CodeLens: Continuous AI Session Analyzer & Rules File Generator

The Wrapped framing is what caps it at once a year. Anything shaped like a year in review only has a reason to exist in December, so Aider support doesn't get you a second use, it gets you more people for the same single use. The second use is already in the data you're reading, just not the part you're surfacing. Those session histories don't only record what I asked for, they record what I had to explain again. Same architecture note, same test command, same don't touch this directory, three times a week across four projects. That's the report I'd run on a Tuesday: here are the five things you re-explain to the model constantly. That output is actionable, which is the difference. It's a first draft of the rules file I should have written, built from evidence instead of me guessing at what I keep repeating, and it changes every couple of weeks as the project moves, so there's a reason to come back to it. Abandonment signals are closer to that than Aider support is, but on their own they're still a retrospective. Interesting to look at, nothing to do afterwards. Same detection work, pointed at something I can act on.

The Wrapped framing is what caps it at once a year. Anything shaped like a year in review only has a reason to exist in December, so Aider support doesn't get you a second use, it gets you more people for the same single use. The second use is already in the data you're reading, just not the part you're surfacing. Those session histories don't only record what I asked for, they record what I had to explain again. Same architecture note, same test command, same don't touch this directory, three times a week across four projects. That's the report I'd run on a Tuesday: here are the five things you re-explain to the model constantly. That output is actionable, which is the difference. It's a first draft of the rules file I should have written, built from evidence instead of me guessing at what I keep repeating, and it changes every couple of weeks as the project moves, so there's a reason to come back to it. Abandonment signals are closer to that than Aider support is, but on their own they're still a retrospective. Interesting to look at, nothing to do afterwards. Same detection work, pointed at something I can act on.

The Wrapped framing is what caps it at once a year. Anything shaped like a year in review only has a reason to exist in December, so Aider support doesn't get you a second use, it gets you more people for the same single use. The second use is already in the data you're reading, just not the part you're surfacing. Those session histories don't only record what I asked for, they record what I had to explain again. Same architecture note, same test command, same don't touch this directory, three times a week across four projects. That's the report I'd run on a Tuesday: here are the five things you re-explain to the model constantly. That output is actionable, which is the difference. It's a first draft of the rules file I should have written, built from evidence instead of me guessing at what I keep repeating, and it changes every couple of weeks as the project moves, so there's a reason to come back to it. Abandonment signals are closer to that than Aider support is, but on their own they're still a retrospective. Interesting to look at, nothing to do afterwards. Same detection work, pointed at something I can act on.