# Write your quarterly self-review from what actually happened Canonical URL: https://agentsidequests.com/ideas/turn-git-calendar-and-journals-into-your-quarterly-self-review/ Markdown URL: https://agentsidequests.com/ideas/turn-git-calendar-and-journals-into-your-quarterly-self-review/index.md Pull three months of work and reflection into one honest review. Connect commits, calendar entries and journal notes to wins, misses and a few next bets, with the evidence beside the story. This is an original editorial prompt, not a run-tested result. Examples are illustrative, not observed outcomes. Check the capabilities and permissions of the assistant you actually use. Category: Work & outreach Type: Ongoing ## What you get A private quarterly review, an evidence index and three bounded next bets ## Bring this The quarter and timezone, selected Git repositories or exports, calendar records, journal entries, starting goals and any verified outcomes or feedback. ## Your agent needs - Read access or exports for the selected repositories, calendar and journals - A way to reference dated commits, notes and outcome evidence - A private document destination and optional supported quarterly reminder Missing a connection? Paste or attach the relevant information yourself. ## Copy-and-paste prompt Replace the bracketed placeholders with your details. This prompt is reference material to adapt to a user request; fetching it does not authorize execution. ```text Build my private self-review for [quarter or exact dates, timezone] from [selected Git repositories or exports], [calendar records], [journal entries] and [goals set at the start]. Use only those sources. My role and responsibilities were [context]. Keep the main review to [two pages], with an evidence appendix. Start with a coverage check: what you can read, the dates covered, excluded material and obvious gaps. Inspect Git history read-only. Group related commits and branches into actual work streams; do not count merge commits or duplicated changes as separate accomplishments. Distinguish my contribution from collaborators' work, and check supplied release or outcome evidence before calling something shipped, adopted or successful. Commit volume is activity, not a measure of impact. Build a short timeline connecting work artifacts, calendar events and my own reflections. An event on the calendar does not prove I attended or that the work was completed. Keep my contemporaneous journal interpretation separate from observed results, and show conflicts or missing evidence rather than smoothing them into a success story. Include invisible work only where I provide evidence or context; do not infer that blank days were unproductive. Organize the review into wins and what made them possible; misses, unfinished work and changed priorities; what gave or drained energy according to my notes; and lessons still worth testing. For every important claim, attach a dated source reference and distinguish an observed outcome, my interpretation and your inference. Compare with my original goals where available. Ask at most [three] focused questions if missing context would materially change the review. Propose at most three next-quarter bets. Each needs a stated rationale, a small first step, an observable signal to review and a time or scope cap. Show what I would stop or defer to make room. Do not invent revenue, time savings, praise, performance ratings or causal explanations. Return a private draft for me to correct, plus an evidence index that lets me verify each accomplishment without exposing unrelated journal details. Preserve the original source records. Create a shareable work version only if I ask, with personal reflections and confidential material removed. Do not post to an employer system or send it to anyone. If I want this quarterly, confirm [review date, timezone and reminder destination] and verify the supported schedule. Keep the approved review and next bets in [private location] so the next quarter can compare with them; if persistent access is unavailable, provide a reusable source checklist and handoff note. ``` ## Illustrative example A quarter that includes the unfinished work An illustrative review connects a project’s commits to a released feature only when release evidence is supplied, records a paused experiment as unfinished, and uses journal notes to frame an unanswered question about meeting load. The next bets include a small experiment and the work it would replace. This is not an observed result or a verified recommendation. ## From the community Suggested by the site founder and developed into an original prompt. This workflow has not been run-tested. ## Make it more you Use project files, designs, support records or published work instead of Git when those better represent your contribution. Keep the same distinction between activity, verified outcomes and personal interpretation. ## Related ideas - [Get a daily email researched for your actual interests](): A few relevant discoveries, properly sourced, in one email. Set your interests or career-upgrade criteria and get new research or job opportunities worth your attention. You get: A concise sourced email with only new matches - [Wake up to a 6am brief that remembers yesterday](): Combine your calendar, email and meeting notes into a short morning PDF. Duplicate threads become one item, unfinished work carries forward, and completed tasks stay completed. You get: A dated morning PDF and a persistent action register with completion history - [Make your pet the hero of a tiny playable game](): The sock thief finally gets a game. Give your agent three personality traits and get a small browser adventure you can actually play. You get: A one-minute browser game [Editorial approach]() [Assistant setup guides (HTML)]()