SkillX reconciliation
Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-reconciliation-report.md
Reconciliation
The pinned reports share the frozen revision and SRC-1 identity in the boundary Source register. This reconciliation compares their current findings, including corrections visible in runtime and memory. No analyst answers or refusal were supplied. It adds no source inspection and makes no judgment of individual report support.
Duplicate identities and distinct referents
Amendment: EPI-RTE-feedback-summary is superseded by MEM-RTE-feedback-summary. Both identify the same ToolSummary operation in SRC-1, extraction/tool_summary.py: code selects long user/tool feedback, a separate model invocation receives preceding action and feedback, extracted text replaces feedback in a deep copy, and subsequent extraction receives that copy. Their predicates, fallback, owner and later consumer coincide. Both state wired implementation and uninspected operation. The epistemic ledger's indeterminate semantic relation and lack of a fidelity check remain findings about this operation; identity establishes no semantic preservation. Both are contained in RT-RTE-library-build, whose broader construction referent remains valid.
Amendment: EPI-OBJ-plan-content is superseded by MEM-OBJ-plan-skill. Both identify PlanSkill.task, plan and metadata in the task-keyed library map and JSON, SRC-1, core/skill.py. These are the same operative object, not two stores. The epistemic distinction between prescriptions and scoped truth-apt sufficiency claims remains applicable; memory adds initialization, retention and consumer detail. Neither finding changes through supersession.
No supersession joins EPI-OBJ-trajectory-feedback to MEM-OBJ-trajectory. Their overlap is observations and reward fields in SRC-1, data/loaders.py and extraction/tool_summary.py. The epistemic object spans raw feedback and substituted summaries, while memory identifies raw/normalized experience and optional original-record retention. They are not coextensive. The combined feedback account remains alongside the input-history object and the separately declared summary route.
No supersession joins EPI-OBJ-skill-content to MEM-OBJ-functional-skill, MEM-OBJ-atomic-skill or MEM-OBJ-skill-metadata. In SRC-1, core/skill.py, the epistemic record spans enclosing skill fields and also sampled candidate arrays; memory separates reference implementations, atomic examples and symbolic access/lineage fields. The combined account does not assert one check or provenance guarantee across those parts. It therefore remains a valid combined referent alongside the distinct part accounts. MEM-OBJ-skill-library is their persistence container, not their production route or instructional content.
No supersession joins EPI-OBJ-synthetic-task to MEM-OBJ-task-checkpoint. Both include objective/confidence/action-sequence content in SRC-1, expansion/task_generator.py and expansion/task_manager.py, but the memory object also owns processed indices, seed hash and recovery state. The epistemic object distinguishes requests from potential solvability/outcome claims. Task content and checkpoint control state overlap without having identical scope.
MEM-OBJ-retrieval-vectors is local derived access state, not the external backend in RT-CMP-embedding-service. EPI-OBJ-tool-schemas is judging reference material, not the executor, model or check that consumes it. No identity or supersession follows from those producer/consumer connections.
The narrower construction parts MEM-RTE-proposal-context, EPI-RTE-general-check, EPI-RTE-schema-check and EPI-RTE-filter-disposition do not replace RT-RTE-library-build. Proposal recurrence, check production and disposition have distinct consumers and consequences. The checks and disposition are not duplicates of RT-CLM-quality-control, which declares filter coverage and guarantee strength. EPI-CLM-quality-refinement instead declares the broader README improvement claim. EPI-CLM-skill-kb and EPI-CLM-transfer-gains likewise have no equivalent runtime claim declaration.
MEM-RTE-self-filter is a distinct public class and invocation from the selector within RT-RTE-prompt-prepare. Its response evaluation is another site, not the merger/service-selector endpoints declared by RT-RTE-response-eval. Its afforded status and fail-open fallback remain its own findings. EPI-RTE-export-validation is a separate exposed preflight, not the construction route's ordinary save operation. Memory cites it without redeclaring it. Workflow declares no new records; its annotations add handoff and check-placement findings to existing referents.
Integration dispositions and changed dependencies
The prior committed-versus-provisional read-back disagreement is no longer present in the pinned records. RT-RTE-library-build now explicitly states that atomic/hybrid prompts read the extractor instance map, not the pipeline-prepared skill_library field, and that filtering/replacement does not synchronize that map. This agrees with MEM-RTE-proposal-context and memory Integration issues, supported there by SRC-1, pipeline.py and extraction/skill_extractor.py. Functional context begins in experience metadata; provisional recurrence can precede vetoes. The epoch library's influence on expansion remains a different path. No reconciled claim of automatic committed-library feedback into atomic prompts follows.
The prior checked-export disagreement is also no longer present. Memory's Write side and the admission inventory for MEM-OBJ-skill-library now distinguish standalone structural predicates from the blocked exporter preflight. They agree with EPI-RTE-export-validation: SRC-1, data/exporters.py passes embeddings_config to the dataclass in data/schemas.py, which declares embeddings. The retained incompatible passages support both reports' static deduction that construction fails before the intended validation/export. Unchecked save/export and direct library admission remain separate mechanisms; standalone predicates do not establish an enforced checked-export consumer.
The alternative public rewrite helper is now covered by RT-RTE-prompt-prepare and memory's Read-back. SRC-1, inference/plan_rewriter.py contains PlanRewriteService.get_pseudo_plan, which passes plural reference plans correctly and returns pseudo-plan/metadata, with no shipped caller found by runtime's name search. This does not repair the service's singular-argument mismatch or establish persistence or later delivery. The epistemic account's rewrite-failure finding concerns that shipped service path, not universal rewriting unreachability. The reports therefore retain compatible path-specific findings rather than a conflict or supersession.
The remaining memory issues qualify, rather than contradict, runtime findings:
- Optional failed-history input in MEM-RTE-proposal-context does not mean default reward-selected preparation supplies it. Memory explains the below-0.5 search within already-successful inputs in SRC-1,
pipeline.py; neither RT-RTE-library-build nor the selected workflow asserts a default contrastive trial. - MEM-OBJ-atomic-skill identifies standalone atomic output collected as functional, unlike the hybrid atomic branch in SRC-1,
extraction/skill_extractor.py. RT-CLM-quality-control describes bypass by candidate category. Both predicates can hold; extractor naming alone does not show that its output takes the atomic bypass. - Same-name replacement, renamed successors, incoming redundancy suppression and provisional recurrence in MEM-OBJ-skill-library and MEM-RTE-proposal-context are separate withdrawal scopes. Runtime does not assert a global predecessor purge or undo of provisional influence.
- MEM-CLM-format-boundary resolves the boundary's sample-format question only for inspected iteration-one shapes. It limits automatic loading in RT-RTE-prompt-prepare without contradicting unified-library loading. The embedding configuration label and MEM-OBJ-retrieval-vectors establish different state, not a persisted FAISS index.
No current inter-report disagreement is identified. This does not settle individual report support or remove shared uncertainty.
Independent convergence and retained limits
Memory and workflow annotations independently locate functional proposal reuse before final admission and functional content truncation after default pre-merge filtering, in SRC-1, extraction/skill_extractor.py. Workflow distinguishes skill rejection from checkpoint delivery; memory distinguishes final serialization from retained criticism. These connect to runtime's partial-result policies and the epistemic separation of checks, disposition and retention. They limit check coverage without establishing harm to any particular saved skill.
RT-RTE-prompt-prepare, RT-BAP-skill-guidance, memory annotations and the epistemic ledger agree on retrieval/formatting as preparation of advisory reference text. Selector/rewrite defects, formatter omissions and wrapper stubs keep saved content and metadata distinct from exercised task-agent delivery. RT-RTE-environment-rollout remains a separate effect route: generic completion heuristics and external environment evaluators provide unequal task-outcome signals, not a common generalized-skill check.
RT-RTE-task-synthesis, the task objects and epistemic ledger retain simulated-versus-real provenance, model confidence, checkpoint recovery and unevaluated placeholders. They do not close automatic execution-to-extraction. Workflow deliberately ends at saved construction results rather than joining exploration and inference capabilities into an observed autonomous cycle.
Unknown input/reward provenance, initial prior-skill admission, backend weights, historical producing revision, downstream compliance and causal gains remain bounded uncertainties, not conflicts. The reports distinguish trace-fed instruction-update capacity from improved future capacity and exercised self-improvement. Supersession preserves those limits and does not promote implementation, availability or attributed performance into observed operation or causal support.