Wuphf reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and evidence agreement

All four reports use the boundary and its Source register. The repository's gawkbot branding does not change the supplied Wuphf identity. The boundary remains complete artifact, partial loop. Later source inspection expands the account within SRC-1, not the frozen source identity or coverage guarantee. Implementation wiring, requested model behavior, actual activation and benefit remain separate. No report supplies an observed run or causal experiment. No additional source reading was needed for this reconciliation.

Duplicate identities

The following amendments identify referents, not preferred findings. Both declarations and their member-specific assessments remain available. None replaces a field or upgrades a conclusion status.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-typed-fact is superseded by MEM-OBJ-typed-fact. Both identify artifact-derived TypedFact text/triplets with provenance and validity/relation metadata in the wiki index and fact JSONL. Their SRC-1 internal/team/wiki_extractor.go passages identify the same extraction output. Memory additionally describes the source artifact and retrieval omissions; epistemic adds unchecked claim fidelity. This identity connects the epistemic inventory to the memory lineage account without turning source metadata into semantic warrant.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-learning-record is superseded by MEM-OBJ-learning-record. Both identify LearningRecord insight, source/confidence/trust/scope/evidence fields in JSONL and the regenerated Markdown index, using SRC-1 internal/team/learnings.go, including the same trust assignment. Memory's newest-key selection finding and epistemic's unresolved observation/policy distinction apply to the same retained record; neither invalidates the other's narrower inspection limits.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-extract-facts is superseded by MEM-RTE-artifact-extraction. Both trace artifact path to provider proposal, parse/sanitation/entity resolution, index submission and fact-log persistence. Their shared SRC-1 internal/team/wiki_extractor.go passages include artifact-SHA replacement and persistence. The epistemic ledger's transformation, checking and retention functions concern this same route. Its indeterminate semantic relation remains distinct from memory's implemented storage/read-back chain. Hook registration knowledge does not settle all hook timing or producer coverage.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-synthesize-brief is superseded by MEM-RTE-brief-synthesis. Both identify EntitySynthesizer's existing-brief/new-fact proposal, output checks, human-edit handling and WikiWorker retention in SRC-1 internal/team/entity_synthesizer.go. Memory describes threshold/demand selection and later file retrieval; epistemic describes the checks' narrow license and unknown semantic preservation. These are different assessments of the same synthesis route, not competing statuses.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-task-distill is superseded by MEM-RTE-task-distillation. Both trace completed non-system task state through entity/article writes before the Pass gate, deterministic insight assembly, AppendVerified and possible playbook draft. Both retain SRC-1 internal/team/task_distill.go Pass-gate and AppendVerified evidence. Memory's future-context chain and epistemic's warning about the Verified outcome prefix refer to the same operation. Trusted metadata does not expand the verification domain or establish transferable knowledge.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-learning-write is superseded by MEM-RTE-learning-admission. Both identify LearningLog normalization/validation, source-dependent trust, JSONL/index persistence and subsequent search in SRC-1 internal/team/learnings.go. The common ordinary Append expression establishes identity. Memory also records current-record selection, confidence decay and separately bounded completion bookkeeping; epistemic leaves those details uninspected. The epistemic import/retention assessment and memory's search findings remain local to their respective evidence; this amendment does not claim authentication of user-stated content.

Containers, suboperations and distinct records

RT-RTE-office-turn remains a valid enclosing route. MEM-RTE-memory-brief, MEM-RTE-task-knowledge and MEM-RTE-upstream-results declare contained selectors, not duplicate office runners. Their different selectors, delivery subsets and authority do not require superseding the enclosing turn.

EPI-RTE-knowledge-packet overlaps only the learning/index-snippet branch of MEM-RTE-task-knowledge. Whole-record identity is ruled out: the memory record also includes independent article-file search delivering titles/paths and a request for a later read. The epistemic record's omitted trust/evidence fields and clipped snippets describe the packet branch; they do not show that article bodies were delivered. Both are narrower than RT-RTE-office-turn. The valid memory container is retained, with no split supersession or invented ID.

EPI-RTE-related-cleanup is a distinct deterministic operation within brief synthesis, not another declaration of MEM-RTE-brief-synthesis. Its prose-containing Related-section counterexample bounds cleanup. Memory's graph-supplied Related section does not assert removal of every model-generated Related statement. No conflicting graph-only guarantee is inferred.

EPI-RTE-playbook-compile produces the wrapper consumed by MEM-RTE-skill-registration, whose tombstones and registry checks govern admission. They overlap at registration but have different starting objects, progression and checks; neither supersedes the other. MEM-OBJ-compiled-skill names the resulting procedure and registry state, not RT-OBJ-stored-tool's JavaScript. Actual downstream skill invocation remains unestablished in both accounts.

MEM-OBJ-session-transcript is retained routine output, not a duplicate of RT-RTE-scheduled-tool. MEM-OBJ-session-memory-snapshot is a different current-state projection, not that transcript or a demonstrated durable resume route. Workflow's scheduled-route annotation supplies presentation and delivery findings on the existing runtime record rather than a new identity.

MEM-CMP-retrieval-embedding ranks retained content; RT-CMP-office-model, RT-CMP-author-model and RT-CMP-runtime-ai have different inference roles. Shared resolver/provider possibilities do not identify these consumption roles. EPI-RTE-ai-results explicitly isolates a material subroute of RT-RTE-saved-call, not another whole executor.

The remaining epistemic objects, query, lint, task-check/admission and prompt-evaluation routes have no duplicate memory or runtime declarations. In particular, EPI-OBJ-verification-result, EPI-RTE-task-check and EPI-RTE-task-admission are not RT-RTE-plan-approval: completion evidence and pre-execution authorization have different targets and consequences. Private notes and remote shared pages are separate from learning records, facts and executable tools.

Independent convergence and integration dispositions

The workflow account, RT-RTE-scheduled-tool and memory's scheduled-tool annotation agree that lexical matching can reuse saved code without new authoring, and routines can persist a fallback despite manual build's model-only condition. RT-RTE-tool-authoring and the epistemic bounded conclusion retain the simulated smoke check's limited domain. These connections do not establish successful business execution, accumulated conversational history or exercised improvement.

Workflow's saved-call annotation adds termination semantics to RT-RTE-saved-call. It does not contradict the runtime gate: needs_approval settles the invocation, while paused narration does not establish resumable worker state. The runtime and workflow also retain the broker-to-sidecar missing authorization-header limit, caller/worker deadline mismatch, possible earlier effects and recurring scheduling without exactly-once recovery. Recorded scheduler success and accessible transcript/artifact do not establish completed external action or human receipt.

RT-CLM-external-approval, EPI-CLM-verified-lookup and EPI-CLM-cited-knowledge are distinct design claims. The first concerns authorization; the others concern sourced answers and citation coverage. Route-local gates, bounds filtering and citation guidance must not be collapsed into one universal approval or truth guarantee. The reports' claim/implementation comparisons are not disagreements between analysts and assert no observed unauthorized action or uncited user-facing output.

Memory's integration issues require no correction of supplied runtime facts. The pre-verification entity-write counterexample is shared by the task-distillation records and concerns source comments, not a conflicting runtime assertion. Unresolved actor/source authentication, remote storage/provider internals, withdrawal propagation, checkpoint installation and procedural activation remain limits beside their records. Epistemic adds lint metadata disposal but expressly leaves global retrieval withdrawal unresolved; it does not settle memory's deletion/supersession concern. The positive fact-disposition route is retained alongside that uncertainty.

No inter-report disagreement is established by these supplied versions, and no analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied to this attempt. Different direct-reading scopes are not conflicts: memory's inspected dedup/decay, file retrieval and maintenance findings coexist with epistemic's narrower uninspected fields. None permits a system-complete negative. No missing required part was identified that makes an existing container's findings false; no conflict or split is manufactured from faithful uncertainty. All amendments above concern duplicated identity alone, leaving each analyst's evidence, status and assessment unchanged for report verification.