Prove2Me_workspace report verification

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

Verification

The reports support a bounded account of a prescribed workflow, with separately implemented extraction helpers. No material report defect was established. The boundary remains appropriate: this is a complete artifact with a partial loop, not an implemented enclosing runtime. I independently checked the frozen checkout's HEAD, clean status and tracked tree. HEAD equals the reviewed boundary. All source inspection stayed within SRC-1 in the Source register; no target, test, example or service was executed.

I read every supplied report and reconciliation completely. The four answer files are empty, and the structural report-check reports none; there are no correction arguments or structural failures to route. I independently read README.md, SKILL.md, .gitignore, every references/ playbook, both scripts/ helpers and Solutions/SmokeTest.lean. These reads supply doctrine/design and helper implementation evidence, not observed workflow operation. I also inspected the worked example's source, expected JSONL and generated platform files to test the reports' execution-evidence boundary.

Runtime, objects and authority

Entry, model and instruction surfaces. RT-CMP-agent-model, RT-OBJ-skill, RT-BAP-role-guidance and RT-RTE-workspace-refresh correctly distinguish prose-directed host actions from a shipped controller. The source prescribes role loading, independent auditors and a version-triggered repository pull; it does not identify deployed model parameters, implemented context isolation or evidence-responsive improvement of the instruction content. Model fixity and operation remain uninspected rather than absent. SRC-1, SKILL.md, references/setup.md, references/mission_auditor.md.

Formal checking and reductions. RT-OBJ-solution, RT-RTE-solver-proof, RT-RTE-reduction-proof and RT-CLM-verification-boundary preserve the exact-target oracle, whole-proposition negation, self-import prohibition, sorry-free submitted code and conditional Open-child imports. The server owns the claimed check and closure; local compilation is not equivalent admission. Terminal errors and new submissions provide the documented repair path. The report's separate contract, implementation and operation statuses are supported. The theory assessments describe localized propositions and requested content-sensitive iteration without inventing observed criticism, learning or autonomy. SRC-1, references/prove.md, references/lean-setup.md, references/mission_solver.md.

Proposal and alternative publication. RT-RTE-proposal-audit, RT-RTE-content-publish, RT-CLM-human-gate, RT-OBJ-readback and RT-BAP-milestone-guidance retain distinct consumers and gates. Blind testimony goes to human source comparison, not an auditor faithfulness verdict. Read-back is optional service content. Human submission publishes declarations before public catalog approval; private launch skips moderation. Direct contributions, upload-first and private-tree release prevent a universal proposal-confirmation gate. Release itself requests human authorization in the playbook; permission to call an API is not permission to publish without that decision. Deprecation and milestone unlinking do not revoke existing imports or membership. SRC-1, references/mission_captain.md, references/mission_auditor.md, references/contribute.md.

Extraction and upload. RT-CMP-extract-decl-graph, RT-CMP-extract-sketch-info, RT-RTE-project-upload, EPI-RTE-extraction-facts and EPI-CLM-graph-truth correctly bound the implemented facts. I traced Stage 1's module filter, private-name retention, type/value dependency collection and traversal through filtered constants. I traced Stage 2's elaboration-error return before fact output, declaration markers, original-position constant selection, prefix filtering, deduplication and sorting. The epistemic hypothetical tuple trace follows the actual fold but is not execution evidence. Recursive-local references are outside its emitted surface. Instance roots, span containment and re-extraction are downstream obligations; exact-payload compilation and type diff remain requested gates, not shipped converter guarantees. SRC-1, scripts/extract_decl_graph.lean, scripts/extract_sketch_info.lean, references/upload_full_project.md.

Memory and epistemic lenses

I checked each retained object's producer, admission, storage, form, later consumer and withdrawal scope against its cited source:

The epistemic ledger and bounded conclusion preserve check versus disposition, retention versus integration, and formal warrant versus source faithfulness. Their doctrine-only assessments do not claim external backend implementation. Indeterminate source-to-code and code-to-prose transformations appropriately withhold semantic-preservation claims without concrete input/output evidence. The source supports the requested workflow capacities despite the absence of exercised acceptance or causal benefit.

Workflow and reconciliation

The workflow account faithfully traces one connected source-to-public-mission procedure. I checked delegation inputs and return, human confirmations, compile-and-publish ordering, moderator delivery, correction ownership and private launch against SRC-1, references/mission_captain.md, references/mission_auditor.md. Its annotations preserve the existing route and read-back identities. Reviewed delivers a public mission, not a proof. The account does not infer transactional rollback from whole-submit failure.

I checked every identity overlap in reconciliation. Valid containers can coexist with narrower objects; no coextensive duplicate needing supersession was established. No Amendment is asserted. All three explicit Part of: relations are semantically supported: scouting is a part of the solver route; upload retained state and executable extraction are different parts of the project-upload route. Cross-kind containment is explained rather than treated as identity. All evidenced-absence sections are empty; no bounded absence record needs acceptance. Annotations add lens-specific findings without replacing generic identities or statuses.

The reconciliation disposes every memory integration issue and preserves the reports' separate evidence strengths. Its finding of no unresolved inter-report disagreement is supported. Submission PATCH uncertainty is instead an actual inconsistency between two source contracts, retained below; it does not require reconciliation to invent a disagreement between analysts who both qualify that gate.

Consequential omission searches and stopping

The tracked tree and skill routing selected three omission questions: whether another shipped path bypasses proposal admission; whether retained history has an actual later consumer rather than mere storage; and whether example artifacts establish operation or acceptance omitted by the reports. Full playbook inspection confirmed the alternative publishing/release, campaign and collection paths already represented. Read-side tracing confirmed requested consumers for failures, milestones, reviews and discussions, without establishing automatic context push, token allocation or hidden host learning. Additional theorem-to-mission navigation in SRC-1, references/discover.md does not change the partial scouting inventory's conclusions about mathematical admission or warrant.

For examples, I read all four source Lean files, all four expected JSONL files and all five generated platform Lean files under SRC-1, examples/upload_full_project/. They provide concrete candidate declarations, proof payloads and structural output, but no service verdict, accepted submission ID, agent trajectory or compiler log. Their README attributes generation and compilation to a performed run; the boundary already retains that reported-operation layer. Inspection does not promote it into independently observed checking or establish a concrete accepted ampliative product. For example, the generated parent solution explicitly distinguishes possible future statuses:

-- Open at submission time this verifies as SKETCH_ACCEPTED, and as ACCEPTED -- once it is Proved (leaves-first upload). --- examples/upload_full_project/expected/platform/Solutions/Sol_SumSquares_six_sumSq.lean

These candidates do not contradict the reports' scoped non-observation findings. Their deliberate small-example node promotion also does not establish a general converter implementation. Further omission expansion stopped because the selected challenges have supported dispositions and no identified material challenge remains unresolved. The account is sufficient for its declared workflow and helper boundary, not an exhaustive behavioral inventory or a reliability comparison of the external host and service.

Blockers

none

Limits

  • The submission PATCH contract remains inconsistent in SRC-1. The memory integration issue, RT-RTE-solver-proof, RT-RTE-content-publish and reconciliation disposition correctly retain immutable proof code and patchable explanation without choosing a universal edit gate. references/prove.md rejects every non-explanation key and restricts PATCH to the creator, whereas references/contribute.md prescribes submission deprecation with wider retirement authority. Withhold conclusions about exact backend accepted keys and universal submission-edit permissions. Formal checking, later source retrieval and the separately documented retirement workflow remain supported as bounded contracts.

  • 400 — body contains any key other than explanation, wrong type, or oversized. --- references/prove.md

  • Submission (proof / sketch) — PATCH /api/v1/submissions/:id with { "deprecated": true }. --- references/contribute.md