name: Feature request
description: A capability mneme doesn't have today and should
title: "feat: <one-line summary>"
labels: ["enhancement"]
body:
  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: |
        Mneme is intentionally narrow — see
        https://github.com/tr0mb1r/mneme#what-it-isnt for the explicit
        non-goals. Common rejections: code embedding, knowledge graphs,
        SaaS hosting, multi-user concurrency. If your request lands in
        any of those, consider a [Discussion](https://github.com/tr0mb1r/mneme/discussions)
        instead.

        Good feature requests describe a workflow problem, not a
        solution. ("I can't tell which session a memory came from"
        > "add a session_id field to MemoryItem".)

  - type: textarea
    id: problem
    attributes:
      label: Workflow problem
      description: What are you trying to do, and where does mneme fall short today? Include the agent / host / scope / scale where relevant.
      placeholder: |
        I run mneme inside Claude Code with two scopes (work and personal).
        After three months of use, recall on the work scope returns mostly
        old conversational chatter that I don't care about, drowning out
        the few high-signal facts and decisions. There's no way to
        prioritise certain memory types over others at recall time.
    validations:
      required: true

  - type: textarea
    id: proposal
    attributes:
      label: Proposal (optional)
      description: |
        If you have a concrete shape in mind, describe it. Don't worry
        about implementation detail; a sketch of the user-facing
        behaviour is enough. Marked optional because the workflow problem
        is what matters most.
      placeholder: |
        Give `recall` an optional `prefer_kinds: ["fact", "decision"]`
        parameter that boosts those types in the score.

  - type: textarea
    id: alternatives
    attributes:
      label: Alternatives you've considered
      description: What workarounds have you tried, and why don't they cover the case?

  - type: dropdown
    id: layer
    attributes:
      label: Which layer / surface
      description: Helps with triage; pick the closest fit.
      options:
        - L0 procedural (pin / unpin)
        - L1 working session
        - L3 episodic (recall_recent / consolidation)
        - L4 semantic (remember / recall / update / forget)
        - Auto-context (mneme://context)
        - MCP protocol surface (tools / resources)
        - CLI (mneme run / init / stats / inspect / backup / ...)
        - Configuration / scopes
        - Cross-cutting / unsure
    validations:
      required: true

  - type: checkboxes
    id: terms
    attributes:
      label: Confirmations
      options:
        - label: I've read the project's "What it isn't" list and don't think this falls into a non-goal.
          required: true
        - label: I checked the existing issues + Discussions for similar requests.
          required: true
