Silent disambiguation is the semantic analogue of tool fallback

Type: kb/types/note.md · Tags: learning-theory, computational-model, observability, llm-reliability

When a tool call fails and the agent silently works around it, final task success does not establish intended-path health unless an independent execution signal preserves the deviation. The same thing happens one layer up: when a spec leaves an implementation-significant branch unresolved and the agent silently picks one reading, success hides that the contract didn't determine the path. The gap is semantic instead of operational, but the observability failure is identical — the run crossed into recovery and nothing reported it.

This is not interpreter failure (spec was clear, model violated it), and it excludes specs that explicitly delegate discretion. It is the agent repairing a contract gap the spec didn't acknowledge — which means task completion alone cannot distinguish "the spec was sufficient" from "the agent improvised well enough."


Relevant Notes: