Origin reconciliation

Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-reconciliation-report.md

Reconciliation

Identity and containment

No duplicate supersession is established in the pinned reports. The connections below rule out identity where records overlap: valid containers remain alongside their parts. This reconciliation uses the supplied members and the boundary's Source register, not additional source inspection. No analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied; the previous reconciliation is not evidence that its connections still hold.

MEM-OBJ-memories identifies stored content and control state spanning RT-RTE-capture-store and RT-RTE-recall-search, not either operation. MEM-OBJ-episode-rows and MEM-OBJ-fact-children are distinct optional retrieval representations, not the outer recall route or RT-CMP-text-embedding. MEM-OBJ-access-state spans logging and maintenance, rather than duplicating recall or MEM-RTE-withdrawal-cleanup.

MEM-RTE-enrichment-slices, MEM-RTE-burst-recaps and MEM-RTE-summary-rollup declare transformation parts of RT-RTE-ambient-work. They distinguish stage-specific selection, admission and retained results from scheduler admission, budgets and cursors. MEM-OBJ-summary-nodes identifies rollup output and its optional retrieval consumer, not page prose or the rollup operation. MEM-RTE-import-inputs adds parsing/synchronization paths with their own admission, not another name for server capture. MEM-OBJ-space-brief and MEM-RTE-brief-handoff add a typed current-work snapshot and update/read route, distinct from ranked recall.

MEM-OBJ-revision-cards is the staged-result part of RT-RTE-page-refresh. EPI-OBJ-page-citation, EPI-RTE-citation-check and EPI-RTE-citation-admission separately identify citation output, checking and disposition parts of refresh. EPI-RTE-quality-check separates capture checking from its subsequent storage consequence. These parts do not invalidate their containers, so no split supersession follows.

EPI-RTE-citation-backfill annotates existing prose under a preservation guard, unlike refresh generation. EPI-OBJ-derived-claim and EPI-OBJ-page-truth are later claim and authority representations, not citation metadata, ownership flags or revision cards. EPI-RTE-claim-extraction, EPI-RTE-claim-judgment, EPI-RTE-support-publish and EPI-RTE-support-withdrawal describe the subsequent support pipeline rather than duplicating synthesis admission. EPI-RTE-truth-exposure spans page-bearing consumers, not just recall. EPI-RTE-truth-cutover changes the exposure regime; EPI-RTE-page-attestation records a separate version-bound review axis.

MEM-RTE-review-decisions covers memory revisions, page cards and refinements. EPI-RTE-refinement-decision elaborates the refinement dispatch family alone. Their overlap does not make these scopes identical or invalidate the broader container. EPI-OBJ-lint-report, EPI-OBJ-repair-manifest, EPI-RTE-lint-assessment, EPI-RTE-repair-admission and EPI-RTE-repair-verification add diagnostic evidence, mutation authorization and postcondition checking previously left untraced, not duplicate review declarations.

WF-RTE-rebuild-request identifies the foreground request/provider/receipt envelope around refresh, not its contained synthesis/write operation or an ambient slice. WF-BAP-rebuild-skill, RT-BAP-recall-skill and RT-BAP-task-prompts guide different decisions through different channels: host confirmation/reporting, host relevance judgment and provider task guidance. Sharing a host consumer does not establish identity.

MEM-RTE-eval-compression substitutes a compressed bundle into an answer request; EPI-RTE-retrieval-eval scores ranked IDs against fixture references. They are distinct evaluator functions, neither identical to production recall. EPI-CLM-notes-change, EPI-CLM-reviewed-repair, EPI-CLM-entailment-judge and RT-CLM-ambient-ownership concern different claims, not alternative labels for one assertion.

Cross-report connections and integration dispositions

Refresh fencing is branch-specific. The current RT-RTE-page-refresh distinguishes forced refresh without candidate sources, which carries source revision and incarnation into its terminal body write, from ordinary refresh and the candidate-source alternative, which carry the source counter without the captured incarnation. Its discard markers use both fences. The workflow's concurrency finding concerns the selected forced path, not all refreshes: WF-RTE-rebuild-request delegates to force_redistill_single with UserForced. Its page-recreation protection therefore does not depend on an incarnation guarantee for ordinary refresh. The memory annotation on refresh concerns snippets, lineage and review cards, not a universal concurrency guarantee. No dependent finding in these supplied members requires the broader guarantee that runtime now expressly withholds. The connection prevents generalizing the workflow's forced-path protection to ordinary or candidate-source writes.

Scheduling and provider scope. The runtime's capture-enrichment ownership and shared-facade one-call limit remain scoped to RT-RTE-ambient-work. The separate truth-maintenance task in EPI-RTE-claim-judgment is not a contradiction of that ownership claim. Foreground provider ordering in the workflow is another distinct selection route; it does not inherit the background pin or M5 judge eligibility. No connection supports a universal one-call bound on all automatic or explicit inference.

Checking and subsequent reliance. Runtime refresh and the epistemic citation records converge on lexical admission rather than semantic entailment. The M5 support records add a separate evidence-consuming acceptance/integration architecture. Memory's uninspected truth-grant and attestation internals are compatible with that additional coverage, not a negative finding. Support publication, exposure and human review retain different consequences: the exposure record preserves generation-zero pass-through, unevaluated visibility and human/named-page exceptions. Neither retention nor visibility becomes universal factual acceptance through these connections.

Review outcomes converge without collapsing actions. The memory and epistemic refinement records independently find that contradiction acceptance resolves a queue item without mutating either fact. Memory additionally distinguishes ordinary revision dismissal, which keeps an independent capture, from page-card dismissal, which deletes the manufactured proposal. Page attestation is not installation of staged prose. Repair apply authorizes a bounded mutation; verification checks its postconditions. These distinctions dispose of memory's rejection-semantics issue without imputing a generic discard claim to runtime or a universal truth criterion to any review API. Instructions requesting user decisions remain separate from authenticated human consent.

Internal results and delivered receipts differ. Runtime refresh can return gate, card and acknowledgement details; the workflow envelope returns a reduced receipt based on wrote. Those are different payload boundaries, not inconsistent descriptions of one result. The workflow preserves the ambiguity of updated: false and does not require delivery of a review-card ID or page body to the host. Later page delivery is another invocation. Memory's recall annotation further distinguishes retained source text, summary and structured fields from the standard MCP projection, which omits those fields. Retaining reasons or generated summaries does not establish their delivery to that consumer.

Memory integration issues retain their local limits. The Brief path qualifies a possible search-only account, but runtime does not assert that all reuse is search. The compression record establishes an evaluator consumer while leaving production-use comments unresolved; RT-OBJ-prompt-registry and RT-RTE-prompt-override do not establish production compression activation or feedback-driven override authorship. Access logging, decay fields and eviction are known, but memory's bounded caller search does not establish production recall-to-count flushing. This limits adaptive-retention attribution without contradicting runtime's narrower logging finding.

Coverage and evidence remain bounded. Memory's unresolved import, graph, vocabulary, repair, projection and invalidation details remain limitations of its inspection. Epistemic repair and attestation records add selected coverage without certifying every writer, provenance path or recovery mechanism. The workflow selects one conditional rebuild rather than enumerating delivery paths. Implementation evidence and requested host/model behavior remain distinct from observed operation and causal benefit. No stronger status is selected from another report to fill these gaps.

No unresolved cross-report conflict is identified in the pinned findings. Their explicitly scoped unknowns prevent universal admission, provenance, withdrawal, activation and benefit conclusions; they do not themselves establish disagreement or absent mechanisms.