errlore is an open-source Python library that gives an AI agent a memory of its own failures. Every error you resolve becomes a lesson that is injected into the next similar prompt, so the agent stops repeating fixed mistakes. It also tracks per-model KNOWN ISSUES and reinforces lessons that help. Embedded, file-based (JSONL), offline, no server, MIT.

How is errlore different from mem0, Zep, or vector memory?

Those store facts about the user or session context. errlore stores the agent's own resolved failures and closes the loop on whether recalling a lesson actually helped (reinforce/decay). It is an embedded, local, file-based library rather than a hosted service.

Does errlore actually reduce errors?

In a paired A/B benchmark with deterministic validators and committed raw outputs, errlore cuts the repeat-error rate by 67-70% (about 66% to about 20%), reproduced across 5 independent runs on claude-haiku-4-5 (McNemar p <= 1.8e-09 every run) and on a second model family, gemma-4-31b (70% reduction, p = 2.6e-13). It fixes what the model doesn't know (repeated conventions, 83-100% reduction), not what it can't do — capability-gap errors were honestly not improved on either model.

Does errlore work offline?

Yes. The core makes zero network calls, needs no API keys, and stores everything in local JSONL files. The optional semantic-retrieval extra downloads a ~120 MB local model once, then also runs offline.

How do I use errlore with Claude Code?

Run 'pip install errlore' then 'errlore init claude-code'. That installs hooks so failed Bash commands become lessons and every new session is briefed on past pitfalls.

Your agent keeps making the same mistakes.
errlore makes that stop.

Stop the second mistake, not just the first.

Your coding agent reintroduces the same bug and forgets the same convention, session after session. errlore captures each fix as a lesson and injects it into the next similar prompt — so the second mistake doesn't happen. Then it tracks whether the lesson actually helped, and reinforces the ones that do.

View on GitHub →

MIT · Python 3.10+ · 289 tests · CI passing · offline · no telemetry · JSONL, file-locked

We spent three months building a 324,000-line multi-LLM "brain" — ensembles, arbiters, cognitive phases. Then we benchmarked it honestly: the clever parts didn't work. One part did — the loop that turned failures into lessons and injected them back. errlore is that one part, extracted, fixed, and finished. — why this library exists

error → your fix → lesson → injected into next similar prompt → outcome feedback → reinforce / decay

Three loops, all closed

01Lessons

An error you resolve becomes a lesson. The next similar task gets it injected into the prompt. report_outcome() reinforces lessons that helped and decays ones that never do — errlore knows whether its own memory works.

02Known issues

Per-model weakness tracking. When gpt-x has failed date extraction four times, the fifth prompt says so: KNOWN ISSUES: TimeoutError (x4). Models get warned about their own history.

03Trust experimental

Bayesian per-model, per-domain trust weights built from observed outcomes, for routing via mem.best_model("code"). Needs a spread of real outcomes to separate models — shipped, but not yet proven in the wild.

Fifteen seconds of the whole idea

errlore demo: a failure becomes a lesson; the next similar task gets it injected and succeeds

Sixty seconds to a learning agent

from errlore import AgentMemory

mem = AgentMemory("./agent_memory")

# 1. agent failed — record it
err = mem.log_error("gpt-5.6", "extraction", error="hallucinated dates")

# 2. you fixed it — extract the lesson
mem.resolve(err, "added validation",
            lesson="For date extraction, demand ISO-8601 and verify against source")

# 3. next similar task — memory speaks up
task = "extract dates from contract"
inj = mem.inject_for(task, model="gpt-5.6", task_type="extraction")
prompt = task + "\n\n" + inj.text
# [LESSONS FROM PAST FAILURES]
# - UnclassifiedError: hallucinated dates -> For date extraction,
#   demand ISO-8601 and verify against source
#
# KNOWN ISSUES:
# - Past error on similar task: hallucinated dates

# 4. close the loop — did it help?
mem.report_outcome(inj, success=True)

Measured, not promised

Paired A/B: the same model runs the task grid with and without errlore injection. Deterministic validators, no LLM judges; raw outputs committed to the repo. Reproduced across 5 independent runs (66.7–69.8% repeat-error reduction, exact McNemar p ≤ 1.8e-09 every run) and on a second model family — gemma-4-31b lands at 70.0% reduction (p = 2.6e-13).

error class	plain	with errlore
knowledge-gap, claude-haiku-4-5	46/48	0/48
knowledge-gap, gemma-4-31b	70/72	12/72
capability-gap (model skill limits), both models	~17/48	~19/48

The knowledge-gap rows use conventions the model can't guess, so plain fails almost by construction — the result shows errlore captures the fix once and re-supplies it on the next task (the loop works), not that memory teaches skills. Two fresh realistic-convention families (an internal status enum, a non-standard git branch format) went 100% → 0% on both models. The honest row stays honest: errlore did not help on things the model can't do (letter counting, string reversal) — and even slightly hurt, on both model families. Reproduce it: python benchmarks/bench_error_reduction.py --backend anthropic.

Finds lessons by meaning, not keywords

Optional local embeddings (pip install errlore[embeddings], ~120 MB ONNX model, RU/EN and 50+ languages, no API keys). On a deliberately adversarial gold set — every query paraphrased so it shares zero words with its lesson:

metric	keyword overlap	errlore embeddings
recall@1	0.000	0.375
recall@5	0.000	0.675
MRR	0.000	0.488

The gold set is deliberately adversarial — every query is paraphrased to share zero words with its lesson. On natural queries with shared vocabulary, plain word-overlap does fine; embeddings earn their keep on paraphrased ones. Reproduce it yourself: python benchmarks/bench_retrieval.py — the gold set ships in the repo.

Drops into what you already run

Claude Code

Hooks wire errlore into your coding agent: failed commands become lessons, and each session starts with a briefing of past pitfalls. See examples/claude-code/.

Open WebUI

Two functions — a Filter that injects lessons into every chat and a feedback Action that closes the loop from a button under each message. Paste, enable, done.

Python SDKs

Working examples for the OpenAI SDK, Anthropic SDK, and LangChain in examples/ — each runnable offline, each showing the full learn-inject-reinforce cycle.

Why not just logs or vector memory?

	plain logs	vector memory	errlore
stores failures	yes	sometimes	yes
turns them into lessons	no	no	yes
injects into future prompts	no	retrieval only	yes, with feedback loop
knows if a lesson helped	no	no	reinforce / decay
tracks per-model weaknesses	no	no	KNOWN ISSUES warnings
works offline, no server	yes	depends	yes

Not a vector DB, not chat-history RAG, not observability. One job: failures become lessons that reach the next prompt.

Where it earns its keep

›Coding agents

that keep re-introducing the same class of bug across sessions.

›Extraction pipelines

that hallucinate dates, numbers and schema fields the same way every week.

›Multi-model routing experimental

pick the model per task from observed outcomes — mem.best_model("code"). The trust layer is shipped but still earning its evidence.

Built for the privacy-first crowd

Files, not cloudsplain JSONL on your disk
fsync'd, file-locked, atomic

Zero calls homeno telemetry, no API keys
embeddings download once, then local

Survives anythingprocess restarts, concurrent
writers, corrupted lines

Honest by designno fake reinforcement —
outcomes only from real feedback

Async API, log compaction and multi-agent memory are next — watch releases on GitHub to follow.