---
name: priority-best-practices-for-teams
type: memory
description: Best practices for organizing auto-load memory priorities in team environments
version: 1.0.0
author: DollhouseMCP
category: documentation
tags:
  - auto-load
  - priorities
  - teams
  - best-practices
  - organization
triggers:
  - memory-priorities
  - priority-best-practices
  - team-priorities
  - organize-auto-load
  - priority-strategy
autoLoad: false
priority: 999
retention: permanent
privacyLevel: public
searchable: true
trustLevel: VALIDATED
---

# Auto-Load Memory Priority Best Practices for Teams

## Priority System Overview

Auto-load memories are loaded in **ascending priority order** (lower number = loads first). This determines the order in which context is provided to the AI, affecting response quality and token efficiency.

**Key Principle**: Foundation knowledge first, specialized context last.

## Standard Priority Ranges

### System Reserved (1-10)

**Reserved for DollhouseMCP system memories**. Do not use for custom content.

```yaml
# Priority 1: DollhouseMCP baseline knowledge
name: dollhousemcp-baseline-knowledge
priority: 1
```

**Why Reserved**:
- Ensures AI always knows DollhouseMCP capabilities
- Prevents conflicts with system updates
- Maintains consistent baseline across all installations

### Organizational Baseline (11-30)

**Company-wide or org-wide standards** that apply across all teams.

```yaml
# Priority 11: Company coding standards
name: company-coding-standards
priority: 11
description: Language-agnostic standards for all engineers

# Priority 15: Company security policies
name: security-policies
priority: 15
description: Security requirements and compliance guidelines

# Priority 20: Company architecture patterns
name: architecture-patterns
priority: 20
description: Standard patterns used across all products
```

**Examples**:
- Code review checklist
- Security/compliance requirements
- Accessibility standards
- Documentation standards
- Incident response procedures

**Best Practices**:
- Keep concise (500-2,000 tokens)
- Update quarterly
- Version control in company wiki
- Get buy-in from engineering leadership

### Team Context (31-60)

**Team-specific** standards, patterns, and domain knowledge.

```yaml
# Priority 35: Team backend patterns
name: backend-team-patterns
priority: 35
description: Backend-specific coding patterns and practices

# Priority 40: Domain knowledge (e.g., healthcare terms)
name: healthcare-domain-knowledge
priority: 40
description: Medical terminology and healthcare workflows

# Priority 50: Team API conventions
name: api-conventions
priority: 50
description: REST API design patterns used by backend team
```

**Examples**:
- Team-specific tech stack
- Domain terminology (legal, medical, financial)
- Third-party service integrations
- Shared libraries and utilities
- Team communication patterns

**Best Practices**:
- Load before project-specific context
- Include only stable, established patterns
- Review monthly for relevance
- Link to detailed docs rather than embedding

### Project Context (61-100)

**Project-specific** architecture, decisions, and current state.

```yaml
# Priority 65: Project architecture
name: myapp-architecture
priority: 65
description: MyApp system architecture and component overview

# Priority 75: Active sprint context
name: sprint-42-context
priority: 75
description: Current sprint goals and work in progress

# Priority 85: Recent decisions
name: architecture-decision-records
priority: 85
description: Key technical decisions made in last 3 months
```

**Examples**:
- Project overview and goals
- System architecture diagrams
- Database schemas
- Active sprint information
- Recent architectural decisions
- Key contacts and responsibilities

**Best Practices**:
- Update at start of each sprint
- Include "last updated" date
- Remove completed sprint context
- Keep architecture diagrams text-based (ASCII/Mermaid)

### Reference Material (101-500)

**Nice-to-have** reference material that's useful but not critical.

```yaml
# Priority 150: API reference
name: internal-api-reference
priority: 150
description: Quick reference for internal API endpoints

# Priority 200: Common error codes
name: error-code-reference
priority: 200
description: List of error codes and their meanings

# Priority 300: Deployment runbook
name: deployment-runbook
priority: 300
description: Step-by-step deployment procedures
```

**Examples**:
- API endpoint lists
- Error code references
- Configuration options
- CLI command references
- Troubleshooting guides

**Best Practices**:
- Keep under 3,000 tokens each
- Use bullet points for scannability
- Link to full docs for details
- Update when APIs change

### Low Priority (501+)

**Optional** context that's rarely needed but occasionally helpful.

```yaml
# Priority 600: Historical context
name: legacy-system-notes
priority: 600
description: Notes about legacy system for migration reference

# Priority 700: Future roadmap
name: future-roadmap
priority: 700
description: Long-term product roadmap and vision
```

**Examples**:
- Legacy system documentation
- Future roadmap (not current work)
- Historical context
- Deprecated patterns (for reference)

**Best Practices**:
- Consider if this should be auto-loaded at all
- May be better as on-demand memory
- Review quarterly for relevance

## Team Coordination Strategies

### Strategy 1: Federated Ownership

Each team maintains their own priority namespace:

```yaml
# Backend team: 31-40
backend-team-patterns: 35
backend-api-conventions: 38

# Frontend team: 41-50
frontend-component-library: 42
frontend-state-management: 45

# DevOps team: 51-60
deployment-procedures: 52
infrastructure-overview: 55
```

**Pros**:
- Clear ownership
- No conflicts
- Independent updates

**Cons**:
- Requires coordination
- Gaps in numbering
- Less flexibility

### Strategy 2: Content-Based Priorities

Organize by content type, not team:

```yaml
# Standards (31-40)
coding-standards: 32
security-guidelines: 35
testing-requirements: 38

# Architecture (41-50)
system-overview: 42
service-boundaries: 45
data-flow: 48

# Current Work (51-60)
active-sprint: 52
recent-decisions: 55
known-issues: 58
```

**Pros**:
- Logical grouping
- Easier to understand
- Natural load order

**Cons**:
- Multiple teams may edit same priority range
- Requires more communication

### Strategy 3: Hybrid Approach

Combine both strategies:

```yaml
# Company (11-20)
company-standards: 11

# Cross-Team (21-30)
api-gateway-docs: 25

# Backend Team (31-50)
backend-patterns: 35
backend-project-context: 45

# Frontend Team (51-70)
frontend-standards: 55
frontend-project-context: 65
```

**Pros**:
- Balanced approach
- Clear boundaries
- Flexible within teams

**Cons**:
- More complex to document

## Priority Decision Tree

Use this decision tree to assign priorities:

```
Is it DollhouseMCP system content?
├─ YES → Priority 1-10 (system reserved)
└─ NO ↓

Is it company-wide (applies to ALL engineers)?
├─ YES → Priority 11-30 (organizational baseline)
└─ NO ↓

Is it team-specific but not project-specific?
├─ YES → Priority 31-60 (team context)
└─ NO ↓

Is it project-specific current work?
├─ YES → Priority 61-100 (project context)
└─ NO ↓

Is it reference material (nice to have)?
├─ YES → Priority 101-500 (reference material)
└─ NO → Priority 501+ (low priority / consider not auto-loading)
```

## Common Pitfalls

### Pitfall 1: Everything is High Priority

**Problem**:
```yaml
project-overview: 10        # Too high!
api-docs: 12                # Too high!
sprint-context: 15          # Too high!
error-codes: 18             # Too high!
```

**Result**: Important baseline knowledge gets crowded out.

**Solution**: Use the full priority range. Not everything can be urgent.

### Pitfall 2: No Priority Strategy

**Problem**: Teams assign priorities randomly without coordination.

**Result**: Critical context loads after optional context, wasting tokens.

**Solution**: Document team priority strategy in shared wiki.

### Pitfall 3: Stale Priorities

**Problem**: Priorities set once and never reviewed.

**Result**: Old sprint context loads before current sprint, outdated docs load before current docs.

**Solution**: Review priorities quarterly as part of retrospectives.

### Pitfall 4: Priority Conflicts

**Problem**: Two teams both want priority 50 for their memories.

**Result**: Unpredictable load order, finger-pointing.

**Solution**: Use federated ownership strategy or establish priority ranges per team.

### Pitfall 5: Too Many Auto-Load Memories

**Problem**: 20+ memories, most rarely needed.

**Result**: Token budget exceeded, critical context skipped.

**Solution**: Review annually. Consider moving some to on-demand memories.

## Real-World Examples

### Example 1: Small Startup (5-10 engineers)

```yaml
# Simple, flat structure
dollhousemcp-baseline-knowledge: 1     # System
company-coding-standards: 20            # Company
project-architecture: 50                # Project
current-sprint: 60                      # Current work
api-reference: 100                      # Reference
```

**Token Budget**: 5,000 (default)
**Total Memories**: 5

### Example 2: Medium Team (30-50 engineers, 3 teams)

```yaml
# System
dollhousemcp-baseline-knowledge: 1

# Company-wide
company-standards: 15
security-policies: 18

# Backend Team (31-50)
backend-patterns: 35
backend-project: 45

# Frontend Team (51-70)
frontend-standards: 55
frontend-project: 65

# Shared
api-contracts: 80
active-sprint: 85
```

**Token Budget**: 8,000
**Total Memories**: 9

### Example 3: Large Enterprise (200+ engineers, 10+ teams)

```yaml
# System
dollhousemcp-baseline-knowledge: 1

# Organizational (11-30)
enterprise-coding-standards: 11
security-compliance: 15
architecture-principles: 20

# Division-Level (31-50)
product-division-standards: 31
platform-team-patterns: 35

# Team-Level (51-100)
team-backend-context: 55
team-frontend-context: 65
team-devops-runbooks: 75

# Project-Level (101-150)
current-project-architecture: 105
active-sprint-goals: 115

# Reference (151-300)
api-catalog: 160
error-code-reference: 180
deployment-procedures: 200
```

**Token Budget**: 12,000
**Total Memories**: 13

## Priority Governance

### For Small Teams (< 20 engineers)

- **Decision Making**: Consensus in team meetings
- **Documentation**: Shared Google Doc or Notion page
- **Review Cadence**: Quarterly
- **Conflicts**: Resolved by tech lead

### For Medium Teams (20-100 engineers)

- **Decision Making**: Team leads + architecture group
- **Documentation**: Internal wiki with priority registry
- **Review Cadence**: Bi-annually with representatives from each team
- **Conflicts**: Escalate to engineering manager

### For Large Organizations (100+ engineers)

- **Decision Making**: Architecture committee
- **Documentation**: Formal RFC process for priority changes
- **Review Cadence**: Annually + ad-hoc for new teams
- **Conflicts**: Formal escalation process with defined SLAs

## Measuring Priority Effectiveness

### Metrics to Track

1. **Token Utilization**:
   ```
   Average tokens loaded: 3,200 / 5,000 (64%)
   Target: 60-80% utilization
   ```

2. **Load Success Rate**:
   ```
   Memories loaded: 8 / 10 (80%)
   Memories skipped: 2 / 10 (20% due to budget)
   Target: >90% loaded
   ```

3. **Relevance Score** (quarterly survey):
   ```
   "How often do you reference auto-loaded context?"
   - Daily: 60%
   - Weekly: 30%
   - Rarely: 10%
   Target: >80% daily/weekly
   ```

4. **Update Frequency**:
   ```
   Memories updated in last 90 days: 7 / 10 (70%)
   Target: >60% updated quarterly
   ```

### Dashboard Query

```bash
# Check current auto-load status
dollhouse list memories --filter autoLoad=true --sort priority

# See token usage
dollhouse config show autoLoad.maxTokenBudget

# Validate all auto-load memories
for memory in $(dollhouse list memories --filter autoLoad=true --json | jq -r '.[].name'); do
  dollhouse validate memory "$memory"
done
```

## Quick Reference

| Priority Range | Purpose | Examples | Token Guideline |
|----------------|---------|----------|-----------------|
| 1-10 | System (reserved) | DollhouseMCP baseline | N/A |
| 11-30 | Organizational | Company standards | 500-2,000 |
| 31-60 | Team | Team patterns, domain knowledge | 1,000-3,000 |
| 61-100 | Project | Architecture, current sprint | 1,500-4,000 |
| 101-500 | Reference | API docs, error codes | 500-3,000 |
| 501+ | Low priority | Legacy docs, future roadmap | 500-2,000 |

## Related Documentation

- [How to Create Custom Auto-Load Memories](./how-to-create-custom-auto-load-memories.yaml)
- [Token Estimation Guidelines](./token-estimation-guidelines.yaml)

---

**Last Updated**: v1.9.25 (October 2025)