Five metadata fields for every archived output: keyword title + date + type + project + 2-5 tags — the minimum standard before entering the archive

Why This Is a Rule

An archive without metadata is a graveyard — files exist but can't be found, understood, or reused. Retrieving a specific output from an un-tagged archive requires opening files one by one until you find the right one. With five metadata fields, you can search by keyword (title), filter by time (date), browse by category (type), scope by project (context), and cross-reference by concept (tags). Each field enables a different retrieval path, and together they make any archived output findable through multiple routes.

The five fields are chosen for maximum retrieval coverage with minimum filing overhead: Descriptive title with keywords (Title reference items with the words your future self will search for, not the words that categorize what it is — enables text search), Completion date (enables chronological filtering: "What did I produce last Q3?"), Output type (from a controlled vocabulary: report, article, presentation, email — enables category browsing), Project/context (which project or initiative this output served — enables project-level retrieval), 2-5 searchable tags (conceptual descriptors that cross-cut types and projects — enables thematic retrieval: "everything about pricing strategy").

The "minimum standard before entering the archive" framing makes metadata a gate (Check 3-5 yes/no gate criteria at each pipeline stage transition — any "no" keeps the output in its current stage until addressed): the file doesn't enter the archive until all five fields are populated. This prevents the common pattern of filing now, tagging later — "later" being never.

When This Fires

• When archiving any completed output (Two-minute archiving ritual after every delivery: file to archive with metadata immediately — archiving is closure, not a deferred task archiving workflow)
• When setting up an archive system for the first time
• When existing archives are unsearchable because items lack consistent metadata
• Complements Two-minute archiving ritual after every delivery: file to archive with metadata immediately — archiving is closure, not a deferred task (two-minute archiving workflow) with the specific metadata standard

Common Failure Mode

Under-tagged archives: files stored with a filename and nothing else. "Report_final_v2.docx" tells you it's a report — but which report? For whom? About what? When? Future retrieval requires opening the file to find out, which defeats the purpose of an organized archive.

The Protocol

(1) Before any file enters the archive, populate five fields: Title: descriptive, containing keywords your future self would search for (Title reference items with the words your future self will search for, not the words that categorize what it is). Date: completion date in YYYY-MM format (Name archived files as [YYYY-MM] [Type] — [Descriptive Title] — enables chronological sort, category filter, and keyword search in the filename alone). Type: from your controlled vocabulary (article, report, presentation, proposal, etc.). Project: the project, client, or initiative this output served. Tags: 2-5 conceptual keywords that describe the content thematically. (2) Implement the fields in whatever format your archive supports: filename convention, file properties, database fields, or frontmatter. (3) The five-field standard is the minimum. Add more fields if your practice justifies it, but never accept fewer. (4) Periodically audit: search your archive for recently archived items. Can you find them in under 30 seconds using any of the five fields? If not, the metadata needs improvement.