Quicky Wiki reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

The supplied reports share the frozen boundary and the evidence limits in the Source register. They distinguish implementation and doctrine/design from unobserved operation and benefit. This reconciliation assesses the current pinned members; the previous reconciliation is not evidence that a connection still holds. No source rereads were needed. No correction-answer or declined-objection files were supplied, so no positions are inferred from an earlier review process. Citations below supply the analysts' findings and supporting passages without changing their values.

Duplicate supersessions and distinct identities

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-claim-statements is superseded by MEM-OBJ-claims. Both identify natural-language retained Claim.statement content in SQLite, produced by extraction or direct editing and consumed by comparison, answering, summaries and reviews. The epistemic record includes transient extraction arrays in the lineage of that content, not a separately identified retained object. Identity evidence is SRC-1, src/compiler/ingest.ts, src/graph/store.ts, and the ingestion/answer passages cited in that declaration. The epistemic inventory and claim-content ledger rows consequently concern the memory statement part. Neither extraction fidelity nor factual acceptance is established by this identity; the memory record's challenge-retention and direct-edit findings remain unchanged.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-page-summaries is superseded by MEM-OBJ-page-summaries. Both identify SQLite pages.summary, generated from page claims/confidences, written after the same minimal length check, and consumed by search and views. Identity evidence is SRC-1, src/compiler/resolve.ts, src/graph/query.ts. The affected epistemic inventory and summary-transformation row refer to the same stored text. The memory record additionally traces refresh and stale-summary paths; those findings do not resolve the epistemic uncertainty about semantic fidelity.

The six memory parts—MEM-OBJ-claims, MEM-OBJ-claim-controls, MEM-OBJ-page-summaries, MEM-OBJ-source-register, MEM-OBJ-epistemic-events and MEM-OBJ-graph-relations—are not identities of RT-OBJ-knowledge-store. They separate content, controls, summaries, provenance, traces and relations inside its valid substrate container. No supersession of the container follows.

EPI-OBJ-confidence-state overlaps the memory controls, source/provenance, event and relation parts, but is not identical to any one. It groups scores, source quality/links, edges and events for the epistemic assessment; memory separates their consumers and invalidation. The relevant parts are already declared, and the combined record does not become wrong when they are separated. No split supersession is warranted. Its arithmetic and timestamp findings converge with the finer memory control record (SRC-1, src/compiler/confidence.ts, src/graph/store.ts).

EPI-OBJ-source-content is distinct from MEM-OBJ-source-register: filesystem bodies and transient imported text are not retained paths, hashes, labels or provenance links. RT-OBJ-knowledge-diff is an in-process action handoff, not the retained claim text, event history or an approval artifact. No identity or supersession applies to these comparisons.

EPI-OBJ-query-results and EPI-OBJ-consensus-result are output parts of their respective runtime routes, not duplicate routes. The same distinction holds for EPI-OBJ-review-proposals, EPI-OBJ-resurface-reviews and EPI-OBJ-discovery-proposals within maintenance: their targets and output purposes differ. EPI-RTE-chunk-selection and EPI-RTE-lint-prune isolate parts of the ingestion and maintenance containers. Neither these parts nor their siblings supersede their parents.

MEM-OBJ-rendered-views covers persisted derived files across formats. EPI-OBJ-slide-content covers the model-generated slide text and saved deck: its saved output belongs to that broader family, but its transient content and the memory record's other formats prevent whole-record identity. EPI-RTE-slide-output is the generating/write route, not the file object, ordinary answer route or ingestion process. These overlaps require no supersession.

EPI-CLM-living-knowledge concerns source extraction and knowledge maintenance, including dependencies/cascade; RT-CLM-confidence-citations concerns answer confidence/citations. They are distinct public claims. RT-CMP-llm-adapter identifies the external generation component, whereas RT-BAP-retained-context identifies consumers, channels, force and horizon. Neither is a duplicate object or route. The workflow declares no new records and annotates the existing ingestion route.

Cross-report connections and integration dispositions

Admission and delivery. RT-RTE-source-ingest, its memory annotation and the workflow account describe code-owned progression through extraction, comparison, graph changes, assignment, summary and driver delivery. The epistemic ledger separates transformation, checking, operational disposition and retention within that process. Workflow separates compiler return, early CLI success text and final Markdown writes. These are different functions and milestones, not conflicting statuses. Parse/index checks do not become factual acceptance; the shared summary length check does not establish fidelity (SRC-1, src/compiler/ingest.ts, src/compiler/diff.ts, src/compiler/resolve.ts, src/cli/ingest.ts).

Transaction scope and prune. The current RT-RTE-client-access and RT-RTE-health-review explicitly distinguish method-local transactions for deleteClaim/deletePage from deleteEmptyPages, whose link/page deletions have no method-wide transaction. Both dashboard prune and CLI lint prune call the latter directly. EPI-RTE-lint-prune describes the same zero-claim selection and removal; it does not claim atomicity. Memory's deletion and withdrawal findings likewise do not assert that prune inherits another method's transaction. No current disagreement remains on this point, and no broader transactional guarantee is inferred from the epistemic retention row's reference to store transactions per method. Whole-ingest, async calls and file writes remain outside one encompassing transaction in runtime and workflow (SRC-1, src/graph/store.ts, src/cli/lint.ts, src/cli/serve.ts, src/compiler/resolve.ts).

Recovery, freshness and withdrawal. Runtime and workflow retain the source/hash-before-completion case and unchanged-retry skip. Memory adds that source replacement does not automatically retract previous claims and watcher deletion is ignored. These concern distinct lifetimes, not competing completion guarantees. RT-RTE-client-access and the epistemic withdrawal row concern removal from live graph reads; MEM-OBJ-page-summaries and MEM-OBJ-rendered-views show independently stale summaries and files. RT-RTE-answer-save supplies a further persisted derivative. No supplied deployment artifacts establish which version was actually displayed (SRC-1, src/compiler/ingest.ts, src/cli/watch.ts, src/graph/store.ts, src/render/markdown.ts, src/cli/save-answer.ts).

Markdown consumer scope. Memory's integration issue qualifies, rather than replaces, runtime's statement that Markdown is not query input. RT-RTE-question-answer and workflow describe model answering from SQLite; MEM-OBJ-rendered-views supplies dashboard /api/page file read-back for display. Both findings hold at their named consumers. No supersession or conflict follows, but a conclusion that generated files have no shipped later consumer would not follow from the model-query account (SRC-1, src/graph/query.ts, src/cli/serve.ts).

Dependency initialization. RT-RTE-source-ingest, MEM-OBJ-graph-relations, EPI-OBJ-confidence-state and workflow agree that extracted dependency strings do not reach claim-edge insertion in the shipped compiler. Public store methods permit externally populated edges; cascade is conditional on those edges. Unknown embedding initialization is a shared limitation, not disagreement or absent capability. It prevents inferring automatic dependency construction or exercised propagation from the public cascade claim (SRC-1, src/compiler/diff.ts, src/compiler/resolve.ts, src/graph/store.ts, src/graph/cascade.ts).

Reasons and authority at the consumer. MEM-OBJ-epistemic-events retains challenge notes; RT-RTE-question-answer delivers only selected statements/scores rather than those notes or source bodies. The epistemic ledger and RT-BAP-retained-context preserve the distinction between delivery, compliance and warrant. Memory's integration issue therefore prevents treating retained criticism as automatically consumed criticism, without denying its storage. Configuration guidance has a different system-message channel under RT-RTE-runtime-setup; no report establishes automatic critique-to-prompt revision (SRC-1, src/graph/store.ts, src/graph/query.ts, src/compiler/ingest.ts).

Review, consensus and output reuse. RT-RTE-health-review, its memory annotation and the epistemic review objects distinguish advisory critique/discovery/resurfacing outputs from durable numeric decay. Structural lint/prune is not factual rejection. RT-RTE-consensus-answer and its epistemic result preserve single-response and comparison-failure paths that label claims agreed without multi-model convergence. RT-RTE-answer-save and its memory annotation establish optional answer retention followed by separate explicit or watched ingestion; the epistemic assessment does not treat that as independent corroboration. These are compatible route-local findings, not a system-wide reliability or improvement status (SRC-1, src/cli/metabolism.ts, src/cli/lint.ts, src/compiler/consensus.ts, src/cli/save-answer.ts).

Coverage and unresolved evidence. Memory's provider opacity, caller lineage, installed-configuration and external-consumer issues agree with RT-CMP-llm-adapter and RT-RTE-client-access. The epistemic member adds a positively traced slide route and a prefix-filter countercase, while retaining limits on other templates and actual content semantics. Workflow selects one local-file route rather than claiming exhaustive workflow coverage. These differences do not establish conflicting findings or system-complete negatives. No supplied dependent finding requires a cited record to retain a finding it no longer states. No unresolved inter-report conflict or missing required part was identified in the current members; their shared uncertainties remain local limits, not disagreements.