EchoesVault for OpenCode reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and duplicate identities

The four reports use the same frozen revision and the implementation and doctrine/design layers of the Source register. None supplies observed operation or causal evidence. This reconciliation connects their pinned findings; it makes no additional source reads and changes no analyst finding. No correction answers or declined objections were supplied to this attempt.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-summary-migrate is superseded by MEM-RTE-summary-migration. Both declare the same init/migrate/upgrade subroute: match a missing page summary to an unambiguous legacy index description, normalize and inject it, then regenerate discovery. Their retained passages show the same normalize_summary and inject_summary operations in SRC-1, scripts/echoes_vault.py. Both retain wired implementation and uninspected operation, unresolved description provenance, mechanical vetoes and lack of batch rollback. The epistemic ledger's non-ampliative reshaping and unchanged source warrant concern this same route; supersession changes neither assessment. Both records remain parts of RT-RTE-runtime-install, not duplicates of the complete installation route.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-daily-entry is superseded by MEM-OBJ-daily. Both identify caller-supplied scratchpad/session text in daily Markdown files, with filename/header/agent wrappers and later recent-entry consumption. Their producer links and wrapper passages in SRC-1, scripts/echoes_vault.py, establish the shared stored-object identity. The memory record additionally accounts for legacy files and unresolved origins; this does not create a different operative object. Epistemic findings about potential truth-apt content, unknown warrant and lack of authenticated provenance remain attached to the daily contents. Neither object is identical to its append or finalization producer route.

Containers, parts and distinct routes

EPI-OBJ-knowledge-page identifies a complete page, whereas MEM-OBJ-page-body identifies its body and MEM-OBJ-page-metadata identifies its frontmatter. Full identity is ruled out: body interpretation/search and metadata parsing/rendering have different consumers. The complete-page record is a valid container, not a competing body-only declaration. Its truth-apt-content uncertainty concerns unsupplied project claims, not uncertainty about implemented parser consumption. No split supersession is needed because the container's findings do not become false when the parts are distinguished.

EPI-OBJ-page-summary keeps authored summary metadata and its generated discovery view together. It overlaps the summary portion of MEM-OBJ-page-metadata and the derived MEM-OBJ-index, but is identical to neither: the metadata record also covers required fields and symbolic status consumption, while the index record identifies the disposable derived file. Its declared containment in the complete page concerns the summary, with the derived view described along that path. Both reports distinguish source summary from generated view and acknowledge omitted body qualifiers. These valid descriptions require no combined-record split or identity supersession. No required operative part is missing from the supplied declarations.

EPI-OBJ-health-card and MEM-OBJ-local-state overlap saved-state predicates but are not identical. The former includes transient health dictionaries and rendered cards; the latter is persisted session/version/counter bookkeeping, also polled by the TUI. A persisted input and a diagnostic/display result retain different identities. Neither is a stored factual evaluation of project knowledge.

EPI-RTE-health-report traces shared structural evaluation, aggregation, state-statistics use and card/start-warning consumption. MEM-RTE-health-report traces requested diagnosis and display, including the independent TUI polling path. Full route identity is ruled out: the shared diagnostic segment does not make the complete endpoint sets identical. The epistemic distinction between check-result production and advisory consumption supplements the memory account's display/diagnosis scope. Both retain wired implementation and uninspected operation; neither attributes semantic repair or factual admission to a health label.

EPI-RTE-index-render is a shared helper across restoration, writing, installation and maintenance, not a duplicate of any complete runtime route. EPI-RTE-page-check is the preflight part of RT-RTE-page-upsert, reused by RT-RTE-session-save. EPI-RTE-session-distill is the requested semantic-proposal stage of finalization, not its mechanical admission or persistence stage. Containment and helper reuse establish connections, not record identities or inherited statuses. In particular, claimed semantic transformation and wired prompt delivery/writing are compatible findings about different operations.

The claims are also distinct: RT-CLM-explicit-save concerns lifecycle capability gating; EPI-CLM-project-knowledge concerns the intended content and canonical-storage role; EPI-CLM-index-integrity concerns deterministic discovery and structural consistency. None supersedes another. EPI-ABS-semantic-check adds a searched, engine-bounded negative; it is not identical to any positive writer route or a negative about the enclosing host. The workflow member declares no additional records and annotates existing runtime routes instead.

Independent convergence and integration dispositions

The memory annotations and epistemic ledger independently retain the runtime restoration distinction: RT-RTE-context-restore delivers the full generated index and a filename-selected daily subset, with literal search and host-directed full reads as separate detail access. Count/result/display limits do not establish a token-window bound, relevance ranking, actual full-page consumption or changed decisions. The generated local start template's omission of the bundled prompt's explicit project-data warning is a path-specific limitation recorded in memory integration issues, not a disagreement with RT-BAP-project-context, which attributes that wording to the bundled prompt. The epistemic project-knowledge claim additionally quotes the protocol's project-data rule. None establishes uniform enforcement by all adapters or host compliance.

RT-RTE-page-upsert, RT-RTE-daily-append and RT-RTE-session-save support the memory distinction between caller proposal, software admission and physical persistence. The epistemic ledger preserves those operations separately from factual acceptance and post-acceptance integration. Its bounded absence does not contradict structural evaluation, requested verified decisions or possible external human verification. Unknown initial page/daily/raw/asset provenance in MEM-OBJ-source-material and the other memory objects limits origin and warrant conclusions without erasing known summary migration, normalization or index generation.

The workflow account specializes finalization rather than changing its runtime finding. It distinguishes stale-hash preflight rejection, which precedes that handler's persistence sequence, from later I/O failure, which can leave earlier files installed. Its grant-retention/retry account agrees with RT-RTE-session-save and RT-CLM-explicit-save: path-local authorization is neither per-claim approval nor exactly-once execution, and CLI confirmation and ungated writes remain alternative paths. Successful local acknowledgement is not remote publication, truthful content or later reliance.

The reports also preserve three different authority consumers: host interpretation of project data through RT-BAP-project-context, host-loaded procedural guidance through RT-BAP-agent-guidance, and interpreter execution through RT-BAP-project-runtime. Compatible-version delegation is not authenticated executable identity. Static instruction installation is not accumulated-use memory or evidence-responsive self-improvement. The host-model unknowns in RT-CMP-host-model remain independent of the inspectable text-retention routes.

No unresolved inter-report disagreement was found in the supplied versions. The memory integration issues resolve as the path-specific warning limit, containment/distinct-identity dispositions above, and retained provenance/consumption unknowns. No dependent finding requires a supplied record to say something it no longer says. Missing execution, concrete project claims, host reasoning and comparison evidence remain limitations shared by the reports, not conflicts to settle or grounds to select a stronger status.