diff --git a/scripts/resolvers/confidence.ts b/scripts/resolvers/confidence.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e5539f73
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/resolvers/confidence.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+/**
+ * Confidence calibration resolver
+ *
+ * Adds confidence scoring rubric to review-producing skills.
+ * Every finding includes a 1-10 score that gates display:
+ *   7+: show normally
+ *   5-6: show with caveat
+ *   <5: suppress from main report
+ */
+import type { TemplateContext } from './types';
+
+export function generateConfidenceCalibration(_ctx: TemplateContext): string {
+  return `## Confidence Calibration
+
+Every finding MUST include a confidence score (1-10):
+
+| Score | Meaning | Display rule |
+|-------|---------|-------------|
+| 9-10 | Verified by reading specific code. Concrete bug or exploit demonstrated. | Show normally |
+| 7-8 | High confidence pattern match. Very likely correct. | Show normally |
+| 5-6 | Moderate. Could be a false positive. | Show with caveat: "Medium confidence, verify this is actually an issue" |
+| 3-4 | Low confidence. Pattern is suspicious but may be fine. | Suppress from main report. Include in appendix only. |
+| 1-2 | Speculation. | Only report if severity would be P0. |
+
+**Finding format:**
+
+\\\`[SEVERITY] (confidence: N/10) file:line — description\\\`
+
+Example:
+\\\`[P1] (confidence: 9/10) app/models/user.rb:42 — SQL injection via string interpolation in where clause\\\`
+\\\`[P2] (confidence: 5/10) app/controllers/api/v1/users_controller.rb:18 — Possible N+1 query, verify with production logs\\\`
+
+**Calibration learning:** If you report a finding with confidence < 7 and the user
+confirms it IS a real issue, that is a calibration event. Your initial confidence was
+too low. Log the corrected pattern as a learning so future reviews catch it with
+higher confidence.`;
+}
diff --git a/scripts/resolvers/index.ts b/scripts/resolvers/index.ts
index 3d2b9dbb..6b5a9e4e 100644
--- a/scripts/resolvers/index.ts
+++ b/scripts/resolvers/index.ts
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ import { generateDesignMethodology, generateDesignHardRules, generateDesignOutsi
 import { generateTestBootstrap, generateTestCoverageAuditPlan, generateTestCoverageAuditShip, generateTestCoverageAuditReview } from './testing';
 import { generateReviewDashboard, generatePlanFileReviewReport, generateSpecReviewLoop, generateBenefitsFrom, generateCodexSecondOpinion, generateAdversarialStep, generateCodexPlanReview, generatePlanCompletionAuditShip, generatePlanCompletionAuditReview, generatePlanVerificationExec } from './review';
 import { generateSlugEval, generateSlugSetup, generateBaseBranchDetect, generateDeployBootstrap, generateQAMethodology, generateCoAuthorTrailer } from './utility';
+import { generateLearningsSearch, generateLearningsLog } from './learnings';
+import { generateConfidenceCalibration } from './confidence';
 
 export const RESOLVERS: Record<string, (ctx: TemplateContext) => string> = {
   SLUG_EVAL: generateSlugEval,
@@ -48,4 +50,7 @@ export const RESOLVERS: Record<string, (ctx: TemplateContext) => string> = {
   PLAN_COMPLETION_AUDIT_REVIEW: generatePlanCompletionAuditReview,
   PLAN_VERIFICATION_EXEC: generatePlanVerificationExec,
   CO_AUTHOR_TRAILER: generateCoAuthorTrailer,
+  LEARNINGS_SEARCH: generateLearningsSearch,
+  LEARNINGS_LOG: generateLearningsLog,
+  CONFIDENCE_CALIBRATION: generateConfidenceCalibration,
 };
diff --git a/scripts/resolvers/learnings.ts b/scripts/resolvers/learnings.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..3bcba7b1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/resolvers/learnings.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
+/**
+ * Learnings resolver — cross-skill institutional memory
+ *
+ * Learnings are stored per-project at ~/.gstack/projects/{slug}/learnings.jsonl.
+ * Each entry is a JSONL line with: ts, skill, type, key, insight, confidence,
+ * source, branch, commit, files[].
+ *
+ * Storage is append-only. Duplicates (same key+type) are resolved at read time
+ * by gstack-learnings-search ("latest winner" per key+type).
+ *
+ * Cross-project discovery is opt-in. The resolver asks the user once via
+ * AskUserQuestion and persists the preference via gstack-config.
+ */
+import type { TemplateContext } from './types';
+
+export function generateLearningsSearch(ctx: TemplateContext): string {
+  if (ctx.host === 'codex') {
+    // Codex: simpler version, no cross-project, uses $GSTACK_BIN
+    return `## Prior Learnings
+
+Search for relevant learnings from previous sessions on this project:
+
+\`\`\`bash
+$GSTACK_BIN/gstack-learnings-search --limit 10 2>/dev/null || true
+\`\`\`
+
+If learnings are found, incorporate them into your analysis. When a review finding
+matches a past learning, note it: "Prior learning applied: [key] (confidence N, from [date])"`;
+  }
+
+  return `## Prior Learnings
+
+Search for relevant learnings from previous sessions:
+
+\`\`\`bash
+_CROSS_PROJ=$(${ctx.paths.binDir}/gstack-config get cross_project_learnings 2>/dev/null || echo "unset")
+echo "CROSS_PROJECT: $_CROSS_PROJ"
+if [ "$_CROSS_PROJ" = "true" ]; then
+  ${ctx.paths.binDir}/gstack-learnings-search --limit 10 --cross-project 2>/dev/null || true
+else
+  ${ctx.paths.binDir}/gstack-learnings-search --limit 10 2>/dev/null || true
+fi
+\`\`\`
+
+If \`CROSS_PROJECT\` is \`unset\` (first time): Use AskUserQuestion:
+
+> gstack can search learnings from your other projects on this machine to find
+> patterns that might apply here. This stays local (no data leaves your machine).
+> Recommended for solo developers. Skip if you work on multiple client codebases
+> where cross-contamination would be a concern.
+
+Options:
+- A) Enable cross-project learnings (recommended)
+- B) Keep learnings project-scoped only
+
+If A: run \`${ctx.paths.binDir}/gstack-config set cross_project_learnings true\`
+If B: run \`${ctx.paths.binDir}/gstack-config set cross_project_learnings false\`
+
+Then re-run the search with the appropriate flag.
+
+If learnings are found, incorporate them into your analysis. When a review finding
+matches a past learning, display:
+
+**"Prior learning applied: [key] (confidence N/10, from [date])"**
+
+This makes the compounding visible. The user should see that gstack is getting
+smarter on their codebase over time.`;
+}
+
+export function generateLearningsLog(ctx: TemplateContext): string {
+  const binDir = ctx.host === 'codex' ? '$GSTACK_BIN' : ctx.paths.binDir;
+
+  return `## Capture Learnings
+
+If you discovered a non-obvious pattern, pitfall, or architectural insight during
+this session, log it for future sessions:
+
+\`\`\`bash
+${binDir}/gstack-learnings-log '{"skill":"${ctx.skillName}","type":"TYPE","key":"SHORT_KEY","insight":"DESCRIPTION","confidence":N,"source":"SOURCE","files":["path/to/relevant/file"]}'
+\`\`\`
+
+**Types:** \`pattern\` (reusable approach), \`pitfall\` (what NOT to do), \`preference\`
+(user stated), \`architecture\` (structural decision), \`tool\` (library/framework insight).
+
+**Sources:** \`observed\` (you found this in the code), \`user-stated\` (user told you),
+\`inferred\` (AI deduction), \`cross-model\` (both Claude and Codex agree).
+
+**Confidence:** 1-10. Be honest. An observed pattern you verified in the code is 8-9.
+An inference you're not sure about is 4-5. A user preference they explicitly stated is 10.
+
+**files:** Include the specific file paths this learning references. This enables
+staleness detection: if those files are later deleted, the learning can be flagged.
+
+**Only log genuine discoveries.** Don't log obvious things. Don't log things the user
+already knows. A good test: would this insight save time in a future session? If yes, log it.`;
+}