Skip to content

Knowledge Infrastructure

Two Architectures for Claude Code: What 19,700 Stars Got Right and What They Missed

A repository called claude-code-best-practice hit #1 trending on GitHub this week. 19,700 stars in days. Eighty-four tips from Boris Cherny, who created Claude Code, along with contributions from Thariq, Cat Wu, and the broader Anthropic team. It is the most comprehensive public document on how to get serious results from Claude Code, and it deserves the attention it is getting.

The reason it caught my eye is that the ExoCortex -- the eight-layer stack running my Claude Code setup for ten-plus weeks now -- solves many of the same problems from a fundamentally different direction. Same tool, same class of problem, different architectural assumptions. Comparing the two reveals something neither setup has articulated on its own: there are two distinct philosophies for extending Claude Code, and both have blind spots the other has solved.

We Cancelled a 45-Minute Architecture Review. A KCP Query Answered It in 1.2 Seconds.

When the AI Agent Knows Your Architecture — organisational knowledge becomes queryable rather than assembled in meetings

Last week someone asked the question that usually triggers a meeting: "If we change the payment service API contract, what else breaks?" In any enterprise system older than a few years, nobody has the full picture. The payment service team knows their side. The downstream consumers know theirs. The platform team knows the deployment topology. But the blast radius of a contract change lives in the intersection of what three or four people carry in their heads, and the only way to assemble that intersection has always been to put those people in a room.

We didn't put them in a room. We ran a query.

Agent Memory Rots. Here's How We Stopped It.

Five weeks ago I wrote about the three-layer memory architecture for AI agents: working memory (the context window), episodic memory (indexed session transcripts), and semantic memory (a workspace knowledge graph). The prescription was "build these layers." Yesterday I shipped the maintenance system that keeps them from decaying.

Building the layers was the easy part.

Agent Memory Rots — diagnostic telemetry and behavioral heuristics for maintaining the ExoCortex. 3,000+ sessions indexed. 65,905 files. Memory degradation imminent.

The Tool I Didn't Plan to Build: Synthesis, Ten Weeks Later

In late January 2026, I had a problem I hadn't anticipated. I had just finished building lib-pcb — a Java library for parsing eight proprietary PCB binary formats. 197,831 lines of code. 7,461 tests. Eleven calendar days. The AI agent (Claude Code) wrote most of it. The methodology worked exactly as designed.

And then I couldn't navigate any of it.

The KCP Ecosystem: How Five Tools Turn Claude Code Into a Persistent Intelligence Platform

The KCP Ecosystem — Turning Claude Code into a Persistent Intelligence Platform

The Problem

Every session with Claude Code starts from zero.

Every AI session starts from zero — the Start-From-Zero Loop

You open a new session, and the model has no idea what you were doing yesterday. Which services are running. What you decided about the database schema last Thursday. Why you chose the library you chose. You re-explain it. Claude asks clarifying questions you answered two sessions ago. You paste the same background context you always paste. Then the work begins.

And when the work does begin, there's a different problem: output flooding the context window. Run mvn package and you get 400 lines of Maven lifecycle noise. Run terraform plan and the diff buries the actual changes in scaffolding. Run kubectl get pods cluster-wide and you've spent 8,000 tokens on status rows you didn't need.

Context flooding destroys working memory — 33.7% of a 200K context is recovery overhead

The context window is your working memory. Filling it with boilerplate and re-explaining the same setup repeatedly is waste — not just inconvenient, but structurally limiting. A 200K token context sounds vast until a third of it is recovery overhead.

What's missing is infrastructure. Not smarter prompting. Not longer context. Infrastructure — a persistent layer that handles memory, filters noise, and gives the model the right knowledge at the right moment without you having to manage it manually.

That infrastructure is KCP.

kcp-dashboard: Observability for the KCP Ecosystem

The KCP toolchain has been running in the background for weeks. kcp-commands injects manifests before Bash calls. kcp-memory indexes sessions and tool events. Events accumulate in ~/.kcp/usage.db and ~/.kcp/memory.db. The machinery works. But until today, the only way to know whether it was working well was to grep through databases and trust the numbers.

Trust is not observability. You cannot improve what you cannot see.

Today we are releasing kcp-dashboard v0.22.0 -- a terminal UI that reads both KCP databases and shows you what the guidance layer is actually doing: which commands are guided, how often manifests leave the agent needing more help, what sessions look like, and where the gaps are.

The Faster Pencil

AI does not remove the hard part of any job. It moves it — and makes it harder to ignore.

Based on a conversation between two software developers, March 2026.

Two developers were talking late one night about what AI had actually changed in their work. They had both been using it for years. They were good at it. And what they kept coming back to was something that surprised them: the more capable the tool got, the more it demanded of them — not less.

This essay is built on that conversation. But the idea they landed on has nothing to do with software. It applies to any job where thinking is the work.

Every Agent That Queries a Knowledge Manifest Reinvents Filtering

Your agent has a task, a token budget, and a manifest with 200 knowledge units. Which units should it actually read? Every team answers this question differently — custom audience filters, ad-hoc staleness checks, bespoke capability gates. The logic works, but none of it interoperates. Swap one tool for another and you rewrite the glue.

KCP v0.14 standardises the query. RFC-0014 standardises composition. Together, they solve the two problems that make knowledge manifests painful at scale.

Peter Naur Was Right in 1985, and AI Just Proved It

In 1985, the Danish computer scientist Peter Naur published a short paper called "Programming as Theory Building." His argument was simple and radical: a program is not its source code. A program is a theory — a coherent mental model of what the system does, how its parts relate to each other, and why it was built the way it was. The source code is a byproduct of that theory. A trace. Not the thing itself.

The Manifest Quality Feedback Loop

kcp-commands ships 291 manifests. Each one is a bet: that the flags we chose are the ones the agent will actually need, that the output filter is tight enough, that the preferred invocations match real usage. Some of those bets pay off. Some do not.

Until now there was no way to know which. A manifest for kubectl apply could be steering the agent into the wrong flags on every invocation, and we would never see it unless we happened to watch the session in real time. At 291 manifests and hundreds of tool calls per day, that does not scale.

Today we are shipping two small releases that close that gap: kcp-commands v0.15.0 and kcp-memory v0.7.0. Together they create a feedback loop from agent behaviour back to manifest quality -- not by guessing, but by measuring what actually happened.