SkillLift reconciliation
Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-reconciliation-report.md
Reconciliation
Boundary and identity dispositions
The reports share the improvement-plane scope in the boundary. Their implementation findings do not establish observed operation or causal benefit. Unavailable benchmark/host dependencies prevent end-to-end verification; available but uninspected repository paths separately prevent exhaustive repository-wide conclusions. The workflow account selects the connected WildClaw task workflow. Category and domain drivers are alternatives, not omitted stages of that workflow. Workflow annotations add ordering, handoff and delivery findings without declaring new records.
No duplicate identity or supersession is established. The following comparisons rule out identity rather than selecting one analyst's declaration over another:
- MEM-OBJ-skill-instructions is instruction content inside RT-OBJ-portfolio-ref. MEM-OBJ-receipt-rubrics and MEM-OBJ-receipt-metadata are differently consumed parts of RT-OBJ-receipt. These separations do not invalidate the runtime containers.
- MEM-OBJ-candidate-record is a reconstruction recipe, not the portfolio tree. MEM-OBJ-search-state is planning/control history, not a skill or receipt. MEM-OBJ-revision-attempts includes rejected proposals and repair evidence, not only the admitted receipt. Their production and consumption within runtime routes do not make them those routes.
- MEM-OBJ-category-round and MEM-OBJ-cluster-checkpoint are state parts of RT-RTE-category-training and RT-RTE-domain-fusion. They are not the enclosing routes or each other; their resume checks differ. MEM-OBJ-master-skill is a separately bundled domain product, not a task portfolio or checkpoint. MEM-OBJ-behavior-summary is retained diagnostic material, not the domain guide.
- EPI-OBJ-verifier-score is a judgment/arithmetic result, not the receipt policy. EPI-OBJ-evidence-package combines multiple inputs into a request view, not an alternate portfolio, receipt or revision archive.
- EPI-RTE-evidence-packing, EPI-RTE-verifier-check and EPI-RTE-receipt-check isolate packing, judgment/arithmetic and structural checking. They feed broader runtime routes rather than duplicate branch refinement or receipt revision. EPI-RTE-category-fusion and EPI-RTE-tau2-evaluator are subroutes of category training and domain training/consumption, respectively, not replacements for those routes. EPI-RTE-artifact-audit is post-run reporting, distinct from logical-cell recovery and skill withdrawal.
- EPI-CLM-local-safety, EPI-CLM-ranking-surrogate and EPI-CLM-ablation-mechanism concern safety, surrogate alignment and reported comparisons. None duplicates the inner-loop oracle-cost claim RT-CLM-mode-a, the persistence finding RT-CLM-refinement-replay, or the routes to which those claims refer.
Connected findings
The workflow and memory accounts converge with RT-RTE-task-evolution, RT-RTE-branch-refinement and RT-RTE-receipt-revision. Models propose directions, patches and judgments; code schedules and admits them. Local refinement requires nondecreasing verifier score. Successor admission requires valid benchmark improvement or an oracle tie with verifier gain. Calibration follows that decision, uses the pre-round champion and evaluated candidates, and changes subsequent scoring rather than the already-selected winner. The epistemic ledger separates these checks and dispositions. Its README comparisons concern source-claim mismatches, not disagreements with the other reports.
MEM-OBJ-candidate-record, the workflow recovery account and the epistemic recovery row retain the conditional risk in RT-CLM-refinement-replay: an actually changed, accepted Mode A refinement can differ from the original patch reconstructed on resume. No member reports an observed failure. Category/domain full snapshots do not refute this task-scoped finding. RT-RTE-cell-recovery concerns logical-result reuse and physical-attempt recovery, not faithful reconstruction of every refined tree. Workflow further limits retryability to cells that later control flow actually reaches; a retryable cell need not reopen a stopped task.
The memory rationale finding adds delivery evidence without demonstrating reliance. MEM-OBJ-receipt-metadata establishes full receipt serialization into later verifier/revision requests. RT-RTE-receipt-revision leaves diagnostic-rationale consumption uninspected and content-directed criticism requested rather than observed. These are compatible as delivery versus actual reliance. EPI-RTE-receipt-check checks removal bookkeeping, not semantic support for the reasons. None of these findings upgrades diagnosis quality, learning or exercised self-improvement. Provider mutability remains independently unresolved in RT-CMP-llm-client.
MEM-OBJ-behavior-summary establishes message-derived diagnostics and their retention, while its public-score projection passage excludes feedback metadata from shared receipt revision. The trajectory-excluded view in EPI-OBJ-evidence-package therefore does not imply that no summaries exist. Scalar outcomes can shape later policy without full trajectories. Summary retention alone establishes no summary-driven instruction induction; uninspected raw-trajectory readers prevent a repository-wide negative.
Corrections and integration-issue dispositions
The previous reconciliation's evidence-preservation conflict is not retained. The corrected memory annotation on RT-RTE-receipt-revision, in memory Annotations, now agrees with EPI-RTE-evidence-packing and EPI-OBJ-evidence-package. Their SRC-1 passages from skilllift/skilllift/rubricator.py and skilllift/skilllift/coordinator/modes.py distinguish exact-key protection from manifest-relative paths. Under a positive evidence budget, prefixed instruction bodies can be truncated or omitted as auxiliary files. Memory additionally establishes that ordinary task Mode B supplies no evidence budget: that caller includes all bodies and uses a character preflight that can reject the request. The epistemic record's budget-conditional qualification does not assert default-path truncation. The current reports therefore permit neither universal budgeted body preservation nor default truncation. This disposition follows the changed memory finding, not the previous reconciliation's characterization.
The corrected RT-RTE-domain-fusion also changes the integration account: the domain driver passes each cluster's final training artifact, the writer exports every current skill, and fusion loads all skill metadata entries and their SKILL.md bodies without consulting the separately saved oracle rank. The record retains SRC-1 handoff, export and loader passages from scripts/skilllift_tau2_run_domain.py and skilllift_eval/runners/skilllift_tau2.py. Lower-ranked current skills can therefore reach fusion; a winner-only lineage connection is ruled out. MEM-OBJ-master-skill describes retained cluster bodies and structural fusion admission without requiring winner-only selection, so it does not depend on the replaced runtime characterization. The epistemic domain-consumption row concerns output association and semantic limits, not winner-only inputs. Category fusion remains different: MEM-OBJ-category-round and EPI-RTE-category-fusion describe batch-winner payloads. Those category findings cannot be transferred to domain fusion.
Memory's other admission findings supplement explicitly uninspected runtime details. Category completed-round snapshots use configuration-compatible markers and immediate verifier nondecrease; MEM-OBJ-cluster-checkpoint identifies a domain checkpoint loader without configuration-signature comparison. Memory's domain annotation identifies structural update admission without category's immediate nondecrease check. Neither finding conflicts with the runtime's scoped uncertainty. Category fusion admits newly composed final content after package/name checks rather than inheriting measured winner performance. Domain fusion's requested conflict handling and rule preservation remain distinct from verified semantic curation; copied input hash labels and checked output equality establish different associations. EPI-RTE-tau2-evaluator adds an external assertion-evaluator dependency without asserting activation. None establishes downstream compliance under RT-BAP-skill-delivery.
No unresolved cross-report disagreement remains in the supplied versions. Their remaining uncertainty limits conclusions rather than contradicting another report's finding. No correction-answer files or declined objections were supplied; the changed primary-report findings above supply the correction evidence available to this attempt. No frozen-source read was needed: the cited records and annotations supply the relevant passages and positions. This reconciliation neither judges their evidential sufficiency nor rewrites their findings.