LLM Wiki v2 memory-profile verification
Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-verification.md
Verification
I checked all ten axes of the profile, including their unit scopes, controlled findings, evidence bases and coverage assessments, against the supplied runtime, memory, epistemic and workflow members. Reconciliation establishes no whole-record supersession. Its unresolved check-result separation does not authorize treating transient checks as one retained memory object. The profile preserves incomplete evaluator coverage instead. The supplied profile answers are empty; no predecessor objection establishes a defect.
The assessed boundary is through-use retained content and its later consumers, not every storage location in the runtime. Excluding static role prompts, transient relay jobs and external provider parameters is consistent with that boundary. Injectable alternatives, caller provenance and opaque connector interpretation remain explicit uncertainties rather than being silently classified from defaults. All emitted positives have wired bases; the records establish implementation, not observed activation or causal benefit.
| Axis | Support and disposition |
|---|---|
| Storage substrate | File-backed notes, raw copies, indexes, archives and operational/benchmark records support files; the default classifier cache supports sqlite. Reconstructed working views are not independently asserted durable storage. The unknown injected implementations keep coverage partial. See MEM-OBJ-note-body, MEM-OBJ-folder-index, MEM-OBJ-sync-state, MEM-OBJ-replay and MEM-OBJ-answer-cache. |
| Representational form | The profile distinguishes interpreted prose from code-consumed structure, fields and scalar outputs. A numerical classifier response is not a distributed-parametric representation. Cursor-wrapper classification does not purport to resolve the opaque payload's interpretation. Mixed retained objects are separated by consumption part rather than assigned a single form from their file extension. See MEM-OBJ-note-metadata, MEM-OBJ-raw, MEM-OBJ-sync-state and MEM-OBJ-answer-cache. |
| Lineage | Imported entry, authored prose, mechanically compiled indexes/snapshots and extracted operational history are distinct derivation paths. Known entry or transformation paths do not settle initial authorship. The separate unresolved provenance unit preserves that distinction. See MEM-OBJ-raw, MEM-OBJ-note-body, MEM-OBJ-folder-index, MEM-OBJ-archive and MEM-OBJ-log. |
| Behavioral authority | Knowledge at writing/answering, relevance ranking, filing/progress routing, and code-consumed validation/vetoes have identifiable retained inputs and consumers. The learning finding is confined to the split-history update path. It does not give every note instruction authority or infer learning from all retention. See MEM-BAP-retained-knowledge, MEM-OBJ-note-metadata, MEM-OBJ-proposals, MEM-RTE-answer-reuse and MEM-OBJ-log. |
| Write agency | Automatic findings concern software/model admission, not physical I/O or a human starting ingest. Generic caller inputs and confirmation flags do not establish per-content human approval. The unresolved caller-directed and injected branches therefore do not contradict the automatic witnesses. See RT-RTE-source-filing, RT-RTE-manual-maintenance, RT-RTE-batch-sync and MEM-RTE-answer-reuse. |
| Curation operations | Reduction/merge supports consolidation; merge and replacement support evolution. Archived replacement withdraws ordinary active reliance while retaining a predecessor, supporting bounded invalidation. These findings do not require observed perfect fidelity. The profile does not infer synthesis from semantic uncertainty or deduplication from a prompt goal. Purge and source-removal marking are not conflated with archived invalidation. See MEM-RTE-source-reduction, EPI-RTE-revision-admit, MEM-OBJ-archive and EPI-RTE-origin-purge. |
| Read-back direction | Requested questions, note reads and cached response returns support pull. Automatic provision of retained filing context and split/progress state to internal consumers supports push. The latter does not assert proactive delivery to the enclosing MCP client. See RT-RTE-question-answer, MEM-RTE-note-read, MEM-RTE-answer-reuse, RT-RTE-source-filing and RT-RTE-batch-sync. |
| Read-back signal | Internal filing distinguishes available structure from semantic route/match judgment. Folder-specific prior-attempt lookup selects retained control state by identity; it is not merely an identifier displayed on a requested file. Coarse history supply is separately identified. The inapplicable unit is limited to the explicitly requested deliveries, not the unresolved inventory. See MEM-OBJ-folder-index, RT-RTE-source-filing, MEM-OBJ-log and MEM-OBJ-sync-state. |
| Trace learning | The split-history positive meets the supplied architectural definition: automatic recording of experience creates a durable control artifact, and later splitting consumes it to suppress repeat attempts. Requiring a new semantic theory, changed weights or demonstrated competence would add conditions absent from the type. Unknown client extraction, response reuse and custom paths remain separate unresolved units; they do not erase this witness. See MEM-OBJ-log, RT-RTE-batch-sync, MEM-RTE-answer-reuse and MEM-OBJ-raw. |
| Trace source | Discrete split-attempt activity supports event-streams for that qualifying write. No transcript or tool-trace origin is inferred from remember or cache API names. Other possible qualifying inputs remain unresolved. See MEM-OBJ-log, RT-RTE-batch-sync, MEM-OBJ-raw and MEM-OBJ-sync-state. |
Some units group several objects or mechanisms. Their finding notes still locate the relevant parts, derivations and effects, and the groupings do not upgrade unresolved branches. They support the emitted existence findings, not counts of independently comparable routes or a complete-value inventory. The partial axis assessments consistently retain unresolved coverage. No absent axis, local trace-learning no, or system-wide negative requires an absence warrant that the records do not supply.
I also checked the consequential cross-report qualifications: full_text is a selected display rather than all serialized metadata; source removal leaves derived notes available; replay is not evidence of current-provider behavior; and offline criteria do not gate ordinary filing. The profile preserves these distinctions. See MEM-OBJ-note-body, MEM-OBJ-raw, MEM-OBJ-replay, MEM-OBJ-evaluation-results, EPI-RTE-fact-score and the workflow account.
The residual uncertainty is already expressed in the extracted assessments and notes. It is not an unsupported complete-coverage assertion and does not need a separate publication limit. No source reread was necessary: this judgment uses the handed records and introduces no source evidence or replacement classifications.
Blockers
none
Limits
none