CQ reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and comparison basis

The four reports share the frozen source and evidence limits in boundary. Implementation, requested host behavior and observed operation remain separate. No analyst answers or refusals are supplied to this attempt. The current pinned reports, rather than the previous reconciliation's descriptions of them, determine the connections below. No additional source reads were made.

Record identities and overlaps

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-insight is superseded by MEM-OBJ-insight. Both identify KnowledgeUnit.insight, its summary/detail/action fields, serialized local/remote storage and host/reviewer interpretation. Both retain the tripartite-insight schema passage under SRC-1 schema/knowledge_unit.json. The epistemic account's truth-apt-content assessment and unknown source warrant concern the same payload, not a separate object. This amendment connects the epistemic inventory, ledger and bounded conclusion to the memory object's identity without replacing their findings or removing either declaration.

EPI-OBJ-evidence overlaps MEM-OBJ-selection-metadata in confidence, confirmations and confirmation time, and MEM-OBJ-flags in the flags array. Neither is identical to the combined epistemic container: selection metadata also includes domains, context, identifiers, tier and review state; flags alone omit confirmation evidence. Supersession by either record, or a split into these two records, is ruled out because their scopes do not partition the combined referent. The epistemic declaration now explicitly acknowledges overlapping containers and separate arithmetic/prose consumers. That preserves scope distinctions but does not supply the missing part declarations discussed below.

EPI-RTE-store-deletion describes the Delete branch included in MEM-RTE-store-replacement, not the whole Update/Delete container. SRC-1 sdk/go/store_sqlite.go supplies the retained deletion and replacement passages. Whole-record identity and supersession are ruled out. The valid capability container can coexist with a narrower physical-deletion route. Its afforded editing capability and the deletion record's wired removal refer to different scopes; this reconciliation selects neither status for the other. The declarations do not state a formal part relation. RT-RTE-local-drain is a deletion caller with additional transfer effects, not an identical storage operation.

Other close referents also have distinct identities. MEM-OBJ-knowledge-vectors is retained numerical output; RT-CMP-token-embedding is its producer. MEM-OBJ-node-info is endpoint metadata and MEM-RTE-discovery-resolution is its cache/probe read-back, not the advice selection in RT-RTE-knowledge-query. MEM-RTE-maintenance-migration changes database encodings; RT-RTE-host-installation changes installed instructions. RT-OBJ-skill is packaged guidance, not per-discovery insight. No identity amendment applies to these pairs.

The claim records do not duplicate the mechanisms to which they are compared. EPI-CLM-guardrails-layer concerns automatic content evaluators, unlike submission permission in RT-CLM-proposal-approval or approved-status filtering in RT-CLM-approved-query. EPI-CLM-reflection-server records a source assertion, not the agent-led progression in RT-RTE-session-reflection. EPI-CLM-flag-protection asserts protection, not the score-update route RT-RTE-knowledge-feedback. Whole-record supersessions are ruled out. Workflow declares no records; its annotations concern the supplied runtime referents.

Remaining missing-part conflict

Unresolved conflict: MEM-OBJ-flags and EPI-OBJ-evidence retain mixed operative parts without separately declaring the optional natural-language flag criticism and the symbolic flag fields. Memory distinguishes ranking through changed confidence from host interpretation of delivered detail. Epistemic explicitly acknowledges this coarse combined inventory and does not assign uniform form or authority. The retained SRC-1 sdk/go/scoring.go construction passage shows reason, timestamp, detail and duplicate target; memory's schema/knowledge_unit.json passage states an intended server-only display restriction, while its local delivery account says detail can reach the host. Thus the different consumers and admission/delivery paths are supported, but no existing declaration isolates the prose criticism part. A split supersession would require a new analyst declaration, which reconciliation cannot allocate. This prevents a complete part-addressed account of criticism's form, consumer and authority; it does not invalidate the supported container findings or establish that criticism is absent. The epistemic acknowledgment of incompleteness preserves the limitation rather than resolving the declaration gap.

Integration dispositions and convergence

Duplicate-feedback qualification is now shared. RT-RTE-knowledge-feedback, MEM-OBJ-flags and EPI-OBJ-evidence all distinguish successful stale/incorrect flag paths and Go-local duplicate retention from server/Python Client duplicate construction failure. Their retained SRC-1 sdk/python/src/cq/models.py validator requires duplicate_of; the reason-only request/caller chain omits it. The current runtime account and epistemic adaptation ledger carry the failure through to no persisted duplicate objection or rank update on those paths. Memory's integration request for qualification therefore no longer identifies a disagreement in the pinned reports. The previous reconciliation's generic-flag conflict is not carried forward. No supplied answer establishes whether a particular objection was corrected or declined; the present findings themselves agree.

Semantic ranking is a refinement, not a remaining contradictory formula. RT-RTE-knowledge-query names nearest-vector preselection and relevance/confidence reranking without an exclusive final formula. The memory query annotation, supported by MEM-OBJ-knowledge-vectors, gives the SRC-1 server/backend/src/cq_server/semsearch/queries.py arithmetic: 0.8 relevance plus 0.2 inverse normalized distance, then confidence. The epistemic selection ledger now retains that formula and the continued distance contribution after preselection. Its claim comparison and bounded conclusion preserve the same distinction. Ordinary SQL relevance × confidence remains separate. Memory's refinement can be connected without selecting a competing runtime value, and the previous reconciliation's epistemic formula disagreement no longer describes this input. None of the accounts establishes retrieval quality or factual warrant from that arithmetic.

Reflection doctrine disagrees within the source, not across these reports. RT-RTE-session-reflection, memory's reflection annotation, EPI-CLM-reflection-server and the workflow account converge on requested foreground-agent extraction. The dedicated command and Python stub passages support that account; the epistemic claim retains the conflicting skill wording and five-tool MCP registration under SRC-1 sdk/go/prompts/SKILL.md and cli/mcpserver/server.go. No report attributes an implemented server extractor or observed session upload to CQ. Requested reasoning does not establish exercised candidate production, and the documentation mismatch does not establish which instructions a host actually follows.

Content permission, software admission and remote visibility are separate. RT-CLM-proposal-approval, memory's proposal annotation, the epistemic ledger and workflow's handoffs distinguish instructed interactive approval, structural/credential validation and later review admission. Direct/headless calls prevent universal human-approval enforcement. RT-RTE-remote-review and RT-CLM-approved-query support status-gated public retrieval, not PRIVATE-tier confidentiality, human-only review or independent truth validation. Workflow's operational approval language does not contradict epistemic's refusal to infer evidence-consuming truth acceptance: workflow also denies a required correctness oracle and an observed review judgment. Its separate endpoints are reflection counts/IDs, review response and later tool delivery, not completion of the host's application task.

Transfer preserves lesson text, not a complete identity or history. RT-RTE-local-drain already denies stable cross-store identity, exactly-once transfer and uninterrupted availability. Memory's annotation adds omitted evidence, flags and superseded_by, plus Python extension omission, concerning MEM-OBJ-selection-metadata, MEM-OBJ-flags and MEM-OBJ-extensions. Its SRC-1 sdk/go/remote.go and sdk/python/src/cq/client.py payload findings connect to server-created defaults. Epistemic and workflow preserve local deletion before remote approval and the lack of renewed per-content approval. These are complementary lineage limits, not a dispute with an asserted faithful replica.

Display and transaction discrepancies are source-internal. MEM-OBJ-flags contrasts schema display doctrine with unstripped local serialized delivery, consistent with RT-RTE-knowledge-query. Remote failure to admit detail is a different limit from local exposure. No other report claims universal detail confidentiality. MEM-OBJ-knowledge-vectors contrasts a separate-transaction docstring with the combined base/vector-clause call retained under SRC-1 server/backend/src/cq_server/semsearch/queries.py. Runtime likewise places embedding production before the combined database transaction. Neither discrepancy creates a cross-report conflict or an observed atomicity guarantee. Provider failures and wrapped-error fallback limits remain intact.

Rank influence is not guaranteed correction. RT-RTE-knowledge-feedback, memory's feedback annotation and EPI-CLM-flag-protection agree that successful updates change scores without evaluating task evidence, rewriting insight text or revoking approved status. Epistemic's sole-matching-result counterexample bounds protection without denying wired ranking influence. Workflow's near-duplicate check is likewise a requested use of limited retrieval, not a novelty oracle. MCP warning omission can further reduce the host's information about incomplete retrieval.

Auxiliary state and static instructions do not establish lesson production. Memory and epistemic annotations preserve RT-OBJ-failure-record and RT-RTE-failure-reminder as latest-event clipping, stop delivery and cleanup, not causal diagnosis or automatic knowledge admission. RT-RTE-host-installation supplies static instruction availability and ownership checks, not experience-driven self-patching. Host compaction, isolated frames, opaque initialized state, provider compatibility and maintenance consistency remain scoped unknowns rather than disagreements.

The reports' remaining uncertainty prevents broader conclusions without defeating inspected positive mechanisms. No supplied execution or causal evidence closes the path from retained lesson to changed host behavior and benefit. Learning, reflection, autonomy, theory-builder conditions and exercised self-improvement remain the analysts' separate bounded findings; this reconciliation assigns no stronger shared status.