Echel reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Shared boundary and independent convergence

The reports share the frozen repository and evidence layers in boundary. Implementation and declared procedure do not establish observed execution, runtime compliance or causal benefit. This reconciliation uses the supplied members only; no source reads were needed.

RT-RTE-idea-init creates canonical state, whereas RT-RTE-file-workflow and RT-RTE-compile-run operate on legacy state. The memory integration issues, epistemic bounded conclusion and workflow account preserve this composition break. A shared CLI is not evidence of a working fresh-init-to-agent journey. These are distinct routes, not candidates for supersession.

Runtime, memory, epistemic and workflow agree that explicit work relationships select legacy knowledge, that text rendering omits source references, and that selection has no accepted-only predicate. Their findings connect to RT-OBJ-compiled-context and RT-RTE-compile-run. The epistemic rendering deduction preserves assertion text while identifying degraded delivered lineage; memory distinguishes complete JSON output from the narrower text sent to Hermes. Neither finding asserts that all context surfaces lose the same fields.

RT-BAP-context-prompt and MEM-BAP-canonical-gates are not identical: the former supplies natural-language guidance to Hermes; the latter describes deterministic canonical eligibility rules. Their consumers, channels and force differ. Canonical review and staleness therefore do not automatically revoke previously delivered legacy prompts.

Duplicate supersessions

These amendments identify duplicate referents, not replacement findings. Both declarations retain their analyst-owned fields and evidence; no status is strengthened by the choice of referent.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-run is superseded by MEM-OBJ-run. Both identify legacy Run JSON under .echel/runs, produced by the CLI with command, context digest, status and bounded stdout tail. Both cite the CLI producer and distinguish this retained output from compiler input. The memory record additionally separates preview retention from execution traces. Epistemic inventory references concern the same retained object, not another memory mechanism.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-evidence is superseded by MEM-OBJ-evidence. Both identify legacy verification Evidence JSON containing command, subject, exit status, generated outcome and checksum of output. Their common producer is RT-RTE-verify-work, not the kernel evaluator. Canonical Evidence is a different schema family; the checksum does not retain readable diagnostic bytes. The epistemic declaration's comparison against supplied runtime objects does not rule out this cross-specialist identity.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-clarification-select is superseded by MEM-RTE-clarification-read. Both trace canonical scans, active claim kinds and ordered nonexcluded gaps to the selected CLI question. They cite the same active-status predicate and count proposed claims. Memory emphasizes later consumption of retained claims; epistemic emphasizes the nonpersisted result. Their read-back descriptions concern different ends of the same route, not conflicting persistence findings.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-canonical-query is superseded by MEM-RTE-canonical-query. Both identify index-backed search, reverse-link and impact queries with canonical reload, provenance returns and freshness checks. Their cited query/index passages establish the same selector/consumer chain. The epistemic ledger separates transformation, freshness and operational selection functions without establishing additional independent routes or semantic endorsement.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-finding-review is superseded by MEM-RTE-finding-maintenance. Both cover canonical open-finding creation with affects relationships, capability-labelled disposition and active severity's gate impact. Both cite the finding service's active-state rule. Creation, impact computation and disposition remain distinct functions of this route, not automatic semantic diagnosis or repair.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-stale-propagation is superseded by MEM-RTE-staleness-propagation. Both trace an active finding and accepted protected root through informs/supports traversal to transaction installation of stale revisions. Both cite the lifecycle status assignment. The epistemic preview/snapshot limits coexist with memory's structural propagation finding; neither asserts universal propagation, inferred falsity, replacement content or recall of earlier prompts.

Containers, parts and nonidentical overlaps

MEM-OBJ-canonical-records remains a valid family container. EPI-OBJ-claim, EPI-OBJ-decision, EPI-OBJ-learning, EPI-OBJ-project, EPI-OBJ-finding and EPI-OBJ-relationship distinguish operative families whose differing consumers the memory container already describes. None is identical to the whole container; no split supersession is warranted. Unestablished specialized canonical task, release, artifact and learning consumers remain limits, not conflicting positive findings elsewhere.

MEM-RTE-policy-revision groups canonical assessment, maturity advance and profile changes. EPI-RTE-maturity-check, EPI-RTE-maturity-advance and EPI-RTE-profile-selection distinguish these operations. None alone identifies the entire grouped route; the grouping does not make its findings wrong, so there is no supersession. Memory describes revision-guarded writes and structural eligibility; epistemic adds that advance apply does not reassess all supporting claim/finding revisions. Memory asserts no atomic evidential snapshot that would conflict with that limit. Both also retain the duplicate-kind limitation of maturity assessment.

MEM-RTE-storage-maintenance groups transport, migration, integrity and transaction recovery. EPI-RTE-portable-import, EPI-RTE-schema-migration and EPI-RTE-integrity-check distinguish operations inside that account rather than identify its whole scope. No supersession follows. Memory explicitly permits migration content edits; epistemic's statement-reversal counterexample elaborates that fact rather than contradicting a lossless-migration assertion. Structural import validation and metadata preservation establish neither origin authentication nor renewed semantic review in either account.

MEM-OBJ-recovery-state and MEM-OBJ-disposable-index identify operational objects, not duplicate maintenance/query routes or compiler text. Recovery consumes stored intent/backups; query uses a replaceable projection and reloads canonical records. Those distinctions prevent treating cleanup, rollback, rejection and staleness as a single forgetting mechanism.

EPI-RTE-relationship-write covers general canonical link authoring, broader than affects-edge production in the finding route. It is not identical to finding creation or legacy work relationships. Conditional linkage of previously accepted content to evidence does not establish that acceptance occurred. RT-RTE-knowledge-decide separately decides proposed protected records; finding disposition and stale propagation have different targets and transitions. Shared capability/rationale conventions do not make those routes identical.

Object-chain dispositions after the changed epistemic account

The current epistemic authority-route ledger no longer assigns compiled prompt text to legacy acquisition, retention and stage selection. EPI-OBJ-knowledge-record, EPI-OBJ-work-item and EPI-OBJ-legacy-project now name retained outputs/state of RT-RTE-file-workflow. Their Part of fields relate objects to the producing/consuming route, not subroutes. They differ from RT-OBJ-compiled-context, the subsequent in-process rendering. They also differ from the canonical families in MEM-OBJ-canonical-records, including the canonical project despite the shared relative filename. No identity supersession applies. The earlier object-assignment conflict is not retained against these changed records.

EPI-OBJ-kernel-report now identifies the result of EPI-RTE-kernel-gate, and the ledger assigns it to the kernel measurement and exit-code functions. Its in-process report/printed JSON and report.passed consumer differ from legacy verification Evidence files. It is neither MEM-OBJ-evidence nor EPI-OBJ-evidence; no supersession between kernel and verification outputs is warranted. The earlier missing-kernel-object conflict is not present in the current account.

EPI-OBJ-contribution names the proposed patch/PR of RT-RTE-source-admission. It is not canonical project state, compiler text or an additional admission route. The ledger separates implemented CI check production from doctrine-only maintainer disposition. Runtime already separates wired CI from claimed human admission and unobserved merge/release. Those statuses address different functions, not competing whole-route judgments.

Claim comparisons and remaining limits

MEM-CLM-kernel-scope and EPI-RTE-kernel-gate are a scope claim and an evaluator route, not duplicate records. Both preserve direct synthetic SQL measurements rather than full canonical query latency or agent benefit. EPI-CLM-evaluation-contract specifies future scenario evidence and explicitly withholds achieved-success claims. The narrower kernel implementation does not contradict that qualified contract.

RT-CLM-runtime-boundary, EPI-CLM-trustworthy-context and EPI-CLM-approved-discoveries concern responsibility, context warrant/minimality and discovery promotion respectively. They are distinct claims, not synonyms. Their comparisons preserve a narrow canonical approval protocol alongside alternate legacy/direct/import writes. RT-BAP-implementation-skill supplies conditional static instruction, not automatic compiler delivery or observed compliance.

The memory integration issues correct no supplied runtime fact and declare no intentional duplicate runtime referent. That is compatible with the cross-specialist supersessions above. Query returns retained reasons, but symbolic gates do not assess their semantic soundness. Canonical status/rationale metadata is not by itself evidence-consuming semantic acceptance. Raw run/evidence retention does not establish learned guidance, and RT-CMP-runtime-model leaves external parameter changes and context management uninspected rather than absent. These are convergent limits, not disagreements.

The workflow account declares no new records and annotates existing runtime identities. It agrees with RT-RTE-compile-run and RT-RTE-verify-work: preview, returned execution result and caller-invoked verification are distinct deliveries. Missing Hermes can fail before Run persistence; returned nonzero exit can persist a failed Run while the CLI returns zero. Check failure records evidence without scheduling repair, undoing effects, accepting knowledge or delivering a release. Retained-output identity therefore establishes no successfully exercised workflow.

No current cross-report disagreement requiring an Unresolved conflict: paragraph was identified. No analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied; the changed epistemic findings were assessed directly, not treated as repairs merely because a previous reconciliation raised objections. Remaining uncertainty stays with its named route, consumer and evidence boundary rather than being resolved by selecting the strongest-sounding status.