affaan-m/ECC
ECC targets Claude Code specifically, which field-notes already uses for CCR orchestration, so the surface fits. But 'fit' here means installing a third-party JavaScript package that auto-applies behavioral 'instincts' and persists cross-session 'memory' inside the exact harness that runs unattended pipeline stages - that is a materially different integration than a normal library dependency.
The operator values practical over experimental, self-hosted, budget-conscious tooling that runs mostly unattended. A six-month-old, single-source-verified package that silently alters agent behavior and carries state across sessions is the opposite of the boring reliability that unattended automation needs - an upstream bug or bad update would corrupt scoring calibration across every future weekly run with no local visibility into why.
The real, narrow value here is not ECC itself but the problem it names: field-notes' weekly enrichment re-derives scoring intuition from the rubric every run instead of accumulating it. A hand-written calibration-notes file captures that value directly without a new dependency.
This item is a useful test case for how the pipeline should treat agent-tooling submissions generally: single-source GitHub self-description, a headline star count that does not hold up to scrutiny for the stated creation date, and a pitch that specifically asks to be given more automatic control over the same harness the enrichment pipeline runs on. That combination should raise scrutiny, not lower it, regardless of how well the pitch matches the stack.
Add a short 'Calibration notes' section to field-notes' enrichment prompt or a new .claude/skills/enrichment-calibration.md file listing 2-5 scoring heuristics already learned from prior weeks (e.g. treat implausible star-count-to-age ratios as a red flag, default evergreen list repos to low signal). Update it by hand after runs where a scoring miss is noticed. No new package, no change to the CCR trigger, no automatic behavior injection.