Memex reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

The reports share the boundary and Source register: SRC-1 supplies implementation and doctrine/design, not observed runs or causal experiments. These connections were assessed against the supplied versions. No source checkout was read. No analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied; memory's own integration issues describe its withdrawal correction.

Duplicate supersessions

The following amendments identify common referents. They replace neither a report's values nor its scoped conclusions; both declarations remain available.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-raw is superseded by MEM-OBJ-raw. Both identify the uploaded bytes in wiki/raw/. Their SRC-1 upload-handler passages show the same base64 decoding and scaffold write. Different descriptions of input-dependent formats do not distinguish archives. Epistemic import and memory lineage findings concern this same retained object, not queue filename lists; neither establishes source truth or universal immutability.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-wiki-pages is superseded by MEM-OBJ-wiki-pages. Both identify generated entity/topic markdown and its connections, distinct from raw inputs and special files. The shared SRC-1 source-reference instruction identifies the same page product. Epistemic candidate-content limits and memory provenance/consumer findings remain assessments of that product, not of the static instructions that prescribe it.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-schema is superseded by MEM-OBJ-schema. Both identify retained _schema.md conventions. Memory's SRC-1 scaffold passage and both reports' schema read/revision passages connect initialization, requested editing and future filing to the same file. Normative rules and possible descriptive claims can coexist in it; identity establishes neither their warrant nor actual decision dependence.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-index is superseded by MEM-OBJ-index. Both identify _index.md page summaries, paths and connection counts. Their identical SRC-1 index-maintenance passage identifies the same requested navigation map. Neither account makes it a deterministic relevance scorer or a verified summary of every page.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-log is superseded by MEM-OBJ-log. Both identify _log.md model-written activity text through the same SRC-1 append instruction. Memory identifies lint's all-markdown request as a potential reader; epistemic says no task explicitly reads the log to evaluate truth or accept claims. Those findings concern different functions and do not disagree. Availability to maintenance is not a log-to-rule or acceptance route.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-file-browse is superseded by MEM-RTE-file-browse. Both identify client list/read operations through ownership-checked handlers to host-side directory listing or UTF-8 content responses. Their identical SRC-1 read-handler passage identifies the same route outside the model queue. Both retain implementation wired and operation uninspected. Memory's corrected deletion limit qualifies future availability; epistemic's overwrite/removal/destruction limit is compatible with it and does not require keep-data preservation.

Amendment: EPI-CLM-audit-reasons is superseded by MEM-CLM-reason-audit. Both quote the same SRC-1 documentation claim that reasons flow into the audit log. Both distinguish possible reason retention in job output from fixed coarse audit events. This is one claim with convergent implementation qualifications, not conflicting analyst findings.

Containment and distinct identities

EPI-RTE-result-display is a declared part of RT-RTE-job-recovery, not a duplicate of its whole referent. The parent includes restart replay and terminal result recording; the part traces extraction, persistence and query CLI display. SRC-1 result-processing and reset passages support these different stages. The valid container remains alongside its part without supersession. The part's concrete answer example is a code deduction, not an observed run or truth check.

RT-OBJ-queue-jobs, MEM-OBJ-audit-log and MEM-OBJ-log have distinct identities: queue payload/result rows, fixed daemon audit events and model-written wiki history. Runtime mentions audits but does not identify them as queue rows. Memory's annotation adds result lineage and consumers to the supplied queue record without redeclaring it. The reason-audit claim therefore does not establish automatic per-edit audit lineage or later-model consumption of reasons.

RT-OBJ-wiki-prompts is distinct from the retained page, schema, index and log objects above. Bundled instructions prescribe production and consumption; they are not the use-changeable products. Similarly, RT-BAP-wiki-instructions and MEM-BAP-schema-guidance are not duplicate authority paths. The former supplies appended system/task instructions; the latter requests reads of retained schema text. Their consumers overlap, but channel, content lineage and horizon differ.

MEM-RTE-prompt-evaluation is not a duplicate of RT-RTE-config-change. It describes a documented maintainer procedure for sequential source evaluation and prompt tuning. The runtime record covers per-wiki model/tool/instruction configuration and mentions source prompt development as another change surface. That overlap does not identify the complete routes. The procedure's claimed status is not upgraded to the configuration route's wired implementation status; neither supplies evaluation results or an enforced release gate.

MEM-RTE-wiki-withdrawal is distinct from restart replay in RT-RTE-job-recovery and configuration replacement in RT-RTE-config-change. It removes filesystem/registry state through an administrative handler, rather than rescheduling a job or replacing future invocation settings. Its corrected progression is addressed below.

EPI-CLM-compounding-wiki, EPI-CLM-grounded-query and RT-CLM-workspace-isolation register different source claims: enrichment, grounded answers/filing and confinement. They are neither duplicate claims nor identities with implementing routes. File browsing is also distinct from RT-RTE-query-job: direct content delivery does not perform model search/synthesis. Query's save suggestion is not a separate acceptance/save transaction.

Independent convergence and integration dispositions

The workflow account declares no new records. Its annotations connect RT-RTE-ingest-job, RT-RTE-lint-job and RT-RTE-job-recovery as request-to-delivery, conditional maintenance and interruption replay. Memory's annotations and epistemic's functional ledger use those same routes without replacing their identities. The ledger splits checks from disposition, and retention from acceptance/integration, rather than declaring duplicates for each function.

These reports converge on separate admission boundaries: request ownership/shape, prompt-mediated content judgments and exit-code terminal success. Successful completion does not verify integration. Automatic lint receives a fresh task and retained files, not predecessor operations. Its report-only human-judgment policy has no enforcing approval callback. Replay consumes payload and surviving files without a clean checkpoint, rollback or exactly-once edit guarantee. These are common distinctions, not stronger combined statuses.

The memory integration issues identify no required correction to runtime. The audit discrepancy and prompt-evaluation overlap are disposed above. The path mismatch in RT-RTE-ingest-job and RT-RTE-query-job also limits MEM-BAP-schema-guidance: the wrapper starts at /workspace, while scaffolded files are under /workspace/wiki/. All lenses retain the possibility of model compensation without claiming it occurred. This shared uncertainty prevents successful literal read-back and activation conclusions, not the account of requested reads.

External custom-instruction discovery, MCP behavior and opaque host checkpoint semantics remain uninspected in RT-RTE-config-change and RT-RTE-job-recovery. Delivered configuration is not demonstrated instruction activation or context management. Lint criticisms persist for readers without an automatic later-model route; schema reasons are not required fields. The runtime theory accounts, MEM-OBJ-schema and epistemic's bounded conclusion consistently keep requested revision and persistence separate from realized criticism, reflection, learning and exercised self-improvement.

Memory's withdrawal correction changes the operative preservation finding, not the frozen boundary. MEM-RTE-wiki-withdrawal now traces the client DELETE body, the server's POST/PUT-only body parsing and the handler's false default. Its SRC-1 passages distinguish a scaffold capability when directly supplied true from an operable preservation choice. The updated route, coverage, read-back and Write side describe destructive directory removal even with the shipped keep-data option, followed by registry deletion/cascades on success. The CLI preservation message is not evidence that files survive.

No supplied peer finding depends on that withdrawn preservation claim. EPI-RTE-file-browse already limits availability by wiki destruction; epistemic's coverage mention of removal/keepData does not assert that the preservation option reaches the handler. Runtime replay and workflow recovery depend on surviving state after interruption, not preservation after authorized deletion. Their findings therefore remain compatible with the corrected withdrawal route. No cross-report conflict is established by this correction.

MEM-OBJ-raw and RT-CLM-workspace-isolation agree that read-only protection is access-path conditional. Withdrawal also does not cancel active children or establish universal revocation of already-read material. These security and lifecycle limits do not contradict retained-state read opportunities before deletion.

No disagreement between the supplied reports or missing required declared part was identified. Shared uncertainties remain limits on operation, warrant and benefit, not unresolved conflicts. No supersession changes a finding, invents an ID or selects a stronger status.