Stigmergy synthesis verification

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

Verification

The handed public synthesis is supported within its declared evidence boundary. No material blocker remains. Its Limitations carry the report verification's context-budget limit and both disagreements retained by reconciliation. Profile verification declares no additional limit.

I read the complete invocation, governing job, worker rules, member types, collection and records contract, and all handed members and synthesis answers. I checked substantive synthesis statements against their cited accounts, declarations and annotations, then checked reconciliation for supersessions and conflicts. There are no supersessions. The synthesis answers are empty and no refusal was supplied. No source ambiguity required an additional source read; no source evidence, correction or new record was added.

Boundary, admission and delivered work

The opening identifies the whole-system knowledge-system boundary, frozen revision, cutoff and code-grounded evidence basis without treating implementation as observed deployment. Its exclusions agree with the boundary. The distinction between model proposals and software effects is supported by RT-OBJ-filing-plan, RT-RTE-capture-filing and RT-RTE-scoped-answer. It does not imply a separate sandbox or an enclosing autonomous runtime.

The audience paragraph preserves explicit/default/classified alternatives, including the possible public default outside classifier choices, rather than widening the classifier restriction into universal admission safety. Its reader-scope qualification preserves principal binding and database-role dependencies. Original bytes, readable extraction and source pages remain separate, with lineage distinguished from fidelity and truth: RT-RTE-layer-routing, MEM-OBJ-artifact, MEM-OBJ-source and EPI-RTE-evidence-extraction.

The representative capture progression agrees with the workflow account: queued receipt, current-authority recheck, isolated planning, typed proposal, mechanical admission, publication and queue finalization. Rejected plans can yield only a source, but the synthesis expressly retains fallback gates rather than promising unconditional archival success. It distinguishes forward reconciliation from rollback, and publication from asynchronous indexing, as supported by EPI-RTE-filing-retention, MEM-OBJ-knowledge-changes and RT-RTE-index-convergence.

Selection, checks and authority

The filing-context account preserves name/lexical selection, whole-object eviction and lack of in-call reload. It carries the compact-versus-indented size discrepancy and final-candidate eviction exception beside the nominal cap, and again in Limitations. Thus the runtime's broad budget wording is not strengthened into guaranteed rendering: RT-RTE-capture-filing and the memory annotation.

The synthesis distinguishes structural filing checks from semantic acceptance while retaining the narrower content-specific alias and merge mechanisms. The 0.75 alias threshold does not become independent identity proof; merge remains conditional on the imported assertion and restricted grammar. These distinctions follow EPI-RTE-filing-check, EPI-RTE-filing-transform, MEM-RTE-alias-recording, EPI-RTE-merge-check and EPI-RTE-entity-merge. It makes neither a system-wide syntactic-only claim nor an unsupported accepted-ampliative-knowledge claim.

Later consumers receive selected evidence rather than an endorsement. Body, metadata, warning and retrieval-vector roles remain distinct, and an excerpt can omit a retained contradiction warning. Automatic initial selection is distinguished from explicit requested retrieval without implying an unsolicited background memory service: MEM-OBJ-knowledge-body, MEM-OBJ-page-metadata, MEM-OBJ-contradiction-display and MEM-RTE-scoped-reading.

The answer account correctly separates figures checked against recorded tool evidence from quotations checked against refetched scoped heads and recorded fragment windows. It explicitly withholds prior-delivery and snapshot guarantees, resolving the public consequence of the reconciliation discrepancy without silently rewriting the runtime record. Occurrence is not represented as entailment. The nonnumeric contradiction example is an implementation deduction, not an observed exploit. The single citation-only partial exception, figure suppression, stricter budget completion and unverified raw read products remain visible: RT-RTE-scoped-answer, EPI-RTE-answer-check and EPI-RTE-answer-disposition.

Maintenance, adaptation and assessment

The maintenance account confines capture preservation and named resolution to their route rather than extending them to garden body replacement. It asserts no actual garden loss. Source immutability is ordinary-path protection, not a global prohibition on authorized deletion or erasure. Managed withdrawal is not a verdict of falsity or proof of all-copies deletion: EPI-RTE-contradiction-disposition, RT-RTE-maintenance-admission, EPI-RTE-evidence-withdrawal and the epistemic conclusion.

The public account leads with supported durable corpus/lookup adaptation, then separately withholds improved future capacity, criticism-caused improvement, reflection, autonomous theory building and exercised self-improvement. It does not infer absence from missing run evidence or exclude corpus outputs from behavior-determining organization merely because they are products. It also avoids inventing a condition-by-condition theory-builder assessment that the runtime did not provide. The distinction between retained contradiction reasons and mutation manifests lacking an established automatic model reader follows the memory write side and RT-BAP-corpus-data.

Release evaluation remains distinct from per-capture admission. QA reporting, configuration-level parity, external review and bypassable deployment are not strengthened into proof that this revision passed, was installed or improved subsequent operation. The synthesis preserves the unestablished evidence-to-update and downstream causal links: EPI-RTE-qa-evaluation, EPI-RTE-release-evaluation, EPI-RTE-release-admission and RT-RTE-product-admission.

The closing scenarios follow these bounded mechanisms rather than ranking products or recommending adoption. The evidence proposed for stronger conclusions matches the unresolved questions: input/output traces for semantic transformation, provenance-linked later use for exercise, and appropriate contrasts for benefit attribution. The limitations table preserves incomplete inspection, mixed provenance, external contracts, route-specific preservation and fixture/configuration scope without recasting them as evidenced absences. Apart from the carried context-budget discrepancy below, these are faithfully scoped uncertainties, not additional defects.

Blockers

none

Limits

• The carried context-budget discrepancy concerns RT-RTE-capture-filing and the memory annotation, SRC-1 src/stigmergy/knowledge/context.py: compact-size trimming precedes a separate indented-size rejection check, and excess source evidence may be removed before the final candidate. Withhold guaranteed successful rendering and strict all-candidates-before-any-evidence eviction. Bounded selection, isolation and lack of in-call filing reload remain supported. The synthesis and its Limitations already carry these consequences; no correction is required.