OpenKB reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and identity

The supplied reports share the frozen revision and run identity in boundary. Their evidence is SRC-1 implementation and doctrine/design, not observed runs or causal experiments. This reconciliation uses the current supplied members and their retained evidence; no additional source reads were needed. No correction answers or refusal were supplied. The previous reconciliation's connections were reassessed against the current reports, including the runtime's corrected save and artifact-consumer wording.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-source-content is superseded by MEM-OBJ-source-content. Both identify converted source Markdown, long-document page JSON and associated images, rather than generated wiki bodies. The memory record's SRC-1 openkb/indexer.py export passage and the epistemic record's openkb/agent/query.py instruction to follow full_text identify the same retained input/evidence artifacts. This connects the epistemic acquisition/import assessment to the memory lineage and consumer account, without replacing either finding about unknown source warrant or extraction fidelity. Both IDs remain declared.

Other overlaps do not establish whole-record identity requiring supersession:

• RT-OBJ-wiki-pages remains a valid body container for the explicitly declared parts EPI-OBJ-summary, EPI-OBJ-concept and EPI-OBJ-entity. Their different production contexts do not make the container's findings wrong. MEM-OBJ-page-frontmatter and MEM-OBJ-index identify metadata and catalog material explicitly excluded from the body's identity.
• EPI-OBJ-answer spans immediate answers, saved exploration prose and chat answer turns. MEM-OBJ-explorations identifies persisted answer/note files; MEM-OBJ-session-history also contains tool records and other history. Neither replaces the epistemic referent in full. MEM-OBJ-session-display has a different filter and browser/human consumer from SDK history despite sharing its JSON substrate.
• EPI-OBJ-lint-report covers issue claims and combined report output, while MEM-OBJ-diagnostics also covers operation logs. Their report overlap is not identity of the whole diagnostics container. Neither asserts identical lineage for raw logs and derived assessment.
• EPI-OBJ-skill-content identifies activation description, body and Markdown references. MEM-OBJ-skill-package additionally includes package structure and possible scripts. The evaluator's text selection does not replace the entire package. MEM-OBJ-iterations identifies alternate checkpoints, not the active package or the installed-instruction authority path RT-BAP-skill-instructions.
• EPI-OBJ-eval-prompts includes generated or loaded in-memory question/label pairs; MEM-OBJ-eval-sets identifies optional saved JSON. The persisted overlap does not make these coextensive objects.

Routes and independent convergence

MEM-RTE-skill-eval describes the diagnostic CLI evaluation and optional saved-question reuse. EPI-RTE-eval-set, EPI-RTE-trigger-grade and EPI-RTE-body-grade distinguish reference production/reload and two different graders within that broader progression. They do not replace an erroneous combined finding. Both reports retain diagnostic force, generated or supplied expected activation labels, character-limited reference previews and no automatic skill-successor selection. These routes are distinct from skill creation in RT-RTE-skill-create.

EPI-RTE-semantic-lint and EPI-RTE-source-withdrawal are explicitly declared parts of RT-RTE-wiki-maintain. EPI-RTE-link-cleanup spans compilation, save and fix callers rather than belonging to exactly one runtime route. No split supersession is required: the maintenance container retains valid entry-level findings. Memory's maintenance annotation and the epistemic withdrawal counterexample independently show that source-list/link cleanup need not subtract factual contributions from surviving multisource prose. This qualifies the cleanup scope without disputing source deletion or partial PageIndex retry behavior.

MEM-RTE-page-edit concerns page-body replacement/deletion rather than document removal/recompile/lint. Preserved frontmatter and differing catalog refresh rules connect it to MEM-OBJ-page-frontmatter and MEM-OBJ-index. These findings prevent assuming metadata/body equivalence; they do not establish an observed stale KB. MEM-RTE-host-read concerns instructed direct navigation by an excluded host, not the internal SDK query route RT-RTE-wiki-query. Their afforded and wired statuses describe different paths, not a disagreement.

The workflow annotation on RT-RTE-deck-produce supplies handoff and timing details without redeclaring the route. WF-CLM-cli-delivery concerns the outer CLI overwrite and exit-status contract, not the inner producer/critic route's identity. A failed CLI status on validation errors coexists with retained files and the wrapper returning the producer result. Runtime and workflow agree that producer validation precedes possible critic writes and no wrapper revalidation follows. The critic's trimming versus no-content-edit instructions are a source-level tension reported by workflow, not conflicting analyst findings or demonstrated content alteration.

EPI-CLM-current-synthesis, EPI-CLM-grounded-answer and EPI-CLM-body-alignment concern stronger coverage or warrant claims than the basic product claim RT-CLM-compiled-wiki. They are not duplicate claims. Their comparisons preserve implemented synthesis, retrieval and diagnostic checks while distinguishing structural admission and retention from semantic acceptance. RT-CLM-wiki-trust remains external-host policy, not demonstrated enforcement or immunity.

Integration dispositions and disagreements

The previous save/catalog conflict no longer holds between the supplied findings. The current runtime account associated with RT-RTE-wiki-query explicitly states that neither inspected exploration-save implementation updates the catalog. This agrees with MEM-OBJ-explorations and MEM-OBJ-index, whose SRC-1 openkb/cli.py evidence separates exploration writes from catalog admission. Memory's first Integration issue still describes a correction to the older runtime association; that description is not evidence that the current runtime retains it. Both current accounts permit explicit later reads without guaranteed catalog-mediated rediscovery. Memory additionally distinguishes the helper's locking, unique-slug and escaping behavior from the duplicated CLI branch; runtime does not extend those guarantees to that branch.

The previous output-artifact consumer conflict also no longer holds. RT-RTE-deck-produce now identifies critic reads and later CLI /critique dispatch to a separate skill runner, explicitly withholding an inference of ordinary foreground-chat output reads or shared history. This agrees with memory's annotation on RT-RTE-session-chat: chat reads remain wiki-rooted despite output write authority. Workflow's deck-route annotation identifies the runner critic's artifact handoff, not a foreground-chat grant. The runtime account retains the SRC-1 openkb/agent/chat.py slash-command dispatch passage; no consumer-specific discrepancy remains among these findings.

Memory's remaining integration issues are compatible qualifications: withdrawal is not semantic forgetting; the additional page-edit, evaluation and host-read paths are distinct; initial schema/skill authorship and provider/PageIndex internals remain unresolved; metadata freshness is not guaranteed. Known loading, replacement, transformation and read-back mechanisms coexist with those limits. No supplied record requires an undeclared part to correct a combined finding, and no remaining cross-report disagreement was identified.

Across RT-RTE-document-add, RT-RTE-session-chat, RT-RTE-skill-create, the memory annotations and the epistemic bounded conclusion, delivery and persistence are not equated with compliance, warrant or improved capacity. Missing activation, learning benefit, reflection, method-revision and exercised self-improvement evidence limits those properties independently. It does not cancel the positive retention, rewriting, context-selection, diagnostic or work-product editing mechanisms.