SkillWeaver report verification

Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-verification.md

Verification

The current reports support a bounded builder-and-consumer account. The three previous blockers are repaired: runtime, memory and workflow now distinguish syntactic named-call occurrence from dynamic execution. Their correction answers agree with their changed text and with independent source inspection. The structural report-check is none; there is no structural failure to route. No current material contradiction or unsupported comparison finding requires correction.

I rechecked checkout HEAD and the tracked tree against the boundary. They support the whole-system builder boundary, including shipped drivers, both skill consumers and evaluators. No frozen-target or boundary-kind contradiction was found. The source reads below use SRC-1 at that revision. Executable source supplies implementation evidence; README and templates supply doctrine/design; shipped usage logs supply reported operation only. No target execution, provider call or experiment was performed.

Runtime, memory and corrected shortcut

Independent complete reads of SRC-1, skillweaver/explore.py, skillweaver/attempt_task.py, skillweaver/agent.py, skillweaver/create_skill_library_prompt.py and skillweaver/knowledge_base/knowledge_base.py support RT-RTE-explore-practice, RT-RTE-native-task and RT-RTE-skill-admission. I traced task scheduling, argument generation, shared-library locks, per-task context, generation retries, host execution, test-counter versus success-judgment branches, synthesis and checkpoint placement. Five-response generation and ten-response synthesis retries are not final vetoes. Native execution includes the complete library unless reference-only, irrespective of selected descriptions or verified visibility.

The AST walk in SRC-1, skillweaver/attempt_task.py searches the supplied source for a matching named-call node. The early-stop branch and SRC-1, skillweaver/explore.py additionally inspect exception/recovery result fields. Neither observes whether that call ran. The unreachable-call deduction retained by EPI-RTE-test-check is valid without executing the target. I checked all dependent current passages: the runtime account and native/practice records, memory Core ideas and metadata/write/read-back descriptions, and workflow steps 3–4 and recovery boundary. None still grants dynamic execution evidence to this predicate. Test-counter authority remains real even when its evidence is weak. The previous blockers are therefore discharged, not converted into limits.

The complete knowledge-base read supports all five memory objects: MEM-OBJ-code, MEM-OBJ-docstring, MEM-OBJ-metadata, MEM-OBJ-semantic-knowledge and MEM-OBJ-traces. I checked function-only merge, same-name replacement, retained omitted names, reset counters, blanket marking, aliased metadata copy, partial fallback initialization, reference discard, semantic-text preservation, retrieval matching and tool-description truncation. These findings distinguish executable content, readable guidance and access metadata. Save/load is persistence, not independent acceptance. Arbitrary initial content provenance is correctly unresolved.

For trace and working-context findings, complete SRC-1, skillweaver/environment/state.py and the two task drivers establish raw artifact persistence, expanded native rendering and subsequent builder overwrite with default rendering. The action prompt uses current observation and prior action text, not all saved observations. Success receives the reduced trajectory plus final screenshot; synthesis receives the reduced trajectory without that separate screenshot. Ordinary library reload does not import synthesis diagnostics. The minimum passages in the trace object and EPI-RTE-trajectory-format support these consumer-level qualifications.

Complete SRC-1, skillweaver/environment/patches.py and skillweaver/environment/browser.py, together with executor setup, support RT-RTE-locator-recovery. Exception categories, visited locations, filtered locals, model-selected element, expression/type/count/identity checks, transient disabling and original-operation retry are correctly bounded. These are local consistency checks, not user-intent or host-isolation guarantees. Recovery does not directly revise retained skills; its omission from default synthesis text is preserved.

Complete SRC-1, skillweaver/attempt_task_browser_use.py and controller construction support RT-RTE-browser-use and RT-BAP-library-execution. Selected callbacks are registered after executing library code; downstream planning belongs to the external agent. Neither native checking nor native recovery tracking transfers automatically. Complete SRC-1, skillweaver/lm.py and the embedding implementation support RT-CMP-lm, RT-CMP-embed and MEM-RTE-embedding-selection: provider-backed parameters, alias/version uncertainty, local retry/semaphore behavior and optional cached top-five selection. No target-owned weight update or exercised embedding consumer is inferred.

Complete SRC-1, skillweaver/evaluation/evaluate_benchmark.py and skillweaver/evaluation/evaluate_single_task.py support RT-RTE-benchmark-evaluation. I independently confirmed the unconditional computer-use import, forwarded undeclared agent_type option, result-file read-back and existing-directory skipping. The tracked-tree query for skillweaver/openai_cua returned no entries, supporting RT-ABS-cua-module within its stated boundary. Local scoring/output wiring can coexist with an obstructed enclosing entry. No working clean-pin evaluation, achieved score or score-fed skill revision is claimed.

Epistemic, workflow and reconciliation

I checked every epistemic object and route against its producer and consumer. EPI-OBJ-trajectory-string, EPI-OBJ-success-result and EPI-OBJ-benchmark-result distinguish selected evidence, task-success inference and benchmark scores. The remaining four epistemic objects identify the same code, docstring, metadata and semantic parts as their memory counterparts; the four supersessions preserve identity and separate findings. The broader trace container remains valid beside its selected text and diagnostic parts.

EPI-RTE-success-check and EPI-RTE-success-decision are supported by complete SRC-1, skillweaver/knowledge_base/check_success.py and the exploration branch. A model infers task success from incomplete visible evidence; software accepts the episode for synthesis input, not the unseen generalized skill. This supports separate checking and disposition functions and the stated narrow license. EPI-RTE-tested-label correctly distinguishes automatic counter admission from an unevaluated caller override and later filtering. Its ledger entries do not confuse operational authority with semantic warrant.

Complete SRC-1, skillweaver/knowledge_base/code_verification.py, skillweaver/sanity_check_code.py, skillweaver/knowledge_base/type_checking.py and skillweaver/knowledge_base/generate_schema.py support EPI-RTE-code-check and EPI-RTE-skill-merge. Navigation occurrence is not first-command enforcement; docstring presence is not truth checking; delegated type diagnostics do not prove website effects. Global fence cleanup can alter literal documentation, and arbitrary candidate content relations remain indeterminate. Installation and retention do not establish accepted generalization or lifecycle integration.

Direct reads of the string and URL evaluator bodies in SRC-1, skillweaver/evaluation/webarena_evaluators.py, and complete dispatch/output reads support EPI-RTE-benchmark-check and EPI-RTE-score-retention. Normalized equality/inclusion, URL containment and fuzzy-model handoff have distinct scopes. Results feed reporting, not skill acceptance or rollback. Unassessed HTML/visual/debug details prevent a complete evaluator-warrant comparison; the emitted findings are already local and do not assert it.

Full SRC-1, README.md, skillweaver/templates/kb_procedural_update_base.md and skillweaver/templates/kb_procedural_update_single.md support the attributed RT-CLM-self-improvement and EPI-CLM-website-knowledge claims. The opening four bodies/docstrings in SRC-1, skillnet/map/map_kb_post_code.py confirm a shipped usage-success candidate, not its route-linked provenance. The connected trace-to-update-to-live-consumer path supports improvement-directed dispositional self-change. It does not establish exercised dependence, successful learning, causal benefit, reflection or formulated content-directed criticism.

Every Part of: relation has supported containment: serialization within native tasks; success check, synthesis permission and test predicate within practice; checker and merge within admission; scoring and retention within evaluation. The tested-label route properly spans override and shared filtering beyond a single parent. No missing material split is needed to preserve the stated findings. Status differences between an afforded benchmark container and wired local parts concern different scopes, not a conflict to settle by choosing the stronger value.

The workflow account is supported by the complete orchestration trace: configuration, task choice, action execution, returned evidence, synthesis permission and checkpoint delivery are connected. Save is outside the success-true branch; exceptions can prevent delivery; initial selection and some cleanup lie outside the local handler; manual restart is not automatic rollback; zero CLI exit does not prove success. Last-action recovery, not any earlier recovery alone, excludes the test shortcut.

The reconciliation dispositions accurately recognize the corrected peers and retain no current conflict. The epistemic record's retrospective reference to earlier stronger runtime wording is not a current stronger execution finding; its substantive predicate assessment agrees with the current runtime. I dismiss that historical phrasing as nonmaterial rather than carrying a false disagreement forward. Recovery-text refinements, memory integration uncertainties and duplicate identities are explicitly connected without changing record values. All source anchors and retained passages were assessed for meaning and scope; deterministic quotation occurrence and link resolution remain the validator's responsibility.

Omission search and stopping decision

The frozen tree, alternate shipped drivers and producer/consumer dependencies selected three consequential questions: whether another maintenance path actively changes semantic text or consumes optional selection/export APIs; whether another caller feeds benchmark scores into skill admission; and whether testing establishes execution. Scoped Python searches across SRC-1, skillweaver/, complete knowledge-base/template-loader reads, and complete SRC-1, skillweaver/evaluation/run_experiment.py and skillweaver/util/run_for_demo_video.py support capability-only wording for optional methods and reporting-only wording for these wrappers. Multiple-episode/semantic templates do not establish an active additional updater. Missing referenced configurations/libraries do not supply observed runs. Shipped callers were traced as target responsibilities, not excluded merely for calling APIs.

The testing question is source-settled and its consequential wording is repaired. The other selected questions have supported bounded dispositions. Further expansion into every shipped skill body, evaluator variant or container detail is not reasonably likely to change the retained conclusions at their stated breadth. Those alternatives prevent all-skills correctness, complete scoring-warrant and end-to-end reliability comparisons, which the reports already withhold. Search stops without treating unsearched behavior as absent. The remaining uncertainty is faithfully scoped in the records; no additional publication limit is required.

Blockers

none

Limits

none