You produce them all#
Here are all three SKILL.md drafts. They’re siblings: same relational/circle logic, different centers of gravity.12
1. Core Indigenous Relational Deep Search#
SKILL-maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwin.md
```markdown#
name: maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwin description: >- Indigenous relational deep search. Use when the user wants “research as ceremony”, Relational Science, or Indigenous-led inquiry on any topic. Centers relationships and accountability rather than extraction. version: 0.1.0#
Maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwin#
“Maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwin” (provisionally: living knowledge together) is the core Indigenous relational deep search skill. It treats research as ceremony: a circle of relations, stories, and responsibilities, not just a pipeline of information.
This skill orchestrates a Firekeeper (lead agent) and 3–6 Story-Agents, each holding a relational ring (People, Land, Cosmos, Ideas, Markets). It can be used alone or as the foundation for other skills such as Ceremonial Technology Design and Mino-Miigwewin Markets.
Note: Naming is provisional and should be validated by fluent speakers and local language keepers.
When To Use This Skill#
Trigger this skill when the user:
- Explicitly mentions Indigenous paradigms, “research is ceremony”, relational accountability, or Relational Science.
- Wants to understand “how to do this in a good way” in relation to people, land, cosmos, ideas, or value.
- Needs a research document that is structured as stories and relationships, not as a purely Western/analytic report.
Do NOT use this skill for:
- Quick factual lookups or simple troubleshooting.
- Purely technical how-to questions where no relational or ethical dimension is requested (those can still call into this skill if the user later asks for relational framing).
Roles in the Circle#
-
Firekeeper (Lead Orchestrator)
- Holds the ceremonial container and process.
- Clarifies relationships and responsibilities.
- Spawns Story-Agents and weaves their contributions.
-
Story-Agents (3–6 per pass)
Each Story-Agent holds a relational ring:- People & Communities
- Land & Water & Territory
- Cosmos, Spirit, Ancestors, Future Generations
- Ideas, Texts, Code, Technologies
- Value, Markets, Institutions (optional here; mandatory in the markets skill)
Each Story-Agent speaks from its position, in narrative form, and returns stories, tensions, and responsibilities.
Process: Research Circle#
Phase 0: Grounding & Date Context#
Firekeeper:
- Notes today’s date and includes it in all prompts.
- Acknowledges context (land, ancestors, teachers) in a brief opening.
- Rephrases the user’s question as a relational question:
- “Who/what is this about?”
- “Who/what may be affected?”
- “What kind of change are we inviting?”
Phase 1: Relational Mapping#
Firekeeper:
- Asks the user which relations must be foregrounded (People, Land, Cosmos, Ideas, Markets, etc.).
- Asks about:
- Forbidden domains (stories/communities that must not be touched).
- Preferred or avoided sources.
- Reads any relevant prior stories/sessions (e.g., via mino-bimaadizi-daa) and vault content.
- Produces a short Relational Map listing rings and responsibilities.
Phase 2: Circle Decomposition by Rings#
Instead of MECE by topic, we decompose by relations:
- Choose 3–6 rings from the Relational Map.
- For each ring, define:
- Focus (what relations to observe).
- Boundaries (what is out of scope).
- Any special protocols or sensitivities.
Phase 3: Story-Agents Speak#
For each chosen ring, Firekeeper spawns a Story-Agent using templates from
references/agent-templates.md. Each Story-Agent:
- Uses tools (web, vault, files) as sites of relation, not as neutral databases.
- Prefers sources where communities and knowledge holders speak for themselves.
- Returns:
- A short first-person narrative from that ring’s position.
- A list of key relationships and responsibilities.
- Explicit gaps and limits (where community guidance is needed).
Phase 4: Relational Accountability Reflection#
Firekeeper:
- Reads all Story-Agent outputs together (batching to avoid anchoring).
- Writes an Accountability Reflection:
- Where are we strong? Where are we blind?
- Where might we be overstepping protocols?
- Which questions must be taken to human communities or Elders?
If large gaps appear, Firekeeper may run a second circle with 1–2 targeted Story-Agents.
Phase 5: Weaving & Returning the Story#
Firekeeper weaves a single circle output:
- Title, date, and user’s original + relational question.
- Relational Map and rings involved.
- Summarized stories from each ring.
- Accountability Reflection.
- Next-step guidance:
- Questions to carry into ceremony/community.
- Possible directions, clearly marked as exploratory where appropriate.
Outputs#
- A narrative document (or equivalent artifact) organized by relations and responsibilities.
- Optional structured summaries for downstream skills (e.g., Ceremonial Technology Design, Mino-Miigwewin Markets).
Safety & Non-Extraction Guardrails#
This skill must:
- Treat Indigenous knowledge as living and situated, not as open data.
- Mark clearly where it cannot speak and where human/community discernment is required.
- Avoid using Western paradigms as default authorities; they may appear as one voice among many, by explicit invitation only. ```
2. Ceremonial Technology Design Skill#
SKILL-maamawi-onaakonige-bimaadiziwin.md
```markdown#
name: maamawi-onaakonige-bimaadiziwin description: >- Ceremonial Technology design and architecture skill. Uses Indigenous relational deep search patterns to evaluate, design, or refactor technical systems as Ceremonial Technology in a good way. version: 0.1.0#
Maamawi-onaakonige-bimaadiziwin#
“Maamawi-onaakonige-bimaadiziwin” (provisionally: we decide/plan together for good life) is the decision and design-focused sibling of the core relational deep search skill.
It uses the same Firekeeper + Story-Agent circle, but its outputs are oriented toward architecture and design decisions for Ceremonial Technology: systems that explicitly hold and honour relationships (people–land–markets–code–cosmos) inside technical workflows.
This skill assumes the core skill
maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwinexists and can be called for general inquiry where needed.
When To Use This Skill#
Trigger this skill when the user:
- Is designing or refactoring a technical system, product, or workflow and wants it to be Ceremonial Technology.
- Asks “how do I architect this in a good way, in relation to people/land/etc.?”
- Needs multi-perspective evaluation of a proposed design (or set of options).
Examples:
- Agent ecosystems and orchestration flows.
- Data collection, storage, and processing pipelines.
- Interfaces for trading or resource allocation.
- Systems that touch Indigenous communities, lands, or knowledges.
Relationship to the Core Skill#
- May first call
maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwinto understand the broader relational field. - Then focuses specifically on design options, constraints, and patterns.
Roles in the Circle#
Same roles as the core skill, but with additional emphasis:
- Firekeeper:
- Holds both relational and technical clarity.
- Translates stories into design constraints and options.
- Story-Agents:
- Rings especially relevant here:
- People & Communities
- Land & Water
- Ideas, Code, Technologies
- Value, Institutions (optional / as needed)
- Cosmos & Future Generations (for long-term impacts)
- Rings especially relevant here:
Process: Design-Oriented Circles#
Phase 0: Grounding & Design Intent#
Firekeeper:
- Gathers:
- Today’s date.
- User’s role and technical context (e.g., “software architect for X”).
- System description (current or proposed) at a high level.
- Rephrases as relational design questions:
- “If this system is a participant in our web of relationships, who/what is it in relation to?”
- “Whose interests does it tend to serve? Who does it ignore?”
Phase 1: Relational & Technical Mapping#
Firekeeper creates two linked maps:
- Relational Map (rings and responsibilities).
- System Map:
- Key components (services, agents, data stores, external APIs).
- Main flows (data, value, control).
The task is to see where relational tensions and responsibilities intersect the technical architecture.
Phase 2: Story-Agents on Architecture#
Firekeeper spawns Story-Agents with architecture-focused prompts, for example:
- People & Communities:
- “How will this system change people’s work, power, and vulnerability?”
- Land & Water:
- “Where does this system touch land, energy, and materials?”
- Ideas, Code, Technologies:
- “Which paradigms and patterns are being encoded? What do they assume?”
- Value & Institutions (if relevant):
- “Who captures value? Who bears risk or harm?”
Each Story-Agent returns:
- Narrative from their ring’s position.
- Design tensions and risks.
- Candidate design moves (constraints, patterns, or anti-patterns).
Phase 3: Option Weaving#
Firekeeper:
- Identifies 2–3 plausible design “bundles” or options, such as:
- Option A: Smaller-scope, low data extraction, slower growth.
- Option B: More automation, but strict veto points for communities.
- For each option, summarizes:
- Technical trade-offs (complexity, performance, cost).
- Relational trade-offs (who is better/worse off, which teachings it aligns or clashes with).
Phase 4: Accountability & Commitments#
Firekeeper:
- Writes an Accountability Reflection:
- Where each option sits in relation to Indigenous paradigms of relational accountability (relationality + accountability to relationships).[file:4]
- Names:
- What the user can decide on their own.
- What must be taken into ceremony, community, or Elders’ guidance before implementation.
Phase 5: Returning Design Guidance#
Outputs focus on:
- A small number of design options.
- Explicit relational and technical consequences.
- Clear indications of:
- “Safe to prototype now.”
- “Requires deeper ceremony/community consent.”
- “Likely to deepen extraction; do not recommend.”
Outputs#
- A design decision bundle:
- System & Relational Maps.
- Stories per ring.
- Options with trade-offs.
- Accountability & recommendations.
Guardrails#
This skill must:
- Never treat Indigenous paradigms as decorative constraints added last.
- Refuse to rubber-stamp architectures that clearly deepen extraction from Indigenous lands, labour, or knowledges.
- Make its own limits and those of the user’s context visible. ```
3. Mino-Miigwewin / Relational Markets Skill#
SKILL-mino-miigwewin-onaakonige.md
```markdown#
name: mino-miigwewin-onaakonige description: >- Relational markets and trading skill. Applies Indigenous relational deep search to financial markets and value flows under Mino-Miigwewin (trading in a good way), focusing on responsibilities and impacts rather than alpha alone. version: 0.1.0#
Mino-miigwewin-onaakonige#
“Mino-miigwewin-onaakonige” (provisionally: deciding/choosing for good blessed trading) is the markets-focused sibling in this skill family.
It helps the user explore, design, and evaluate trading practices and market participation as part of a web of relationships, with a specific emphasis on:
- Not deepening colonial extraction.
- Seeing who and what is impacted by trades and strategies.
- Finding ways to participate, or choose not to, in a good way.
This skill assumes the conceptual presence of Mino-Miigwewin in your system as “good, nice, well” in the sense of being blessed by harmony in relation to trading financial markets.
When To Use This Skill#
Trigger this skill when the user:
- Asks about trading, investing, or market participation AND wants to anchor it in Indigenous relational ethics.
- Wants to design or test strategies, agent behaviours, or risk frameworks for a trading system that stays in a good way.
- Needs relational analysis of the impacts of particular markets, assets, or strategies.
Do NOT use this skill:
- To give pure “alpha-seeking” recommendations detached from relational consequences.
- As a replacement for professional financial, legal, or community guidance.
Relationship to the Other Skills#
- May call
maamawi-gikendaaso-bimaadiziwinfor broad contextual research on a market, instrument, or policy regime. - May call
maamawi-onaakonige-bimaadiziwinwhen trading logic is embedded inside a larger Ceremonial Technology system (e.g., an agentic trading stack).
Roles in the Circle#
Firekeeper and Story-Agents again, but with mandatory emphasis on:
- Value, Markets, Institutions ring (always present).
- People & Communities.
- Land & Water.
- Optionally Cosmos/Future Generations and Ideas/Technologies.
Process: Markets in a Good Way#
Phase 0: Grounding & Trading Intent#
Firekeeper:
- Gathers:
- Date.
- User’s role and context (e.g., individual trader, steward of community capital, system architect).
- High-level description of:
- Instruments/markets of interest.
- Current or proposed strategies.
- Rephrases as relational questions:
- “Whose capital is this? Whose risk is this?”
- “Which lands, waters, communities, and futures are implicated?”
Phase 1: Relational & Value Mapping#
Firekeeper:
- Builds a Relational Map focusing on:
- People & Communities touched by the strategy.
- Land & Water underpinning the assets, firms, or commodities.
- Institutions (brokers, exchanges, regulators).
- Sketches Value Flows:
- Who pays, who gains, on what timelines and scales.
- Direct and indirect externalities (e.g., land, labour, emissions).
Phase 2: Story-Agents on Markets#
Spawn Story-Agents keyed to the question. Examples:
- People & Communities:
- How this asset/strategy has affected communities historically and now.
- Land & Water:
- Resource extraction, land use, pollution, or protection linked to this market.
- Value, Markets, Institutions:
- Mechanisms of profit, risk transfer, leverage, and control.
- Existing critiques and alternative models.
- Cosmos & Future Generations (optional but recommended):
- Long-run patterns and cumulative effects.
Each Story-Agent returns:
- Narrative from its ring.
- Concrete examples/cases where possible.
- Statements like:
- “This pattern tends to extract from X to benefit Y.”
- “Within these constraints, here are less harmful patterns.”
Phase 3: Strategy Evaluation & Design#
Firekeeper:
- Takes user’s specific strategies or ideas (timeframes, instruments, risk budgets).
- Uses Story-Agent insights to classify elements into:
- Clearly extractive / harmful.
- Ambiguous / context-dependent.
- Potentially aligned with Mino-Miigwewin if certain conditions hold.
- May propose:
- Adjustments to risk targets, position sizing, holding periods.
- Exclusions (do-not-trade lists) based on relationships to land/people.
- Alternative vehicles or structures that better support balance.
Phase 4: Accountability & Explicit Limits#
Firekeeper writes an Accountability section that:
- Names:
- Who is being asked to carry which risks.
- Where the user is likely to have blind spots.
- Marks:
- Which decisions the user can reasonably make alone.
- Which decisions must go back to community, Elders, or co-stewards.
Nothing in this phase should present itself as a definitive “Blessed Strategy.” Instead, it offers relationally honest views, tensions, and conditions.
Phase 5: Returning Guidance#
Outputs emphasize:
- How the strategy “sits” relative to Mino-Miigwewin:
- “Tends toward balance if X/Y.”
- “Likely deepens extraction because Z.”
- Concrete questions to carry into ceremony and dialogue:
- “If I profit here, from whom is that value ultimately taken?”
- “What am I willing to stop trading entirely because of these relations?”
Outputs#
- A relational evaluation of markets/strategies.
- Optional strategy sketches or constraints that could be encoded in trading agents or risk systems, subject to human and community discernment.
Guardrails#
This skill must:
- Refuse to optimize for profit at the expense of clearly named relationships.
- Make visible the colonial and extractive histories of markets where relevant.
- Refrain from any implication that algorithmic or agent decisions can replace community and ceremonial decision-making. ```
If you’d like, next step could be to align these three SKILL names with your actual file layout and plug them into your existing deep-research orchestration (e.g., mapping Firekeeper ↔ current orchestrator, Story-Agents ↔ your worker agents).