusable measure, whether a business measure (MRR, churn risk, usage revenue, activation) or operational telemetry it computes every run to monitor or report (cost per run, failure or error rates, latency, throughput). If the project has an approved metric for that measure (metric-list shows what exists), name it in the body and run it with data-catalog-metric-run, so the scout's number matches the one the team already reports.

Run posture (config)

A scout's schedule and emit behavior live on its SignalScoutConfig, separate from the skill body. For a brand-new scout, pass these settings in the nested config object of the posthog:scout-create call, including creating it disabled or in dry-run before it ever runs. When creating a scout to test an idea, set config.enabled=false so scheduled runs cannot interfere with the trial. The endpoint creates the skill and config atomically, always opts the scout into the report channel, and safely re-applies config fields when the same definition is retried. A scout with a product-specific output must stay off the report channel, so create it with skill-create and scout-config-create instead; see Scouts with a product-specific output. Otherwise the coordinator auto-registers an enabled config on the default every-24-hours schedule on its next tick (up to ~30 min). For an existing scout, tune with posthog:scout-config-update (find the id via -config-list):

  • run_interval_minutes — 30 to 43200. Default 1440 (every 24 hours). Slow a chatty or expensive scout by raising this.

  • run_cron_schedule: a five-field cron expression ('30 9 * * *', '0 9 * * 1-5') evaluated in the project's timezone; occurrences must be at least 30 minutes apart. When set it takes precedence over run_interval_minutes, so a "slow it down" edit on a cron scout has to change or clear the cron (set null to return to the rolling interval). A new or edited schedule anchors on the edit time and waits for its next slot rather than catching up on a past one. Reach for it when the run should land at a wall-clock time: a digest before standup, a weekday-only watch.

  • A scheduled run starts inside a window, not at an exact minute. Each scout has a fixed offset in that window, so its cadence does not change from run to run. A cron scout starts within 20 minutes of its cron time, so a 0 9 * * * scout starts at the same minute between 9:00 and 9:20 every day. An interval scout starts within the same 30-minute coordinator tick, and last_run_at records the tick, not the start. A scout's first run, a manual run, a workflow run, and a report-check run start at once. When you explain or write a schedule, describe the time as a window.

  • enabled — false pauses the scout entirely (coordinator skips it).

  • precheck_query — defaults to null: a HogQL SELECT that a scheduled run evaluates before it starts, with {since}, {now}, and {interval_minutes} placeholders. No rows, or one row with one false value (such as a zero count()), skips the run before it creates a run row or a sandbox. Any other result starts the run, and the rows enter the run prompt. A query error also starts the run. Only scheduled runs evaluate it: a manual, workflow, or report-check run always starts. Set it for a scout that has nothing to do on most ticks. Test the query with posthog:scout-config-precheck-test before you save it, because a scheduled check runs as the scout's acting user and the dry run runs as you. A canonical scout can ship a default in its scout-precheck-query frontmatter. precheck_query overrides that default, null restores it, and precheck_disabled: true turns off both. The full recipe, the placeholder semantics, and how to diagnose a tick with no run row are in references/scheduled-precheck.md.

  • emit — defaults to true: the scout writes its reports straight to the inbox. Set emit=false (dry-run) to inspect an ordinary run's reasoning without publishing reports to the inbox. Private trials capture reports and memory separately and work while the source scout is paused or has emit=false.

  • network_access — defaults to trusted: the scout's sandbox can only reach the platform's trusted-domain allowlist (PostHog, GitHub, common package registries), which covers the MCP loop and gh but blocks everything else. Set full for a scout whose skill needs to read arbitrary external sites, e.g. documentation, papers on arxiv.org, or a vendor status page. Applies from the scout's next run, and changes are activity-logged.

  • auto_pause_exempt — defaults to false. A scout whose reports nobody engages with (no open, rating, or action — the cloud web inbox records reads; other clients don't yet) is warned and then paused automatically (pause_reason=ignored) — every run costs a sandbox agent, so a scout producing output no human consumes shouldn't keep running forever. A scout that is merely quiet is only flagged (pause_reason=no_output, a warning that never advances to a pause), since a watch scout's silence can be its job. -config-list shows the warning as status=pending_pause and the pause as status=paused_by_system; setting enabled=true again resumes the scout with a fresh grace window before the sweep may judge it again. Set auto_pause_exempt=true up front for a watchdog scout whose whole job is to stay quiet, so it never even picks up the quiet flag.

  • write_scopes — defaults to ["notebook:write"]: the scout reads the project and writes its findings, its memory, and notebooks. notebook:write reaches every notebook in the project, not only the ones the scout made. Send [] (or drop it from the list) for a scout that should write nothing but its findings and memory. Unlike the other scopes, a run keeps it when its author no longer resolves and it acts as another project member. Grant dashboard:write, insight:write, annotation:write, alert:write, customer_task:write, llm_skill:write, warehouse_view:write, warehouse_table:write, replay_scanner:write, canvas:write, or experiment:write to a scout whose job is to maintain one of those things rather than only describe what it would change. The body of such a scout follows the maintainer / steward pattern in references/scout-patterns.md: a curated inventory, a write ladder (do-and-log, do-verify-report, hand-to-a-human), a per-run change cap, and a rolling maintenance report naming every object changed. Each scope is project-wide and covers update and delete of every object of its kind, not only the ones the scout made, so grant only what the scout's body actually tends, and say in the body what it may change and when. llm_skill:write is the one to think twice about: custom scouts are skills in the same store, so a scout holding it can edit a sibling scout's body, or the body it runs from itself. Grant it to a scout whose job really is tending a set of skills, name that set in the body, and say there that the scouts are off limits unless tending them is the job. warehouse_view:write and warehouse_table:write are separate on purpose: a scout that keeps a set of views healthy does not also need to create tables. Take both rows only when the scout tends both. replay_scanner:write permits scanner maintenance. A scout must set a credit_limit when it creates, copies, or enables a scanner, and before it changes targeting, sampling, or the model of an enabled scanner. It cannot clear a limit, delete a scanner, or start manual scans, retries, or backfills. Use enabled: false to stop a scanner and keep its observations. Change a shared rating only to record an explicit user verdict, because ratings steer how the scanner judges later sessions. customer_task:write covers every Customer analytics task in the project, including tasks assigned to other people: create, update (status, due date, assignee), archive, and restore archived tasks, with no delete. Say in the body whose tasks the scout tends, and whether it may reassign one. Customer analytics tasks are still behind the customer-analytics-customer-tasks feature flag. On a project without it the task tools do not exist and the grant does nothing, so do not grant it there. canvas:write reaches every canvas in a public space and every canvas the acting user created: publish, layout, runtime state, and soft-delete of the acting user's own canvases. A scout run cannot create a canvas, because a scout task has no space to file one in. Create the canvas first, name its id in the body, and follow the one-canvas maintainer variant in references/scout-patterns.md. Each published version records the run's task, so version history shows which run published it. experiment:write is the one grant that changes what end users see. It reaches every experiment in the project: create, edit, duplicate, archive, launch, pause, resume, end, and reset. Launch and pause turn the linked feature flag on and off. A scout cannot delete an experiment, copy one to another project, migrate a legacy one, or open a flag cleanup pull request. Without feature_flag:write, which no scout can hold yet, it also cannot ship a variant or change the variants, rollout, or holdout once an experiment has launched or its flag is on. So a scout sets up drafts and ends experiments, and a person ships them. Say in the body which experiments the scout tends, and which lifecycle changes it may make without a person asking. Only the person the scout's runs act as (whoever authored it) or a project admin can set the field, and grants are activity-logged. A scoped API key must itself carry each scope it grants. A granted scout is told in its run prompt which objects it may change, and is asked to name every change in its close-out. The grant is an upper bound: the acting user's own permissions still apply to each object, and the scout reports a refused write rather than retrying it. A dry run (emit: false) never holds the grant, so a scout can be previewed without it changing anything. To audit the writes after a run, see "Auditing what a scout changed" in working-with-scouts: the changes land in the activity log under the scout's acting user, tagged "via MCP", with no scout or run name on the row. Applies from the scout's next run.

  • output_destinations — defaults to none. When adding Slack to an existing scout, first read output_destinations, then send the full object with every key preserved. Updates replace the object, so sending only slack removes an existing webhook pointer. Set slack to deliver every surfaced report the scout emits (ready or pending_input) to Slack as well as the inbox; a report the judge suppressed stays out of Slack by design: an integration_id for the workspace, plus either a channel (channel_id|#channel-name) or up to five users to DM (member_id|@display-name), never both. A scoped API key or OAuth token needs integration:read and inbox:read (or the matching write scopes) on top of signal_scout:write to set slack; a minimally scoped credential gets a permission error. thread_reports: true posts a report as a short lead message with the rest split into replies at the summary's section labels, so a long report isn't clipped; it doesn't change how findings post. Slack delivery is a firehose of that one scout's output — no priority filter, no reviewer routing — so it suits a scout whose bar is already tight rather than a chatty one you're still calibrating. A Slack-delivered scout is also exempt from the ignored-reports auto-pause, since consumption there isn't measurable.

  • display_name: the name the UI shows for the scout. Leave blank to use the default derived from the skill name; it never changes skill_name, which stays fixed. The only setting here the nested config on scout-create does not take: set it with a -config-update after creation.

  • model: pins the model the scout's runs use. Leave unset to follow the fleet default, which is what most scouts should do; set it when a scout's job needs a stronger model (long research) or a cheaper one (a frequent, mechanical probe) and say why in the body. Early access: on a project not enrolled in the scouts-model-config preview, any non-null value is rejected with "Choosing a scout model is not available on this project yet.", so only recommend pinning where that flag is on.

  • mcp_gateway_server_ids: MCP store servers (by id) this scout's runs may mount, chosen from the connections members have shared with the whole team. Empty (the default) mounts none of the shared servers. The intent is that only team-shared connections back a scout run, so runs behave the same whoever edits the scout; where MCP gateway enforcement is not yet active on the project, the launch path may still mount the acting user's personal connections, so check the run's mounted servers in its transcript when that matters. Treat it like network_access: it hands the scout third-party tools with whatever access the shared connection carries, changes are activity-logged, and the body should name what the scout uses each server for.

  • repositories — defaults to []: the scout's sandbox holds no checkout, which is right for a scout that only reads the project over MCP. Set ["organization/repository", ...] for a scout that reasons about code, and its sandbox clones each one before the run starts, so the scout can grep the tree, read the layout, and run the project's own build, type check, and tests instead of fetching files one gh api call at a time. Up to 10 per scout, and each must be reachable through the project's GitHub connection — an unreachable name is refused on write rather than surfacing as a clone failure mid-run. The scout's GitHub access stays read-only whether or not it clones, so a listed repository gives it a tree to read and never the ability to push, comment, or open a pull request. Write access for a scout is a separate opt-in that does not exist yet. A multi-repository scout gets each tree on its default branch; there is no per-repository branch selection. Each tree carries the repository's full commit history, so a skill body can run git log, git blame, and --since against it without an unshallow fetch first. Applies from the scout's next run, and changes are activity-logged.

  • tags — free-form labels grouping the fleet, e.g. ["revenue", "on-call"]. Up to 10 per scout, normalized to lowercase kebab-case (On Call → on-call) and deduped. Set them at create time: a scout that lands already grouped saves a follow-up edit, and the desktop app's scout list filters on them. Prefer a tag that already exists on the fleet (-config-list shows every scout's tags) over minting a near-duplicate — revenue and revenue-analytics fragment the same group. A write replaces the set, so send the full desired list, not just the additions. Filter the roster with -config-list's tags parameter (comma-separated, matches a scout carrying any of them).

  • structured_output_schema — defaults to null (channel off). Set a JSON Schema (draft 2020-12, root "type": "object") describing one structured record and the scout gains a third output channel next to reports: each run is shown the schema and told to submit conforming records via scout-record-output (one per run, or one per judged entity — the skill body decides the cardinality and when to record). Records are validated server-side against the schema (all-or-nothing per call) and recorded in the project as $scout_structured_output events with scalar payload keys flattened to output_<key> properties — so a judging/scoring scout's series is chartable in insights directly, and past records are queryable like any events (filter on subject or run_id, break down on output_<key>). The channel also requires emit: a dry-run scout has nowhere to record to, so scout-record-output fails closed for it. Reach for this when the scout's job is a recurring measurement (judge each sampled report good/bad/unsure with a reason, score accounts, classify sessions) rather than surfacing anomalies; keep enums small and add a free-text reason field so the series is breakdown-friendly and auditable. The skill body should say what to sample, how to judge, and what subject to stamp on each record; the schema owns the record shape. Because the records are ordinary events, anything that consumes events can act on one — a workflow or CDP destination triggered on $scout_structured_output, filtered to your skill_name and an output_<key> value, turns a measuring scout into the front half of an automation (route the verdict to a channel, a task, a CRM) with no human in between. The full design treatment — rubric writing, rates-over-scores record shape, rubric versioning, sampling discipline, the seam with reports, what changes once a grade is a routing decision, and the non-judging variants (structured extraction, state snapshots, synthetic telemetry) — is the recurring measurement / LLM-judge pattern in references/scout-patterns.md.

Steering with notes (no authoring needed)

Sometimes you don't want to change the scout — you want to tell it something. That's what scout notes are for: short steering messages any team member (or an agent acting for one) leaves for the fleet, which every run picks up as prior context alongside its scratchpad and run history. Reach for a note instead of an edit when the steer is feedback, a pointer, or context with a shelf life:

  • Feedback on output: "the staging traffic spike you keep flagging is known noise, stop reporting it".

  • A pointer: "dig into the EU signup funnel this week — we think something regressed".

  • Context the scout couldn't know: "we shipped a new checkout on Tuesday, treat conversion shifts after that as expected".

The tools (reads on the public signal_scout:read scope; because scouts read notes verbatim, writing or deleting one requires the same authorization as editing a scout's skill — the llm_skill:write scope plus skill editor access):

  • posthog:scout-notes-create {"content": "...", "skill_name": "signals-scout-web-analytics"} — address one scout by its exact skill name (roster via scout-config-list; the skill must already exist, so a typo'd target is rejected instead of silently steering no one), or omit skill_name for a general note every scout sees. Optionally set expires_at so a time-boxed note ("watch closely this week") retires itself. skill_name: "pipeline:report-research" addresses the report pipeline's research stage instead of any scout, for guidance about how the reports it builds from clustered signals get researched, judged, and routed ("route billing-adjacent reports to the billing folks"). Reports a scout authors directly never pass through that stage, so a rule for them belongs in a fleet-wide note (omit skill_name) or a per-scout one. It is the only pipeline:* audience; any other value is rejected.

  • posthog:scout-notes-list — browse the active notes; pass skill_name to see what a given scout will read. Expect system-derived notes alongside the human ones: a dismissal or snooze note, a Discuss question, a thumbs-rating note, and a reviewer add/remove on a report are each forwarded to the relevant scout as a note, labelled by origin (report_dismissal, report_discussion, report_feedback, report_reviewer_correction; a note left directly is human). Derived notes expire on their own after ~30 days. Three caveats: a Discuss question or rating note only forwards when the person had the notes-write authorization themselves (skill-editor access plus, on a scoped credential, signal_scout:write and llm_skill:write); a reviewer correction only forwards when the person had skill-editor access on the canonical project (the reviewer change itself still lands on the report); and the list hides every derived origin from a caller without report read access (inbox:read), since they quote report content. A missing derived note can mean either. A dismissal note is still on the report and a Discuss question on its discussion task, but a rating note exists only as the forwarded scout note (plus an analytics event), so a rating note that did not forward is gone.

  • posthog:scout-notes-delete {"id": "..."} — retire a note that's been acted on or no longer applies.

  • posthog:scout-run-now {"id": <config_id>, "note": "..."}: steer one run only. The note (up to 1,000 characters) is read by that run next to the durable notes and is never delivered to a later run as a note, so use it for "check this now" instead of a note every scheduled run would keep reading. It does stay visible in that run's metadata (run_note) when a later run reads its history, so phrase it as a dated one-off ("today only: ...") rather than standing policy. It needs skill-editor access and, on a scoped credential, llm_skill:write on top of the base signal_scout:write, the same two scopes as a durable note (a 403 otherwise; drop the note to run without it), and spends a run like any manual dispatch.

How scouts treat notes: every run reads its notes in step 1 and is told to let a fresh note visibly shape what it investigates — but notes are advisory. They direct attention; they don't lower the scout's evidence bar or force a report, so a note saying "report X" still gets an honest investigation, not an automatic emit. The scout closes the loop in its run summary (which notes it acted on and how) and folds absorbed guidance into its scratchpad.

Choosing between a note and an edit: a note is the right tool for this project, right now steering and for trying a nudge before committing to it; a skill edit is the right tool once the steer is permanent policy (a disqualifier, a threshold, a scope change). A note that you keep re-leaving is a skill edit waiting to happen — promote it. Note lifecycle stays with humans: scouts never delete notes, so retire acted-on notes yourself (or set expires_at up front) to keep the channel high-signal.

Workflow-triggered runs

A workflow's "Run scout" step starts a run when an event fires, for example a new GitHub issue or a pull request. Every run's prompt names how it started in Your run identity: triggered_by is schedule, manual, workflow, or check (experiment on a private trial run). A workflow run also carries trigger_workflow_id, the id of the workflow that fired. Branch on that value in the body ("if triggered_by is workflow ...") rather than on whether a note is present.

What the run sees depends on the step's note:

  • With a note, the harness makes the subject the note names the run's first job. The run handles that subject completely before anything else: it investigates, decides, files a report or records why it rejected the subject, and writes the memory the body asks for. The scout's routine is optional on that run. If the body says nothing about workflow-triggered runs, the run skips the routine and leaves it to the schedule.

  • Without a note, the run is told a workflow started it and that nothing names the event. It runs the body as it would on a schedule, unless the body says what to do on a workflow-triggered run.

Write a workflow-triggered section in the body when the default is wrong for the scout. For example, "on a workflow-triggered run, also refresh the label cache", or "on a workflow-triggered run with no note, only check the last hour".

Incremental state needs a full pass. A run that skipped its routine or cut it short must leave cursors, baselines, and "last swept" markers as they were, and write memory only about the subject it handled. The harness tells every workflow run with a note this. Name the scout's own incremental keys in the body, because only the body knows which scratchpad entries a partial pass must not move.

Write the step's note from identifiers. Use a pull request number, an issue URL, or an alert id, for example Issue #{event.properties.issue_number}. Do not paste a title, a body, or other free text from the event. The scout reads the note as untrusted input, and an identifier gives it something to look up with its own tools.

Test loop

Dogfood the scout yourself before you ever spend a real run. You — the agent authoring the scout — have the same PostHog MCP tools a scout uses at runtime (execute-sql, read-data-schema, the per-product list tools, scout-project-profile-get). The cheapest, fastest iteration doesn't touch a scout run at all: walk the scout's own logic against the live project by hand. Confirm the watched event/entity exists and has the shape you assumed, run the discriminator to check it actually separates signal from noise on this project's data, and run each explore pattern's queries to see what they surface. This loop is free and instant — refine the body against what you find, re-run the queries, repeat, until the scout's logic holds up on real data. This is where the real iteration happens.

A few runtime tools cannot be dogfooded, so validate them in the first real run instead. Anything that takes a run_id only works from inside a run, and a tool the project has not been switched on for fails whoever calls it. posthog:scout-lighthouse-audit is the one to plan around: it loads a page in a real throttled browser and returns the lab metrics, the element the browser chose as the Largest Contentful Paint, where the LCP time went phase by phase, and the ranked savings estimates — which is how a page-performance finding names a cause rather than guessing one. It needs the run's run_id, it is restricted to an allowlist of public pages (the browser signs in to nothing, so a page behind a login would report the login screen's numbers as the page's), it is limited to the projects switched on for it, and it is capped at five audits per run. A rejected call costs nothing, but once the page loads the slot is spent whatever the result, and every error message ends with how many audits the run has left, which tells a rejection apart from an exhausted budget. So: treat it as available only once a run's own call succeeds, never write a body whose finding depends on it, and keep lab and field evidence labelled apart — one throttled cold load explains a finding, and the field percentile over real users is what establishes there is one. Then check the first real run's transcript for the call and what it returned, the same way you would check a query you could not run by hand.

Compare variants privately

The rubric and private-trial MCP tools currently require staff access and the scout-trials feature flag. Use this path when the user wants to test an existing scout, try an idea, or compare several prompts, models, or reasoning efforts. The trial runs real scouts against project data, captures their reports and memory privately, judges them against one saved rubric, and saves a comparison report. Generation, scout runs, and judging spend model usage; choose the number of variants and repeats within the requested budget.

  1. Choose the source. For an existing scout, get its config from posthog:scout-config-list and read its instructions with posthog:skill-get. For a new idea, create the complete scout with posthog:scout-create, including config: {"enabled": false} and any bundled files. Then call posthog:scout-trial-setup with the config id to check readiness and discover supported models and efforts.

  2. Review and save the rubric. Read posthog:scout-rubric-get. If it needs generation, use posthog:scout-rubric-generate, then poll posthog:scout-rubric-get until generation finishes. Review the suggestions and captured source, select criteria that measure the intended job, and use posthog:scout-rubric-save with the current revision, complete criteria list, and adopt_generation_id when adopting that generation's source. If suggestions are poor, edit the criteria directly: enable or disable any check, revise its wording, add custom checks, or remove unwanted custom/generated checks from the saved list. Keep the six built-in defaults, disabling them when unwanted; omit adopt_generation_id to preserve the saved reference. Generation alone does not save or adopt anything; the saved rubric needs an adopted source before a trial can start.

  3. Start the comparison. Use posthog:scout-trial-start with a baseline and the requested variants, keeping model and effort fixed when comparing prompt changes. Each candidate supplies its full skill_body; the saved source remains unchanged. A request for 5–10 prompts fits one comparison; use distinct hypotheses and avoid multiplying repeats without a reason.

  4. Read the result. Poll posthog:scout-trial-report for the saved comparison, including criterion evidence, failures, applicability, and cost. Resume an interrupted trial with posthog:scout-trial-resume when its error permits it; use posthog:scout-trial-list to find saved trials. Read the evidence behind a score before recommending or applying a candidate.

Read references/lifecycle-and-testing.md for the exact save/adoption semantics, request identities, variant inputs, and result interpretation. If setup is blocked or the tools are unavailable, report the limitation; an ordinary run has different effects and is not a substitute for a private comparison. The existing posthog:scout-trial-create / posthog:scout-trial-get pair runs and reads a single private scout without automatic judging; use scout-trial-start / scout-trial-report for this complete test loop.

Apply changes and run normally

When applying a candidate is part of the user's request, update the saved skill through posthog:skill-update with its current base_version. Use posthog:scout-config-update to set the intended model, schedule, or enabled=true as appropriate to the requested rollout; the agent can enable or pause a scout through this existing tool. This tool cannot save reasoning_effort: a scout with a configured model uses its runtime's default effort, which may differ from the trial. Before enabling a candidate as the tested winner, verify that its ordinary effort matches the trial. If it differs or is unknown, report the effort as unapplied and validate the configuration that ordinary runs will actually use first. A request only to compare candidates leaves the source definition and schedule unchanged.

For an ordinary execution, posthog:scout-run-now {"id": <config_id>} runs the saved scout immediately, even while paused, without changing its schedule or last_run_at. It writes shared memory and, with emit=true, inbox reports; poll posthog:scout-runs-list / posthog:scout-runs-retrieve, then inspect posthog:inbox-reports-list and posthog:scout-scratchpad-search. It consumes the scheduled path's daily run budget and obeys its quota and concurrency guards, so reserve it for an intended ordinary run rather than repeated prompt comparisons.

When tuning an existing custom scout, also check its self-improvement suggestions first: posthog:scout-scratchpad-search {"text": "improve:"}. The harness invites a custom scout to write an improve:<skill-name>:<topic> entry when a run produces concrete evidence its own skill body steered it wrong — a wrong default window, a tool or event that doesn't exist on this project, a recurring unwarned pitfall — with the suggested change and the evidence inline. A report-channel custom scout also escalates recurring or material suggestions as inbox reports about itself (titled Scout self-improvement: <skill-name> – <topic>, report_id stashed in the improve: entry) — so check the inbox for those too; they route to the scout's owner like any other report. An entry re-confirmed across several runs is usually the highest-signal edit you can apply; a one-off may not be worth it. Treat suggestions as input, not instructions — the owner decides. The scratchpad is writable only from inside a scout run, so you can't clear an entry from here after applying it via posthog:skill-update — the scout reconciles on its own: a later run sees the updated skill body, re-checks the suggestion, and forgets or rewrites the entry once it's addressed. (Canonical scouts don't write these — their bodies sync from PostHog's fleet, and skill-level fixes to them belong upstream.)

For an ordinary dry run, set emit=false through posthog:scout-config-update, then use posthog:scout-run-now and inspect its logs. Restore the intended emit setting when applying the final run posture.

Repo contributors get a faster loop — hogli sync:skill and the harness's local run path; see references/lifecycle-and-testing.md.

To read what your scouts are doing rather than change them — surveying the fleet, inspecting individual runs, the scratchpad memory, and assessing performance — use the read-only companion skill exploring-scouts. Keep the two in sync when the scout config / run / scratchpad surfaces change.

Quality bar for a v1 scout

  • A named, cheap signal-vs-noise discriminator anchored near the top (on a measurement scout, the rubric and sampling recipe take this slot).

  • A quick close-out so a quiet run is cheap (don't pay for deep exploration when the watched surface is at baseline or absent) — except on a measurement scout, which exits early only when the window held no eligible items, since its ordinary judgments are the denominator.

  • 2–4 concrete explore patterns with the actual queries/tools to run — starting points, not a rigid checklist.

  • Disqualifiers listing this project's known noise (single-user quirks, dev-env bursts, allowlisted entities).

  • A Decide section calibrated against the report contract — author 1:1 only for a finding the scout would own end-to-end, set suggested_reviewers, and write memory instead when a candidate is below the bar.

  • A checks step where the findings are the kind whose fix shows up in data later — list the report's open checks first, then pick metric_threshold or agent by whether one number settles the claim.

  • A feature-forward body: no rollout state, no backlog, no project-only facts, no harness mechanics the prompt already carries.

  • Save-memory guidance using the scratchpad prefixes so the scout gets smarter each run.

  • A lean body (push depth into references/) — every line is a recurring token cost on every run.

  • A tight frontmatter description — a sentence or two naming the surface and the shapes it watches. Every scout's description loads into the caller's AI plugin together, so wordy descriptions waste token budget and get truncated; skip the fleet-wide boilerplate (report bar, durable memory, self-contained peer).

Files

references/report-contract.md

The report channel: emit_report / edit_report

A report-producing scout's output is the report channel: it does its research, then authors (or edits) a full inbox SignalReport directly, 1:1. This reference is the contract for that channel: the tools, their fields, when to author vs. edit, and the two behaviors to design around (it isn't idempotent, and the pipeline may later rewrite what you authored).

The channel is granted via the skill's frontmatter allowed_tools: every report-producing scout lists both emit_report and edit_report there; see Granting the tools. A scout with a product-specific output omits both tools. See Scouts with a product-specific output.

Tool names vs. opt-in strings. The callable MCP tools are scout-emit-report and scout-edit-report — those are the names you invoke. The bare emit_report / edit_report (underscored) used throughout this doc and below are the opt-in strings you list under allowed_tools; they are not callable tool names. And like every scout-* tool, both report tools require the current run_id (the run you're executing in) on every call — omitting it fails validation.

Contents

  • Author vs. edit

  • emit_report — author a full report

    • Measuring impact

      • Choosing the kind

      • Keeping the query live and bounded

      • Keeping semantics separate from formatting

      • Titling and captioning

      • Snapshots are optional cached fallbacks, not estimates

      • A reader may see the tile without its data

      • Caps, and what an edit does

    • Attaching charts

    • Suggesting follow-up prompts

    • Opening a draft PR (autostart)

  • Choosing suggested_reviewers — how a report gets assigned to a human

  • edit_report — update an existing report

    • Replacing the report's pull request

    • Re-confirming a report you already filed

  • Finding "the report I made last time"

  • Dedup: the retry is covered, the near-duplicate is not

  • The pipeline may rewrite what you authored (accepted)

  • Granting the tools

    • Scouts with a product-specific output

Author vs. edit

You have…Use
A finished, well-formed finding no existing report covers — file it 1:1 with full control of title/summary.emit_report
New information about a report that already exists (one you authored last run, or a pipeline report).edit_report
An observation you can't yet stand behind as a standalone report.Neither — write a scratchpad entry and keep investigating (see dedupe-and-memory.md).

The report bar is high: author only when you'd stand behind the report as a standalone inbox item a human will act on. A weak or partial observation belongs in the scratchpad, where a future run (with more evidence) can pick it up — not in the inbox.

emit_report — author a full report

Judges the report for safety, then persists it at the judged status.

FieldTypeNotes
run_idstring, requiredThe current run's id — the run you're executing in, same as every scout-* tool.
titlestring, required, ≤300, non-emptyThe inbox headline. One specific, quantified line.
summarystring, requiredThe report body prose — one tight passage a busy human can act on: a quantified hook (what's happening, with numbers), the pattern that makes it signal rather than noise, the suspected-cause hypothesis, and the recommendation. Cite entities inline as markdown links so the reader pivots straight to source (see below).
evidencelist, required, 1–50Each {description, source_id}. Becomes a bound signal row backing the report. source_id is the citable entity id. Hard cap of 50 — summarize/trim before calling; a longer list fails validation before the report is judged or persisted.
actionability_explanationstring, requiredOne sentence justifying the actionability call below.
actionabilityenum, requiredimmediately_actionable / requires_human_input / not_actionable. You make this call — the channel does not re-research it. See Choosing actionability below.
already_addressedbool, default falseSet when the underlying issue is already handled and you're filing for the record.
metricslist, ≤6, optionalTyped impact measurements the inbox shows as tiles. The report's full set. Each {metric_id, title, kind, query, role?, value?, value_at?, series?, value_format?, unit?, caption?}. See Measuring impact below.
chartslist, ≤20, optionalQueries the inbox draws on the report — the report's full set, replacing any it already had. Each {chart_id, title, query, caption?, size?}. See Attaching charts below.
suggested_promptslist, ≤3, optionalFollow-up prompts the inbox offers above the report's Ask AI box (questions to ask, or next-step actions to request), each ≤200 characters and all distinct. See Suggesting follow-up prompts below.

Cite each entity as a link, not a bare id. In summary and in evidence descriptions, write the entity you name as a markdown link: reuse the url the returning tool attached (_posthogUrl and friends), else build one with generate-app-url, and keep the bare id when neither reaches the entity itself. Two spots stay plain text, because the inbox renders them as text: title, and the summary's first line, which the inbox lifts out as the card headline. The harness prompt (Linking what you reference) carries the full rule.

Section labels are where a Slack thread splits. A destination with "Post reports as a thread" on posts a short lead in the channel and each later section as a reply. A heading (## Evidence) and a bold label on a line of its own (**Evidence**) both mark a section, so write the outline you want the reader to get and either form works. Leave a blank line above each label, since a label the line above runs onto is part of that paragraph rather than a new section.

Status is decided for you, from safety × actionability:

Safety judgeactionabilityResulting statusSurfaces in inbox?
safeimmediately_actionableREADYyes
saferequires_human_inputPENDING_INPUTyes
safenot_actionableSUPPRESSEDno
unsafe(any)SUPPRESSEDno

Choosing actionability. The harness prompt carries the full criteria; the call comes down to what a person would have to supply.

  1. immediately_actionable — a coding agent could take concrete, useful action right now: a bug fix, an experiment reaction, a flag cleanup, a UX fix, or a deep investigation with a clear jumping-off point. An unknown root cause does not disqualify a report. When you name the evidence, the code surface, or a failure path someone can reproduce, the investigation is the action.

  2. requires_human_input — a code change is plausible, but a person must first make a call only a person can make: a product decision, a trade-off between valid approaches, business context that is not in the data or the code. Name that decision in actionability_explanation. If you cannot name it, the report is not waiting on a human.

  3. not_actionable — no answer would lead to code work.

In doubt between the first two, pick immediately_actionable; in doubt between the last two, pick not_actionable. It is not a free hedge: autostart only considers an immediately-actionable report, so parking one costs it the draft PR a person then has to start by hand.

The result tells you what happened: report_id (always set when a report was persisted — even when suppressed, so you can edit or dedup against it), report_status (the birth status — ready / pending_input / suppressed — the field is named report_status in the response, not status), emitted (true only when it actually surfaced — READY / PENDING_INPUT), safety_explanation, and skipped_reason (set only when a preflight gate stopped the call before any report was created — the AI-data-processing / source-enabled gates that govern every scout write).

Measuring impact

metrics carries the typed measurements that tell a reader what the observation changes, and how many people it reaches. A consumer draws each one as a tile: the figure with its unit, the title, the window the query covers, and a small trend strip. Use one primary metric for the key observation, and supporting metrics for the facts around it.

The Inbox shows live metrics on report rows and in report detail when signals-report-metrics is enabled. The server checks this organization-level flag on each scout write that supplies a non-empty metric list. The flag is independent of signals-report-charts.

When the flag is off or its check fails:

  • emit_report(metrics=[...]) stores the report without the supplied metrics.

  • edit_report(metrics=[...]) ignores the supplied metrics and preserves the report's existing set.

  • edit_report(metrics=[]) still clears the set. Omitting metrics preserves it.

The server drops gated metrics before the safety judge. Keep the report useful without metrics, and do not retry a write to bypass the flag. Local development with DEBUG=True enables the metric write path without a flag check.

Omit a metric you cannot measure honestly. A weak number is worse than none. One support ticket and a single migration crash tell the reader nothing. Nor does a rate over a handful of attempts, or a count with no person context.

FieldTypeNotes
metric_idstring, requiredYour own slug (lowercase letters, numbers, _, -, starting with a letter or number), ≤100 characters. Unique within the report, and the key a later edit updates it under.
titlestring, requiredWhat was observed, and for whom, in one line: Users who hit "Not found" opening a shared chat link, not a label such as Users affected. ≤200 characters.
kindenum, requiredWhat the value measures. See Choosing the kind below.
queryobject, requiredThe bounded live query behind the figure. See Keeping the query live and bounded below.
roleenum, defaultprimary for the report's key observation, else supporting (the default). At most one primary per report.
valuenumber, optionalA snapshot you measured in this run. Optional cached fallback only. Pair it with value_at.
value_attimestamp, optionalWhen you measured value. ISO-8601 with a timezone, and not in the future.
serieslist, optionalTrailing per-bucket values from the same run, oldest first, ≤14 points. Part of the snapshot, so it needs value and value_at.
value_formatenum, defaultHow to print the figure: count, percentage, percentage_scaled, duration, currency, or number (the default).
unitstring, optionalShort suffix that completes the figure, ≤40 characters. See Keeping semantics separate from formatting below.
captionstring, optionalOnly what the tile cannot show, ≤500 characters. See below.
comparisonobject, optionalLegacy. Leave it unset.

A primary affected-users metric and a supporting rate, as they arrive in metrics:

[
  {
    "metric_id": "people-hitting-not-found",
    "title": "Users who hit \"Not found\" opening a shared chat link",
    "kind": "affected_users",
    "role": "primary",
    "value": 412,
    "value_at": "2026-06-18T09:00:00Z",
    "value_format": "count",
    "unit": "users",
    "series": [38, 41, 55, 60, 49, 52, 58, 61, 57, 63, 66, 71, 68, 74],
    "query": {
      "kind": "InsightVizNode",
      "source": {
        "kind": "TrendsQuery",
        "dateRange": { "date_from": "-13d" },
        "interval": "day",
        "series": [
          {
            "kind": "EventsNode",
            "event": "shared_link_failed",
            "math": "dau",
            "properties": [{ "type": "event", "key": "reason", "operator": "exact", "value": ["not_found"] }]
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  },
  {
    "metric_id": "shared-link-failure-rate",
    "title": "Shared chat links that fail to open",
    "kind": "error_rate",
    "value_format": "percentage_scaled",
    "unit": "failure",
    "caption": "Production traffic only.",
    "query": {
      "kind": "InsightVizNode",
      "source": {
        "kind": "TrendsQuery",
        "dateRange": { "date_from": "-13d" },
        "interval": "day",
        "series": [
          {
            "kind": "EventsNode",
            "event": "shared_link_opened",
            "math": "total",
            "properties": [{ "type": "event", "key": "environment", "operator": "exact", "value": ["production"] }]
          },
          {
            "kind": "EventsNode",
            "event": "shared_link_failed",
            "math": "total",
            "properties": [{ "type": "event", "key": "environment", "operator": "exact", "value": ["production"] }]
          }
        ],
        "trendsFilter": { "formula": "B / A", "aggregationAxisFormat": "percentage_scaled" }
      }
    }
  }
]
Choosing the kind

Choose by what the reader will ask, not by what the source makes easy.

KindUse it forQuery shape
affected_usersAnything a person experiences: a captured exception with person context, a dead click, a rage click, a failed request on a surface, a broken URL.Exactly one series, math: "dau". value_format: "count".
affected_sessionsA source that establishes sessions but not people.Exactly one series, math: "unique_session". value_format: "count".
occurrencesNoise, and backend failures: a report asking the team to stop reporting something as an error, a Temporal, Celery, or job exception with no person on the event, or a volume counter such as tool calls per week.Total count. value_format: "count".
error_rateA flow that fails.Two series plus one formula such as B / A, with percentage formatting.
conversion_rateA flow that stalls.Same shape as error_rate.
durationA source that measures time.A numeric property aggregation such as avg or p95 with math_property. value_format: "duration", unit of ms or s, and a non-negative snapshot.
revenueA source that measures money.A sum over the amount property with math_property. value_format: "currency", unit of an uppercase three-letter ISO code such as USD.
customA measurement that no kind above covers.Still needs a live event or action query.

A figure with no event or action query behind it stays in the prose. A database statistic, a build time read from another tool, or a number quoted from an external source has no query, so it cannot be a metric.

A noise report where nobody was hurt takes occurrences, never affected_users.

The server checks the aggregation for affected_users and affected_sessions only. A plain event count formatted as duration or revenue passes validation and then prints a count beside a time or currency unit, so pick the aggregation from the row above rather than relying on the refusal.

An affected_users metric means distinct PostHog people, not sessions, events, requests, traces, groups, or the report's signal count. affected_sessions means distinct sessions. Group math and a formula are refused on both, because the total comes from the series math alone.

Keeping the query live and bounded

The query is the source of truth; it runs again every time a reader opens the report. So attach a query you ran successfully in this session, the same rule the charts carry.

  • One InsightVizNode wrapping one TrendsQuery. Any other node kind is refused at write time.

  • Event and action series only. Every source series must be an EventsNode with a non-empty event, or an ActionsNode with a positive integer id. This is what lets the server check a reader's access without an unbounded query fan-out.

  • A relative window that advances with time. dateRange.date_from must be relative (-13d, -30d), at most 366 days, and date_to must be empty. Default to date_from: "-13d" with interval: "day", which gives 14 inclusive daily buckets including today. interval accepts second through year.

  • At most 1,000 estimated longitudinal points, counting the current partial bucket. One hourly series over roughly six weeks fits.

  • Exactly one output series. Without a formula that means exactly one source series. A rate may combine up to 10 source series with exactly one formula. A breakdown and compare mode are both refused, because either can multiply the output at run time.

  • Keep the filters that reproduce the observation, so the figure measures the thing the report describes.

Consumers own the display. The report derives two shapes from the stored query: BoldNumber for the whole-window aggregated_value, and ActionsBar for the longitudinal buckets. The display you author does not control how the report draws the metric. Run the total-value shape when you measure a snapshot, because a bar or line response gives no whole-window total. Never sum distinct-user buckets, since one person can appear in several.

Keeping semantics separate from formatting

kind says what the metric measures. value_format says how to print it.

  • A non-currency unit is one lowercase word that completes the figure, because the report prints it next to the number: users, sessions, events, runs, calls.

  • For a rate, name what the share means: failure for an error rate, conversion for a conversion rate. % is redundant and is dropped.

  • Use percentage for percentage points (34 means 34%) and percentage_scaled for 0–1 ratios (0.34 means 34%).

  • A percentage query must set aggregationAxisFormat to exactly the same value as value_format. A missing or numeric axis format is invalid.

Titling and captioning

The tile prints the figure, the unit, the title, and the window together, so never state one fact twice across them.

Leave caption empty unless it carries something the reader needs and cannot see:

  • a filter that narrows the count (Production only, excluding internal users),

  • why a longer window was needed,

  • a caveat on the data (Person context is missing on about a third of these events).

A caption that restates the title, the unit, or the window is noise. The strip shows at most the trailing 14 buckets, so a window longer than 14 days needs the caption that explains it.

Snapshots are optional cached fallbacks, not estimates

A snapshot keeps an inbox list read cheap. It never replaces the required live query.

  • Send a snapshot only for a value you measured in this run. Zero is a real measurement; null means unavailable.

  • A count snapshot and series must be non-negative whole numbers. A rate snapshot must sit inside its format's range (0–100 for percentage, 0–1 for percentage_scaled).

  • Never author a snapshot-only or queryless row. Those shapes are legacy or malformed, and the server always redacts them.

  • Leave comparison unset. The server does not yet keep an adjacent comparison window live, so an authored comparison is stored and never shown.

A refresh replaces value, value_at, and series, and clears comparison. It runs only when a client posts to the report's refresh_metrics endpoint; reading a report does not refresh anything on its own. Listing reports never executes a metric query: a row carries the metric metadata and any readable cached snapshot, but no query definition.

A reader may see the tile without its data

A metric snapshot is measured without a requesting user, while a report read is authorized as the viewer. When the server cannot prove the two are equivalent, the metric stays in the response with its data-bearing fields redacted.

  • A cohort reference, including a nested one, hides the metric from every reader. There is no cohort object access policy to prove access against, so this is an intentional safety limit rather than a display bug. Keep a cohort filter out of a metric query.

  • A reader can also lose the query, the snapshot, or both for access reasons you cannot see while authoring: a property restriction, a missing token scope, an action they cannot read, or an unfamiliar filter shape.

So a metric is not a way to deliver a number to a reader who could not run the query themselves. Keep the figure the report's argument depends on in the summary prose, where every reader gets it.

Caps, and what an edit does

At most one affected_users metric, and 60,000 characters of query JSON across the report. Prefer the few measurements that change the decision.

metrics on an edit is the report's whole set, not an addition, exactly like charts. Omit the field to keep the metrics the report has, send the complete replacement list to change them, or send metrics: [] to clear them. Re-send a metric_id with a newer query or snapshot to replace that metric. Read the report first (inbox-reports-retrieve returns its metrics) when you mean to add one. A metric that comes back with a null query is redacted, not empty. You cannot re-send it, because the write shape requires a query, and leaving it out deletes that tile. Omit metrics altogether on such a report, and leave the change to a reader who can see every row.

When the flag permits a metric write, every metric title, caption, snapshot, and query goes before the safety judge, the same as the report prose.

Attaching charts

charts puts the data next to the claim, so a reader sees the move instead of taking the number on trust. Worth it when the shape is the point — a trend that broke, a distribution that shifted, a funnel step that collapsed. A chart restating one number the summary already gives is noise; just write the number.

FieldTypeNotes
chart_idstring, requiredYour own slug (lowercase letters, numbers, _, -). How the summary points at the chart, and the key a later edit refreshes it under. Unique within the report.
titlestring, requiredHeading above the chart.
queryobject, requiredAn InsightVizNode, DataVisualizationNode (a HogQLQuery source, plus display and chartSettings for a graph), or SavedInsightNode (by shortId). Any other kind is refused at write time.
captionstring, optionalOne line on what to look at.
sizeenum, optionalsmall / medium / large. Leave it out unless the default looks wrong — the inbox sizes a chart from its query (a big single number gets a short box, a retention grid a tall scrolling one).

A trends chart and a graph built from SQL, as they arrive in charts:

[
  {
    "chart_id": "exceptions-daily",
    "title": "Exceptions per day",
    "caption": "The step up starts on 18 June.",
    "query": {
      "kind": "InsightVizNode",
      "source": {
        "kind": "TrendsQuery",
        "dateRange": { "date_from": "2026-06-01", "date_to": "2026-07-02" },
        "interval": "day",
        "series": [{ "kind": "EventsNode", "event": "$exception", "math": "total" }],
        "trendsFilter": { "display": "ActionsLineGraph" }
      }
    }
  },
  {
    "chart_id": "exceptions-by-type",
    "title": "People affected, by exception type",
    "query": {
      "kind": "DataVisualizationNode",
      "source": {
        "kind": "HogQLQuery",
        "query": "SELECT exception_type, uniq(distinct_id) AS people FROM ... GROUP BY exception_type ORDER BY people DESC"
      },
      "display": "ActionsBar",
      "chartSettings": { "xAxis": { "column": "exception_type" }, "yAxis": [{ "column": "people" }] }
    }
  },
  {
    "chart_id": "exceptions-by-type-daily",
    "title": "Exceptions per day, by type",
    "query": {
      "kind": "DataVisualizationNode",
      "source": {
        "kind": "HogQLQuery",
        "query": "SELECT toDate(timestamp) AS day, exception_type, count() AS occurrences FROM ... GROUP BY day, exception_type ORDER BY day"
      },
      "display": "ActionsLineGraph",
      "chartSettings": {
        "xAxis": { "column": "day" },
        "yAxis": [{ "column": "occurrences" }],
        "seriesBreakdownColumn": "exception_type",
        "showLegend": true
      }
    }
  }
]

A graph from SQL needs its axes named. Setting display without chartSettings draws an empty box; chartSettings.xAxis.column and chartSettings.yAxis[].column say which columns of the result are which. Omit display altogether and the node renders the result table, which reads better than a chart for a handful of rows.

A graph from SQL needs one row per x-axis value. The x axis is built from the result rows in the order they arrive, so a query that also groups by a second dimension puts several rows at the same x position and the line zigzags instead of trending. Either aggregate the query down to one row per x value, or name the second dimension in chartSettings.seriesBreakdownColumn, which pivots those rows into one series per value of that column. For a time series per segment, an InsightVizNode wrapping a TrendsQuery with a breakdownFilter is usually cleaner than SQL.

Only the node's kind and its serialized size are checked on write. A well-formed node of an allowed kind carrying a broken query is stored without complaint, then fails to draw when a reader opens the report, and nothing reports that back to the scout. So a scout should attach a query it has already run in the same session, or point at an insight that already exists via SavedInsightNode, rather than composing a node from memory. This is the single most useful thing to reinforce in a scout body that leans on charts.

A chart query must not carry anything executable. HogVM bytecode (what conditional formatting compiles to), a nested HogQuery, and sendRawQuery are each refused with a 400 wherever they sit in the node, because a chart renders data rather than running code in the reader's session. A nested SuggestedQuestionsQuery is refused the same way, for cost rather than execution: its runner calls an LLM, so a chart carrying one buys a completion every time a reader opens the report. A query over a warehouse connection is fine as long as it goes through HogQL: keep connectionId, drop sendRawQuery. So a direct-warehouse query you ran with the raw-SQL bypass has to be rewritten before it can be attached.

Placement comes from the summary. A markdown link with a chart: target — [Daily signups](chart:signups-drop) — draws the chart at that point in the body; a chart you never reference still renders, after the prose. Reference each chart once: a repeated reference reads as pointing back at the chart, not as asking for a second copy of it. Two references in one paragraph sit side by side, so put a pair you want compared in a paragraph of their own. A reference inside a code span, a table cell, or a heading has no room to draw — its chart falls to the end of the report instead.

The summary has to read without the charts. A report can also be delivered to Slack, where each reference degrades to the plain label it was given and the charts follow the prose as images rather than sitting inline. Only InsightVizNode and SavedInsightNode charts render there, at most three per report with referenced charts first; a DataVisualizationNode chart shows only in the inbox. "Signups fell 60% over the week" survives that; "the chart below shows the drop" leaves a Slack reader with nothing.

Pin the window to absolute dates wherever the node supports it, so a reader opening the report days later sees the data you wrote about rather than whatever a relative range resolves to then. This holds for charts alone. A metric and a follow-up check measure the period before each run, so each one needs a relative dateRange.date_from and an empty date_to. An absolute window is refused there.

charts on an edit is the report's whole set, not an addition. It replaces what the report had, the way summary replaces the summary — so send every chart you want kept, and re-send an id under a newer window to refresh that chart. Leave charts out entirely and the report keeps the ones it has; read the report first (inbox-reports-retrieve returns its charts) when you mean to add to them. Send charts: [] to take every chart down, for when the finding has moved on and the old chart would now mislead. Cap is 20 charts per report (and a combined query-size budget), which is far more than most reports should use. Each chart runs its query when the report is opened, so attach the ones that carry the argument rather than everything you looked at: three charts a reader studies beat a dozen they scroll past.

Suggesting follow-up prompts

suggested_prompts are prompts the inbox offers above the report's Ask AI box: follow-up questions, and next-step actions the reader can send as a request. Clicking one fills the box with it; nothing is sent on the click, so the reader can send it as written or edit it first. You did the research and know which threads you left open and what should happen next, so this hands the reader that knowledge instead of leaving them to invent a prompt from an empty box.

Optional, and worth it only when you can name a prompt worth an agent run. Write none rather than pad to the cap — a report with no suggestions looks exactly as it did before.

Ask what your research left open, not what it already answered. A question the summary answers spends an agent run restating the report. Good ones widen the finding (who else is affected, since when, what changed), test a hypothesis you could not, or ask for the next step you did not have the standing to take.

Offer the action your report recommends, so acting on it is one click. The prompt reaches an agent run that can investigate, carry out the report's recommendation, and work the report itself — its work log and its state — so a good action prompt names the concrete work: "Create the alert the report recommends, then mark this report resolved". Fold in "mark this report resolved" only when the action completes in place — an action that lands as a pull request must not resolve the report, because a caller resolve closes the report's open PR and the merge resolves the report on its own. Suggest only actions your report's own recommendation makes concrete; leave anything a human should weigh first (deleting data, changing a flag serving live traffic) as a question instead.

Write each prompt as the reader would send it, in their words — a question they would ask or a request they would make — and make each one stand alone: the prompt reaches an agent that gets the report as context but not your run, so it can't point at "the above" or "the second chart".

suggested_prompts on an edit is the report's whole set, not an addition. It replaces what the report had, the way summary replaces the summary, so re-send every prompt you want kept. Leave the field out and the report keeps the ones it has; send suggested_prompts: [] to take them down. Rewriting summary on an edit does not clear them for you, so send the new set (or []) in the same call. The research pipeline does clear them when it rewrites a report it re-researches, since the prompts were written against the prose it replaces.

Cap is 3 prompts per report, each ≤200 characters, and duplicates are refused.

Suggesting a product to turn on

When a report would have had better evidence from a product the project does not use, record a source_suggestion artefact on it. After emit_report or edit_report returns the report id, call inbox-report-artefacts-create with artefact_type: "source_suggestion" and content: {"product": ..., "reason": ...}. The tool needs the inbox:write scope. If the session does not have it, continue without the suggestion. product is one of logs, session_replay, error_tracking, or llm_analytics. The inbox shows the suggestion under the report's evidence with a link to that product, and hides it once the project uses the product.

Suggest a product only for a gap you hit this run: a question it would have answered that you could not answer. Confirm first that the project does not use it, from a not-in-use: memory or a probe that came back empty. reason is one sentence of at most 300 characters about what the product would have shown for this report, not a generic pitch. A report shows one suggestion, and a newer one replaces the older one.

Opening a draft PR (autostart)

A surfaced, immediately-actionable report can open a draft PR automatically — the same autostart path the pipeline uses. It's opt-in per report via three more emit_report fields; supply them only when the report is a concrete, fixable issue you'd want a PR for:

FieldTypeNotes
repositorystring"owner/repo" targets that repo; omitting it falls back to free-form selection; the NO_REPO sentinel opts out. See Choosing a repository below.
priorityP0-P4Required for a PR. Pair with priority_explanation.
priority_explanationstringRequired when priority is set.
suggested_reviewerslist of objReviewers to consider, each {github_login?, user_uuid?} (at least one per entry; see the section below). A PR opens only if at least one clears their autonomy threshold.

Choosing a repository. Prefer owner/repo whenever you can say where a fix would land, including on a requires_human_input report — a repository does not open a PR by itself, it is what lets a person open one from the inbox later. Omit the field when your team has several repositories and you can't tell which one, so selection can find it; that is the slow path on a many-repo team, since it spawns a selection sandbox. Keep NO_REPO for the rare report where nothing under version control could change, such as a staffing finding or a data question with no artifact. A skill body, a config file, and a doc all live in a repository, so "not code" is not the test.

Full repo selection only runs when you signal PR intent — an explicit repository, or both priority and suggested_reviewers. A report that supplies none of these just surfaces in the inbox: no repo sandbox, and no PR. It still gets a repo target when its own text links exactly one repository the team has connected on GitHub, so someone reading it can click Create PR. That inferred target is for a person to act on — it never opens a PR by itself, and rewriting the report's title or summary to link a different connected repository moves it. Adding a qualifying reviewer later is a person asking for the PR, so the report can open a draft one from then on. Autostart itself still no-ops unless the report is immediately_actionable, has a repo + priority, and a reviewer qualifies — so these fields are safe to omit for an informational report.

Choosing suggested_reviewers — how a report gets assigned to a human

suggested_reviewers is not just a PR gate — it is the primary way a report gets routed to the right person internally. The inbox orders by is_suggested_reviewer, so a reviewer's own reports float to the top of their inbox; a report with the right reviewer reaches that human even when no PR is involved. Set it whenever you can name a plausible owner — including on informational requires_human_input reports, not only PR-bound ones. A report with no reviewer just sits in the shared inbox hoping someone grabs it.

Each entry identifies one reviewer by github_login, user_uuid, or both:

  • github_login — a bare, lowercase GitHub login (e.g. octocat, not @OctoCat). Internal assignment matches it against each user's linked GitHub login by exact, lowercased comparison, so a mis-cased handle, an @-prefix, a display name, a CODEOWNERS team slug, or an email won't set is_suggested_reviewer for anyone (autostart's PR-selection path is more lenient, but the assignment path is not).

  • user_uuid — a PostHog user UUID. The server resolves it to that org member. It wins if you also pass a github_login. Use this whenever your evidence already names a PostHog user. It works without a linked GitHub account. A user_uuid that is not an org member of this team is rejected, so it never silently drops.

So you have two routes to a reviewer. If you already hold a PostHog user UUID, prefer passing it as user_uuid — it's the most reliable. Otherwise resolve a github_login, cheapest source first:

  1. Scratchpad cache. A reviewer:<domain>:<area> entry you (or a sibling run) recorded before — reuse it. Fastest path, and the reason the caching step at the end of this list exists.

  2. Inbox precedent. inbox-reports-list for a similar/related report on the same surface (same source_product, plus a free-text search for the area), then inbox-reports-retrieve / inbox-report-artefacts-list to see who comparable reports were routed to. Reuse that reviewer for the same area — the safest general recipe, available to every scout.

  3. CODEOWNERS / git (only if the scout has a repo checkout). .github/CODEOWNERS for the owning path, or the last git log author for the file. Neither hands you a reviewer directly: CODEOWNERS entries are often team slugs (@your-org/team-name) and git log gives a name + email. A reviewer is always an individual, so resolve either to people with scout-members-list before you write it.

  4. scout-members-list — the in-run roster lookup, for the cold-start case where the cheaper paths above don't resolve an owner, and the way a team slug becomes reviewers. It returns this project's members, each with user_uuid, email, name, a resolved github_login, and the teams they're on. Pass search= to narrow by name or email. Match the owner and route with user_uuid. The org-scoped org-members-list / org-member-get-github-login tools are not available in a scout run — a scoped-team token can't reach the org-nested endpoint, so don't build a scout's reviewer recipe around them.

Resolving a team slug to reviewers. Call scout-members-list with team=<slug> (bare slug, no @your-org/ prefix, case-insensitive). It returns the members of that team with its maintainers first, so:

  • Take the first 1 to 3 rows and route them. Three is the cap suggested_reviewers enforces anyway, and past the maintainers the order carries no ownership signal, so a longer list dilutes rather than widens.

  • Prefer one reviewer when a maintainer is clearly the owner of the area. Add the next one or two only when the work spans the team.

  • Route each with user_uuid, the same as any other reviewer.

Two things the roster can't tell you, which change what you should do rather than what you should report:

  • A slug with no rows means "not synced here", not "no such team". The GitHub teams and team_members schemas are off by default and need the organization Members permission, so coverage is partial on most projects. The tool returns an error saying which case it hit. Fall back to matching the owner by name or email, and don't write a report claiming the team doesn't exist.

  • The roster is a snapshot, so it can lag the live team. Someone who joined or left since the last sync is wrong here. Treat a surprising result as stale data, and cross-check against a recent author or an inbox precedent before routing on it alone.

If you can't confidently identify a reviewer, leave suggested_reviewers empty — the report still surfaces for a human to grab. Never guess a handle: a wrong login mis-assigns the report (or silently fails to assign), which is worse than leaving it open. And remember edit_report can set reviewers on a report later — so a report that surfaced routed to no one isn't stuck; once you resolve an owner, edit it in (which also re-runs autostart).

Cache for next time. After you confidently tie an area to an owner, write a reviewer:<domain>:<area> scratchpad entry with the bare lowercase login so the next run — and sibling scouts — route faster. The fleet's reviewer map should compound over time.

edit_report — update an existing report

Rewrite title/summary, append evidence or a note, set suggested_reviewers, correct the repository, change the work decisions (actionability, priority), and/or replace metrics / charts / suggested_prompts on a report that already exists. Pass run_id (the current run) and report_id, plus at least one of title, summary, append_note, append_evidence, suggested_reviewers, repository, actionability, priority, metrics, charts, suggested_prompts. An edit that supplies content (title, summary, metrics, charts, suggested_prompts, append_note, append_evidence, or a reviewer reason) passes the same safety judge as emit_report; an unsafe edit is rejected whole and the report keeps what it had.

edit_report can target any of the team's inbox reports — not just ones a scout authored. That makes it the right tool when a later run learns something about a report the pipeline (or another scout) created. Rules of good behavior:

  • Use append_evidence for a new observation that a reader can check. It takes the same {description, source_id} items as emit_report, and each one lands in the report's evidence rail as a bound signal, so the report's signal_count and total_weight grow with it.

  • Use append_note for commentary — a reading of the report that adds nothing to check, such as the owning team already knowing, or a deploy having fixed it. Send both in one call when an observation needs a reading alongside it.

  • A recovery is a note, not evidence. signal_count and total_weight only grow, and both feed the inbox ranking, so evidence that an issue is over would rank the report as stronger.

  • At the cap, the note is the channel that still lands. Emit plus every append share the report's 50 evidence rows, and the grouping pipeline can raise the count too, so a long-lived report can fill up. An append past the cap is rejected and the report keeps what it had.

  • Prefer these additive fields over rewriting title/summary on a report you didn't author. A note is additive and audit-friendly (it carries your scout as the author); a rewrite silently overwrites a human- or pipeline-authored headline.

  • Don't fight an in-flight pipeline. A report the summary/research workflow is mid-run on can have its fields overwritten under you. If a report is actively being worked, append a note rather than rewriting.

  • Take the questions down when you replace the prose they answer. Rewriting summary leaves the report's suggested_prompts in place, and they were written against the summary you just replaced — send a fresh set in the same call, or [] to clear them.

  • Use suggested_reviewers to rescue an unrouted report. Setting reviewers (same {github_login?, user_uuid?} shape as emit_report) replaces the report's reviewer list and re-runs autostart — so a report that surfaced routed to no one can be assigned to an owner you resolved later, and a now-actionable report with a repo + priority can open a draft PR. An empty list is a no-op (it never clears existing reviewers).

  • Use repository to fix a report that points at the wrong codebase. Pass owner/repo to replace the target, or the NO_REPO sentinel when nothing under version control can change. Omit the field to keep the current target. Correct the report in place instead of filing a duplicate. The change re-runs autostart, so a report that had no repository can now open a draft PR.

Changing the work decisions

edit_report can replace the two decisions that control autostart. Each decision is a set of paired fields, and you send the full set together:

DecisionFields to send together
Actionabilityactionability, actionability_explanation, and already_addressed
Prioritypriority (P0–P4) and priority_explanation
  • An explanation is 2–3 sentences of evidence. The edit fails when you set a decision without its explanation.

  • already_addressed is part of the actionability decision, so it needs actionability and actionability_explanation in the same call. When you omit it, the decision records false.

  • A decision change re-runs autostart. It does not change the report's inbox status. immediately_actionable with a priority can open a draft PR. requires_human_input and not_actionable stop autostart from opening one.

  • decision_fields_set in the response names the decisions the edit replaced. It is empty when you re-send the decisions the report already holds.

Mark in-flight work so that autostart does not compete with it. When a fix has landed, or a PR for the issue is already open, set already_addressed: true with the current actionability and an explanation that names the fix. Autostart then does not open a second, competing implementation. Do this instead of a note alone: a note records the fix for a reader, but autostart does not read it.

Replacing the report's pull request

A report that autostarted has an open draft PR built from the summary as it read at the time. When your rewrite changes what the fix should be, set supersedes_implementation: true alongside the title / summary you are changing. This records a replacement decision for a ready report. Autostart checks policy and eligibility before starting a replacement from your new summary. Technical failures retry automatically; a policy block waits for a new edit or research trigger. The existing PR stays open until the replacement succeeds with a verified open PR.

Set it only when the fix itself changed: a different root cause, a different file or layer, a materially wider or narrower scope. More evidence for the same fix is not a reason — the open PR already implements it, and replacing it throws away review someone may already have done. An append_note is the right move there instead.

Two things bound it, and the response tells you which one applied:

  • It is only honored alongside a rewrite that actually changed the title or summary. Restating the text the report already holds is not a revision, and neither is a note or a reviewer change. is_content_revision in the response says whether yours counted.

  • Only the first four content revisions can request replacements. content_revision_count counts every title or summary rewrite, including ones that did not request replacement. Past four your rewrite still lands, but it cannot request a replacement. supersedes_implementation in the response is true only when the decision was recorded.

Re-confirming a report you already filed

Appending a note that says the finding still holds is worth doing, and it is not a revision — it leaves content_revision_count alone. Free-form append_note text always remains in the work log, including recovery details and observations beyond the evidence cap. Set corroboration_only: true only for a confirmation with no new information. A report keeps its first four confirmations as separate entries and counts later confirmations; the web and desktop inboxes show the collapsed count. The call still succeeds, and corroboration_collapsed in the response tells you it happened.

A replacement request that cannot bind verified predecessor PRs, or whose report changes during verification, fails without saving the edit. Retry the same edit to resolve the context again.

Finding "the report I made last time"

There is no scout-specific report search — use the vanilla inbox tools the scout already has. Before authoring, list the team's existing reports so you reconcile against one instead of filing a duplicate:

  • inbox-reports-list — filter by title/summary free-text (search), status, source_product, or your own task_id; newest-updated first.

  • inbox-reports-retrieve — fetch a single report by id (use the report_id you stashed in the scratchpad last run).

Dedup: the retry is covered, the near-duplicate is not

emit_report carries an emit key, so resending a call that timed out returns the report the first one authored (idempotent_replay true) rather than a twin. The key is the idempotency_key you pass, or the report's own content when you pass none, and it is scoped to your run. Pass one when a retry might reword the report, since a reworded report is a different content key.

That barrier covers the transport failure and nothing else. A report on a topic an earlier run already filed is a fresh emission with a fresh key, so the cross-run dedup is still two-sided and the scout owns it:

  1. Before authoring, inbox-reports-list for a prior report on the same topic. Found one? edit_report it instead of authoring a new one.

  2. After authoring, write a report:<domain>:<entity> scratchpad entry recording the report_id so the next run finds it (via inbox-reports-retrieve) without a title-search guess. (This is the report-channel member of the scratchpad key-prefix vocabulary — see dedupe-and-memory.md.)

edit_report has no such barrier: never retry an edit_report call that may have succeeded, since a transport error after the write commits, retried, appends a second note. If you're unsure whether an edit landed, inbox-reports-retrieve to check before retrying.

The pipeline may rewrite what you authored (accepted)

An authored report is a first-class SignalReport that coexists with pipeline reports. When future signals consolidate around the same topic, the pipeline may re-promote and re-research the report, overwriting your authored title/summary. This is accepted behavior, not a bug — there is no pin. Don't author a report assuming your exact prose is immutable; author the finding, and let the inbox stay the source of truth for how it's currently framed. Your durable record of "I filed this" is the report: scratchpad entry and the report_id, not the title text.

Granting the tools

In the scout's SKILL.md frontmatter, list the report tools under allowed_tools:

allowed_tools:
  - emit_report
  - edit_report

Every report-producing scout needs this. A report-producing scout that omits it falls back to a deprecated legacy channel (weak emit-signal findings a pipeline consolidated) and can't write reports at all. Don't author a new report-producing scout without the opt-in. If you find an existing report-producing scout missing it, add it and rework the scout's Decide section onto this contract. The canonical fleet runs on this channel; signals-scout-anomaly-detection's references/report-contract.md keeps a worked, surface-specific shape (its notebook write-up + embedded-chart recipe). Add a short body section telling the scout what's report-shaped for its surface. Keep it lean — the field-level detail lives here (and in the harness prompt), not in the body.

Rollout posture: for a chatty or high-stakes new scout, start in dry-run (emit=false on its SignalScoutConfig) so it runs and logs what it would author without writing to the inbox. Inspect via scout-runs-retrieve, calibrate, then flip emit=true. The channel files a full inbox item on the first hit, so the cautious loop is worth it when in doubt.

Scouts with a product-specific output

Some scouts write their output to a product surface, not to the inbox. Such a scout omits both emit_report and edit_report, and it does not call emit_signal.

signals-scout-workflows is the example. It files suggestions through the workflows suggestions API, and the suggestion on the workflow page is its output. Its frontmatter description and its "Why this scout files no reports" section state that this is deliberate. A report on a workflow change could autostart a code PR for a change that is only PostHog configuration.

Before you add the report tools to a scout that does not have them, read its description and output section. If the scout states a product-specific output, keep it off the report channel.

To create such a scout per team, do not use scout-create, because it always grants both report tools. Make both calls below on the parent project, not on a child environment. skill-create stores the skill in the active environment, but scout-config-create looks for the skill in the parent project. From a child environment, registration fails, or it registers a different skill with the same name from the parent project. If the active context is a child environment, select the parent project with switch-project first. Some MCP contexts do not expose switch-project, for example a connection with a filtered tool set. In such a context, connect to the parent project directly. If you cannot, do not use this path from that context. Create the skill with skill-create and leave allowed_tools empty. Then register it with scout-config-create, and set its schedule, enabled, and emit on that call. Also set write_scopes on that call to the scope that writes the product output, for example ["hog_flow_proposal:write"] for workflow suggestions. Without that grant, the scout cannot write its output. A dry run (emit: false) never holds the grant, so the scout writes no output in a dry run. Give the skill a name without the signals-scout- prefix. The coordinator auto-registers an enabled config for a prefixed skill that has no config, so a prefixed scout can run on the defaults before your scout-config-create call.

Requirements and compatibility

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Needs an API key

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
PostHog
Publisher
PostHog (Official)
Source
PostHog/skills · skills/omnibus/authoring-scouts · commit a5d30e7
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by PostHog.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download authoring-scouts.zip