kgai reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Duplicate identities and distinct parts

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-decision-reasons is superseded by MEM-OBJ-decision. Both identify the retained natural-language Decision.Title and Decision.Rationale, copied from ingest input into event and projection fields. Their SRC-1 passages at src/internal/engine/engine.go establish the same content part, not separate epistemic and memory objects. Both retain optional rationale and caller-dependent warrant. The epistemic inventory, ledger and conclusions concern this same content; supersession does not replace their epistemic assessments or turn authorship into evidence-consuming acceptance.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-historical-replay is superseded by MEM-RTE-asof-recall. Both identify Engine.AsOf: caller cutoff, recorded-time and event-hash filtering, temporary native projection, structural return and temporary-directory removal. Their SRC-1 passages at src/internal/engine/reads.go show the same filtering operation. Both distinguish event-hash verification from the stronger rebuild gate and leave replay equivalence unestablished. This identity connects the epistemic historical-transformation ledger to the memory read-back finding without changing either conclusion status or asserting that the output includes rationale.

EPI-OBJ-decision-mutations and MEM-OBJ-event overlap but are not identical. The former isolates mutations and authority fields; the latter includes those fields plus the event's hash, installation, actor, parents and ordering envelope. Their SRC-1 authority-construction passages at src/internal/engine/engine.go concern a shared symbolic part. The envelope remains a valid container: its integrity and synchronization findings are not wrong when authority fields are separated. Neither supersedes the other. MEM-OBJ-graph is the derived projection, not another event or mutation declaration.

EPI-RTE-recall-shaping spans rationale selection and abbreviation in search and context. MEM-RTE-context-recall identifies the independently callable context read, including element scoring and structural delivery; MEM-RTE-search-history includes search and an optional full-history follow-up. These are overlapping operations, not three names for one complete route. The SRC-1 src/internal/engine/reads.go passages on four-head selection and shortened versus full rationale connect their findings. No split supersession is warranted: the shaping account remains valid, while the memory routes carry additional selection and history responsibilities.

MEM-CMP-host-smoke identifies the shipped evaluator and prospective artifacts; EPI-RTE-capture-evaluation identifies its manual fixture-to-count-verdict progression. The shared SRC-1 tests/host-smoke.sh count-equality passage establishes their connection, not identical referents. Neither supersedes the other, nor do they duplicate the production capture routes.

Other proposed overlaps also retain distinct identities. MEM-OBJ-prompt is configured convention text, whereas RT-OBJ-trusted is approval metadata and RT-RTE-config-admission is their admission/delivery route. RT-OBJ-knowledge-graph and RT-OBJ-capture-prompt are shipped policies, not captured reasons. EPI-RTE-doctor-check returns diagnostics without the admission effect of RT-RTE-team-sync. EPI-RTE-branch-check isolates branch listing and requested resolution, not the whole RT-RTE-foreground-capture loop. The epistemic completeness, semantic-conflict and dead-end claims concern different assertions from RT-CLM-structural-capture; they are not duplicate claims. Workflow declares no new records and adds completion/recovery annotations to runtime identities.

Integration-issue dispositions and convergence

The memory report's ordinary-recall qualification does not contradict runtime's historical reachability finding. RT-RTE-foreground-capture says historical decisions remain reachable, not that every context return contains their full reasons. MEM-RTE-context-recall, MEM-RTE-search-history and EPI-RTE-recall-shaping distinguish stored history, ranking inputs, head-only delivery and clipped text. Memory's Lamport-threshold countercase qualifies relevance rather than disputing runtime's lexical-selection account. Epistemic's qualifier-loss example concerns the actual delivered text. These findings prevent treating recall availability as complete explanatory delivery; they do not establish measured retrieval failure.

Consumer-local integrity findings converge. RT-RTE-team-sync retains engine and object-transport checks; RT-RTE-editor-read retains the reader's missing engine verification gate. MEM-RTE-asof-recall adds event-hash-only historical filtering, and EPI-RTE-doctor-check identifies advisory diagnostics over parsed events. Memory's malformed-line qualification limits what Doctor can report; it does not contradict the epistemic record's parsed-event scope. No report establishes a universal integrity gate or semantic trust from hashes.

The configuration cap qualification likewise adds precision without disagreement. RT-RTE-config-admission says conventions are capped; MEM-OBJ-prompt identifies the Bash string-length measurement and distinguishes future revocation from removal of already delivered text. Both separate approval state from authenticated human consent and reliable model compliance. No byte-independent or model-token guarantee is jointly established.

Retraction and revision findings connect MEM-OBJ-event, MEM-OBJ-graph and RT-RTE-foreground-capture: successor authority changes live state while old reasons remain accessible. The memory integration issue limits the skill's adjustment/retraction wording to inspected successor/live-edge paths, not a destructive erase guarantee. Epistemic's EPI-CLM-full-story and EPI-CLM-dead-ends comparisons separately bound completeness, proof of wrongness and future avoidance. These are source-claim versus mechanism comparisons, not disagreements between reports.

RT-RTE-fork-capture, its memory annotation and the workflow account agree on eligibility, opaque host-fork inputs, parsed durable extraction, supported-surface confirmation and headless automatic fallback. Workflow adds the distinction between awaited headless completion and asynchronously scheduled drawn-session capture. Its separate dry-run and real-ingest calls qualify delivery without contradicting runtime's sequence. A pending proposal is not persistence; process success need not append a new event when content is already present; failed real ingest need not imply zero writes. Both reports retain append-before-projection repair and diagnostics rather than automatic mod repair.

The classic turn-marker heuristic in RT-RTE-foreground-capture differs from the mod's successful-tool/dry-run-aware detector described in the workflow account. These are different paths, not incompatible findings about one detector. Likewise, UI result hiding is consistently distinguished from demonstrated model-context trimming.

MEM-CMP-host-smoke and EPI-RTE-capture-evaluation independently retain the same bounded count oracle and empty-query diagnostic limitation. Neither establishes truth of reasons, downstream dependence, component causality or evaluation-fed policy revision. These findings do not strengthen the separately labelled theory-builder, learning and reflection assessments in RT-RTE-foreground-capture.

Conflicts and retained limits

No unresolved cross-report disagreement is identified in the supplied members. No analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied, so no disposition of such an objection is inferred. The supersessions above resolve duplicate identities only; the remaining overlap comparisons rule out identity rather than select a preferred finding.

The members share the boundary's evidence limits: inspected implementation and doctrine are not observed operation or causal benefit. Opaque provider state, exact fork copying, uninspected bulk/transport/rendering branches and other unassessed evaluators remain local limitations. They prevent stronger completeness, universal enforcement, exercised learning and successful delivery conclusions without negating the supported routes. This reconciliation used the pinned members only and performed no additional source reads.