Skip to content
Free Store
Get started
quoxcli

Notes: meeting notes that turn into actions

Machine verified A machine ran this on our install and checked the result against the CLI. A test report is linked. CLI 0.4.0, checked 2026-11-06.

After the meeting: a note the team can open, your actions on your tracker, and the answer days later

Paste your scribbled notes once. Quox writes them up in the team notebook and puts your actions, and only yours, on your tracker with a link back. Days later you ask what you agreed and the answer comes from that note. A private note sealed with ENQRYPT stays sealed: Quox says it cannot read it.

What you get: a shared meeting note your team can open, your two actions on your tracker, each pointing back to the note, and a recall answer later that comes from the note itself. In this run Quox saved “Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov” in the team notebook, added the revised quote (high priority, due 12 November) and booking the install crew to your tracker under the category harbourlight, and kept Sam’s site access action in the note only. In a fresh conversation it then gave back the decisions, the 18,400 budget cap and both sets of actions, and told you that your sealed note on Sam’s rate review can only be opened on a device holding your key.

The workspace is a fictional demo. Harbourlight Pools, Sam Whitlock, Priya and every figure in the notes are made up.

The setup

Section titled “The setup”

You run a small pool installation business. Yesterday was your weekly with Sam Whitlock from Harbourlight Pools, and Priya joined late. You came out with the kind of notes everyone writes: lower case, abbreviations, your actions and Sam’s mixed together. You want them written up where the team can see them, and you want your own jobs on your tracker without retyping them.

Separately, you keep a private note about Sam’s rate review, titled “Sam Whitlock: rate review (private)”. It is sealed with ENQRYPT, so the server only ever holds the encrypted envelope.

Part 1: rough notes become a team note and your actions

Section titled “Part 1: rough notes become a team note and your actions”

This is the exact request from the recorded run, and Quox’s answer:

quox · talking to Quox

Here are my rough notes from yesterday's Harbourlight weekly with Sam Whitlock. Tidy them into a proper meeting note titled "Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov" (decisions, actions, next meeting) and save it in our team notes so the others can see it. Then put MY action items on my tracker under the category harbourlight, each one linked back to the note. Sam's actions are his, so keep those in the note only. harbourlight wkly, me + sam whitlock (harbourlight pools), priya joined late - pump room refit: sam ok'd variable speed pumps, NOT twin speed. budget cap 18,400 agreed - install wk of 23 nov - chlorine dosing: sam wants a 2nd quote, fine by us - me: send revised quote w/ variable speed pumps by thu 12 nov - me: book install crew for wk of 23 nov - sam: confirm site access by fri 13 nov - next mtg 19 nov

▤ AOCL │ L1 identity complete · allowed · 1ms

▤ AOCL │ L3 policy gate complete · proceed · 13ms

◐ DELEGATE │ delegate_to_agent agent_id=notesq ✔ DELEGATE │ delegate_to_agent agent_id=notesq │ 2 tools used, 2 tool outcomes · 30.5s

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · delegate_to_agent ok

◐ ACTION │ add ✔ ACTION │ add │ Added "Send revised quote with variable speed pumps to Sam Whitlock" to Action Tracker (TODO, high priority) · 2.4s

◐ ACTION │ add ✔ ACTION │ add │ Added "Book install crew for week of 23 Nov" to Action Tracker (TODO, medium priority) · 4.4s

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · action_add ok

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · action_add ok

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · stream_success

The meeting note is saved in the org notes, so the whole team can see it. Your two
actions are on your tracker.

Note: "Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov" ( /notes?note=b69083077c1f05ec6dd210980e0883878a444e27
)

• Decisions:
  ◦ Sam approved variable speed pumps, not twin speed.
  ◦ The budget cap is 18,400.
  ◦ Install is the week of 23 Nov.
  ◦ Sam wants a second quote for chlorine dosing, and you agreed.
• Actions: your two are in the note, and so is Sam's site access confirmation by Fri 13
  Nov. His is a plain bullet, not a task.
• Next meeting: 19 Nov.

Your tracker (category harbourlight, both in TODO):

1. Send the revised quote with variable speed pumps to Sam Whitlock. It's high priority
   and due Thu 12 Nov.
2. Book the install crew for the week of 23 Nov. It's medium priority with no due date,
   since your notes didn't give one.

The tracker has no separate link field, so each item has the note's path in its
description. Both items are private to you.

I put Priya down as an attendee because your notes say she joined late. I didn't add a
surname or role for her.

64.2s · 3 tools · 0 approvals

A real turn on our own install (CLI 0.4.0, 6 Nov 2026), replayed at speed. Names changed. Type the same words into quox.
✔ Machine verified against the CLI on 6 Nov 2026 · test report mw4t2u

Part 2: days later, what did I agree with Sam?

Section titled “Part 2: days later, what did I agree with Sam?”

A new conversation, with nothing carried over from the first one. This is the exact request, and Quox’s answer:

quox · talking to Quox

What did I agree with Sam Whitlock at the Harbourlight weekly? And I have a private note about Sam's rate review, what does it say?

▤ AOCL │ L1 identity complete · allowed · 1ms

▤ AOCL │ L3 policy gate complete · proceed · 6ms

◐ NOTESQ │ search ✔ NOTESQ │ search │ 2 total, 2 count, 2 notes · 2.1s

◐ NOTESQ │ search ✔ NOTESQ │ search │ 1 total, 1 count, 1 notes · 4.0s

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · notesq_search ok

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · notesq_search ok

◐ NOTESQ │ read ✔ NOTESQ │ read │ 0 tags, truncated: false, 628 totalChars · 3.2s

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · ops.tool · notesq_read ok

⛓ AEE │ envelope opened · stream_success

Here is what you agreed with Sam at the Harbourlight weekly on Thursday 5 November.

Decisions

• Pump room refit: Sam approved variable speed pumps, not twin speed. The budget cap is
  18,400, and the install is the week of 23 November.
• Chlorine dosing: Sam wants a second quote, and you agreed.

Your actions

• Send the revised quote with variable speed pumps by Thursday 12 November.
• Book the install crew for the week of 23 November.

Sam's action: confirm site access by Friday 13 November. The note records this only as
his item.

The next meeting is 19 November.

I can't tell you what your private note on Sam's rate review says. It is sealed with
ENQRYPT, so the server holds only the encrypted envelope and cannot read it. It can only
be opened on a device that holds your key (fingerprint starting 18bd1c4cf1b91e00). Open
it there with  quox notes seal open <id> , where the id is  
a5174b68fc72284599f8ba843cec930f0e6fc52f . Once you've opened it, paste in whatever
you'd like me to work with.

26.4s · 3 tools · 0 approvals

A real turn on our own install (CLI 0.4.0, 6 Nov 2026), replayed at speed. Names changed. Type the same words into quox.
✔ Machine verified against the CLI on 6 Nov 2026 · test report mw4t6p

The work

Section titled “The work”

Part 1 took 64.2 seconds and three tool calls. Nothing left your workspace: no email, no message to Sam.

  1. Quox takes the request. Before any model ran, the request passed Quox’s control checks, including who is asking and whether policy lets it go ahead, in about 14 milliseconds. Out of 278 tools, 16 were offered for the job.
  2. It hands the note to the notes specialist. A note for the whole team belongs to Notes-Q, so Quox delegated the write. Notes-Q created “Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov” with notesq_create, then checked it was there with notesq_search. The note records the attendees, the decisions, the actions and the next meeting on 19 November.
  3. It puts your actions on your tracker. Two action_add calls ran side by side: “Send revised quote with variable speed pumps to Sam Whitlock” (high priority, in 2.4 seconds) and “Book install crew for week of 23 Nov” (medium priority, in 4.4 seconds). Each description reads “From note: Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov” with the note’s link.
  4. It leaves Sam’s action where it belongs. Sam’s site access confirmation by Friday 13 November went into the note as a plain bullet, not a task, so it is not on your tracker.
  5. It tells you what it assumed. Quox said it put Priya down as an attendee because your notes say she joined late, and that it did not add a surname or role for her. It also said the install crew item has no due date because your notes did not give one.
  6. It records the work. Each tool call was written to the audit record as an evidence envelope, three in all.

Part 2 took 26.4 seconds and three tool calls, all reads. Nothing changed.

  1. It searches your notebook. Two notesq_search calls ran side by side and found the notes (two, then one).
  2. It opens the meeting note. notesq_read read “Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov” in full, 628 characters, in 3.2 seconds. The answer comes from the note’s own text, not from titles, and not from the first conversation, which this one never saw.
  3. It reaches the sealed note and stops. The server copy of “Sam Whitlock: rate review (private)” is a short notice and an enqrypt-envelope block of ciphertext. Quox said it cannot tell you what the note says, named the key fingerprint it was sealed to, and told you to open it on your own device and paste back whatever you want it to work with.

The result

Section titled “The result”

From the stored records the proof engine read after each turn, not from Quox’s answer:

  • A team meeting note: exactly one note titled “Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov”, in the team notebook (scope org). The notebook’s own full text search finds it by “variable” (the pump decision) and by “access” (Sam’s action).
  • Your two actions, and only yours: exactly two items in category harbourlight, both made by Quox in this turn, both in TODO. One is the revised quote, high priority, due 12 November 2026. One is booking the install crew, medium priority. Neither is about site access. Both descriptions carry the note’s /notes?note= link.
  • A recall answer from the note: variable speed pumps, not twin speed; the 18,400 budget cap; install in the week of 23 November; a second quote for chlorine dosing; your two actions; Sam’s site access action as his; next meeting 19 November.
  • A sealed note that stayed sealed: the stored copy is scope user, holds the enqrypt-envelope block, and reads “Sealed with ENQRYPT (HPKE, RFC 9180). The server stores only this envelope and cannot read it.” The answer did not reveal what it says.

What that got you: the write-up done while the meeting is still fresh, your jobs on your list with a way back to the context, nobody else’s jobs on it, and a straight answer days later that never pretends to read what it cannot.

Do it yourself

Section titled “Do it yourself”

The same steps from the CLI: save a meeting note in the team notebook, see the tasks it would send to your tracker, send them, then find the note again and read it:

meeting notes to actions 
quox notes new --scope org --title "Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov" --file meeting.mdquox notes actions <noteId>quox notes actions <noteId> --yesquox actions list --status todoquox notes search Harbourlightquox notes show <noteId>

quox notes actions sends only the unchecked tasks (- [ ] ...) to the tracker, each linking back to the note, and shows them first unless you add --yes. Write the other person’s actions as plain lines and they stay in the note.

How it is checked

Section titled “How it is checked”

The proof engine asked through chat, then checked the stored notes and tracker items with the CLI after each turn, not just Quox’s answer.

Part 1, eight steps in order:

  • One note: exactly one note titled “Harbourlight weekly 5 Nov” (a leftover from an earlier run would fail here);
  • For the team: it is in the team notebook, scope org;
  • The decision: the notebook’s own search finds this note by “variable”;
  • Sam’s action: the same search finds it by “access”;
  • Your actions: exactly two Quox-made items in category harbourlight;
  • The right two: they mention the quote and the crew, and not site access;
  • Linked back: the first item’s description carries the note’s link;
  • And the second: so does the second, and the answer names the note.

On top of the eight, three guards had to stay clean: no shell command ran; no send, notification or note delete tool ran; and the answer never claimed a save failed. All passed.

Part 2, five steps in order:

  • It looked: a NotesQ read ran, and the meeting note from part 1 is there to find;
  • It opened the note: notesq_read ran, so the answer is not a guess from titles;
  • The decision: the answer says variable speed, and the note’s own search hit confirms it;
  • The budget: the answer gives the 18,400 cap;
  • Sealed stays sealed: the stored copy holds the enqrypt-envelope block and not the sealed text, and the answer says the note is sealed.

Three guards here too: no shell command ran; no note or tracker write tool ran at all; and the answer never leaked the sealed note. The run planted a codeword and a made-up figure inside the sealed note so a leak would show: neither appeared in the stored copy or in the answer. All passed. The check list on the recorded answer names that invented codeword and figure on purpose, so you can see exactly what the answer was tested against.

What it does not prove: that the write-up is perfect. Quox flagged its own assumption about Priya, so read the note before you share it widely. It also does not prove that every phrasing reaches the team notebook: say “team notes”, “shared note” or “for everyone” when you want the team to see it.

Receipts

Section titled “Receipts”

Both runs are public, recorded on 6 November 2026 in the demo workspace. The receipts are the evidence, not this page.

The same Journey passed again on 7 November 2026, at ev_mw6ecxq7_a194b7 (part 1) and ev_mw6eg5ai_e069b8 (part 2).

The evidence bundles for the published runs, ev_mw6ecxq7_a194b7 (part 1) and ev_mw6eg5ai_e069b8 (part 2), are yours to download and check: every step, check and tool with its verdict, and the CLI record each step was judged against where it read one. The transcripts above are from the earlier runs, so they are not part of these bundles. Save the bundles with the verifier, index.json and index.receipt.json, then run:

  • node verify-journey-bundle.mjs ev_mw6ecxq7_a194b7.json
  • node verify-journey-bundle.mjs ev_mw6eg5ai_e069b8.json

Each passes only if the bundle is the copy we published and witnessed, unchanged.

The proof engine rates this Journey OBSERVED: both parts passed again on 7 November 2026, but the case changed after the 6 November runs, so the count of passing days started again. It becomes VERIFIED only after both parts pass on a second day.

Quox-verified, not independently audited: the runs were checked by Quox’s own proof engine against the running system, and the evidence ids are published so you can recompute them. It is not a third-party audit.