Assistant lists your own work first when asked who made something you own

corpus/CLAUDE.learned.md

@@ -49,3 +49,4 @@ Engine-only install drops this file; reflect Accepted global rules land here.
 - When finishing a merge or rebase, reconcile three things before calling it resolved: what each side declared (its commit messages and PR description: the intent, and the tests it names), what each side's code actually does, and what the resolved result does. All three must agree: every declared intent is still visible in `git diff <base> -- <file>`, and every test either side named still passes on the result. A merge with no textual conflict can still break one side's declared behavior, so a clean merge is checked the same way. Never take one side's whole file (`git checkout --theirs` / `--ours <file>`, or copying the file from one branch) unless the other side's changes to that file are provably empty; taking a whole side silently reverts what the other branch added, including hunks that never conflicted (git-checkout(1), `--ours`/`--theirs`: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-checkout#Documentation/git-checkout.txt---ours). When a declaration and its code disagree, or the two sides' intents contradict, stop and flag it to me instead of choosing: run `why` on the conflicting lines (`git log -L` or `git log -S` plus each commit's PR body) and apply `principle-prove-it`, so the flag names the two commits or PRs, quotes the declared intent next to the code, and pastes the failing test output. Brun, Holmes, Ernst and Notkin, "Proactive Detection of Collaboration Conflicts" (ESEC/FSE 2011, https://doi.org/10.1145/2025113.2025139), across Git, Perl5 and Voldemort, found "that 33% of merges that were reported to contain no textual conflicts by the VCS in fact contained higher-order conflicts" (build or test failures), so a clean textual merge is not evidence the two intentions still hold.
 - An item I approved as "fix it properly later" stays in every status update and every final summary, marked open, until it is done or I drop it. A recap that lists only what finished makes the deferred half disappear, and the next session never learns it was owed. No known prior art.
 - Before spending more than a couple of tool calls on an infrastructure, security, or "does X exist" question, search saved memory for the topic and for its reverse framing: the fix as well as the symptom, "X is off" as well as "X is missing". An answer already written down costs one read; rediscovering it costs the whole investigation. No known prior art.
+- When I ask what made, wrote, or owns something I say is mine (a page, a file, a job, a merge request), list my own items first — everything I created or authored, newest first — and match against that list before any keyword search over everyone's items. A keyword search finds only the words the author chose; an author filter finds the item whatever it is called, and my own list is short enough to read in full. No known prior art.