C10 follow-up: oh-my-pi session report

Checked on 2026-09-05 at the operator's request. This triages the producer's session report and applies the classification audit to its reported semantic concerns. It is a diagnosis, not a corrected system analysis or a whole-result endorsement.

Two classification defects are established: inconsistent compaction scope and an unsupported exclusion of compaction from trace learning. Identifier-based push selection remains a mapping question. Canonical-ID drift and inspection truncation are reported execution errors under existing instructions. The publisher's lack of an independent integrated-result review is its current coverage boundary, not a bypass of a required legacy gate.

Evidence boundary and checks

Selected run: AAS-2026-09-05-oh-my-pi-01; source https://github.com/can1357/oh-my-pi; revision be6cb8217cd4c1dafcc86793ae5d809ea4d7396a; cutoff 2026-09-05; code-grounded, with no target execution.

Input SHA-256
Public main review 1aa5330d7b30b5e390db54b53f02832b55f518f10da3b7b6bf3a03d4eee22212
Retained exact result f088fbd407c7a8a9a964d88035e472adc7e23c419522b47c9e7903b877f1b0b7
State-side exact result f088fbd407c7a8a9a964d88035e472adc7e23c419522b47c9e7903b877f1b0b7
Complete run state fdc96622eb4dcee202acdd7c1c19895427a6496b21ce9eba4817c4df0ae7349c

The strict reader accepted this explicit population. Retained-result and complete-state validation also passed without warnings. The audit read the full result, including the profile, register, both lenses and reconciliation, and the compact projection. The files are published locally but were still untracked at the initial check; no clean-committed-checkout claim follows from that check.

The five core method identities are unchanged from C10 acceptance: the audit instruction, producer skill, result type/schema and shared reader. The representational-form and behavioral-authority definitions also match that record. Additional material actually consulted has these identities:

Method or explanatory input SHA-256
kb/notes/rule-based-context-selection-needs-a-pre-existing-signal.md 73d8020044f8879f09628d8bf3c47b5e91af8147a8f62bc381b278cd798e1d30
src/commonplace/lib/agentic_publication.py 1bf6b05fb70123dcb2c14464b2474d8e5ec4354aba3e79cd6637870044d16dd1
src/commonplace/cli/agentic_analysis_publication.py 9054af6b1d4468dac923722eaa4190b318448f84266f741a21bd22b3e7d42bd7
kb/instructions/synthesize-agent-memory-landscape/SKILL.md 37f8bf9d8dc9357eb5e444416a6d993dc82be72c965476b2e38b35162e751c1b

Separate bounded source checks verified the report's cited compaction and selection mechanisms, using commit-addressed reads after checking clone origin and resolving the commit. These checks do not replace producer regeneration. They covered packages/agent/src/compaction/compaction.ts:1792-1873, packages/coding-agent/src/session/session-context.ts:226-285,410-499, packages/coding-agent/src/extensibility/skills.ts:345-474,499-538, and packages/coding-agent/src/session/session-tools.ts:1266-1286 at that revision. The provider payload's internal representation was not inspected.

Initial and final population, input and method identities matched. Temporary check data is under /tmp/commonplace-omp-audit-19hkzwld/; this record preserves the necessary identities without depending on that directory. Truncated output also occurred during this triage and was reread in bounded ranges; the final findings rely on delivered spans.

Dispositions

1. Canonical-ID reassignment: execution error

The producer reports giving workers CLM-3 with one referent and assigning it another in the final result. Reconciliation acknowledges splitting the seeds, but says no accepted ID was reused. That qualification is not in the producer's canonical-identity rule. Once a worker receives an ID as canonical, later acceptance cannot retroactively make its old referent provisional.

The existing producer step 3 and result-type identity contract already require one orchestrator-owned register and stable generic identity. This is primarily an application failure. A short clarification would help: shared canonical IDs retain their referents; split claims receive new IDs, and the combined record is explicitly superseded. A provisional seed uses a local label.

The report is firsthand process evidence; no independent handoff transcript was retained. The final-file splits are inspectable, but do not reconstruct the handoff history or prove published misattribution. No new lifecycle ledger or historical validation mechanism is justified by this check.

2. Truncated inspection: execution error

Producer step 2 already treats truncated output as non-evidence and requires a narrow reread. The reported recurrence supports a budgeting problem, not a new source-analysis requirement. Bound the selected files and ranges, and budget the aggregate delivery from parallel reads. A small output cap merely discards part of an oversized read. No particular false source claim was established from this error, and no unavailable transcript was inferred.

3. Compaction scope/form: classification defect

The profile names durable session branch/compaction memory. Its known representational_form set cites OBJ-2, which describes a local summary. RTE-4 also includes external replay/archive material. The restart forcing case and synthesis say that material returns to model context, while Lens scoping narrows the comparison to local summaries. The named backend exclusions do not explicitly resolve this compaction alternative.

The pinned implementation confirms the distinction: remote compaction uses a display summary while durable history lives in separate preserveData; reconstruction supplies provider replay and archive material to model context. A summary string or JSON envelope does not establish the payload's operative representation.

This violates the result type's requirement that a known set cover its declared scope. The defect is the inconsistent boundary and unsupported completeness claim; the payload's replacement form is not determined. A new producer run must either include that part with supported classifications/uncertainty, or state its exclusion consistently and distinguish it from the local object in the route mapping. The audit cannot choose the producer's intended boundary or hand-edit the published profile.

4a. Identifier-based push: mapping question remains

Removing identifier is not justified merely because a user can choose a session or request a skill. RTE-3 reconstructs a branch using leaf/parent IDs, then supplies selected history to a later model invocation. The pinned code also uses kept-entry and replay-through IDs when rebuilding compacted context. There are real identity-based selectors, not only names printed in a catalog.

However, the profile combines operator selection, automatic context assembly, skill-name eligibility and requested full bodies. RTE-12's pinned name checks establish enabled/disabled and shadowing behavior; they do not alone establish task-specific memory relevance. A requested full skill is a distinct path.

The shared type says the signal axis covers push selection but does not fully specify where to split a requested-session/automatic-context chain. The selection explanation allows upstream identity signals to feed push, so the branch-assembly reading is defensible. The correction should name the trigger, selector input, selected retained part and later consumer, and keep explicit requests separate. This is a narrow method clarification and route-mapping issue; it is not an established wrong token or a license to infer semantic retrieval.

4b. Compaction excluded from trace learning: classification defect

The learning-scope rationale explicitly excludes compaction as retention/reshaping. No such exclusion appears in the current contract. OBJ-2, RTE-4 and BAP-1 record model-generated history summaries, automatic threshold triggers, durable retention and later contextual use. These meet the existing architectural criterion of automatic trace-fed writes producing durable behavior-shaping artifacts. Neither observed improvement nor ampliative knowledge creation is required. Raw logging alone remains excluded.

The producer must assess this route's contribution to source, scope, timing and distilled form under the same comparison boundary. Do not simply append per-task: session identity alone does not establish the intended task horizon, and local versus provider compaction must first be separated. Other extraction and Auto-Learn routes still support trace_learning: yes; the defect concerns the omitted route and completeness of the dependent assessments.

The existing method is sufficient to reject the stated exclusion. A small worked distinction between raw logging, generated continuation summaries and cross-task procedure extraction would reduce repeated application errors.

5. Publication and comparison scope: coverage limits

prepare_publication returns no review batch when there is no legacy candidate; the CLI derives semantic_review_required from that batch. The run correctly records memory-review-required: false for its enclosing runtime boundary. No applicable legacy gate was bypassed. Producer step 7 still assigns semantic verification to the orchestrator, and an unresolved failure should block publication. Its successful completion here did not detect the two classification defects.

The migrated reader accepts this row because hashes, identity and structure are valid. This audit is not an automatic invalidation flag consumed by that reader. Consumers should withhold the affected scope/form and complete learning-profile claims until a replacement run resolves them.

C10 therefore has a real positive example of detecting semantic defects after structural success. The immediate producer improvement is a focused scope and route-to-axis check during step 7. The current C10 procedure consumes published inputs, so it cannot simply be inserted before publication unchanged. An independent integrated reviewer is a separate cost/coverage decision, relevant when C14 revisits publication; this check does not add that gate.

The profile already carries scope, and the migrated reader preserves it. Landscape synthesis already requires scope beside comparisons and comparable scopes for change claims. Excluded alternatives are not absent. Those existing conditions address the reported comparison risk, provided consumers apply them; completeness within different scopes is not comparable coverage.

6. Repetition and unexecuted tests: economy and evidence limits

Repeated objects/routes across the register and overlays are visible, but length alone does not prove invalidity. The producer already calls for sparse lens overlays and prohibits concatenated lens reports. Prefer canonical-record references and lens-specific judgments; preserve required coverage. No new mandatory packet, ledger or output section follows.

The result explicitly records no dynamic check planned, lists considered checks and bounds its claims to wiring. The skill permits this disposition. It does not claim tests were impossible to run, so lack of a runnable-test inventory is not a violated prerequisite. Runtime reliability, activation and summary fidelity remain untested limits.

Required follow-up

The completed run and generated files remain immutable. Source-based correction requires a new producer run with the compaction boundary, omitted learning route and push-selection mapping as explicit review questions. The current check does not execute that regeneration or certify the other comparison axes.

At completion of this audit, the instruction refinements above were proposals. The subsequent producer-check update implements them and records its own verification boundary. This audit added diagnosis and workshop bookkeeping only. Its changed records passed commonplace-validate without warnings and git diff --check; no runtime implementation changed or pytest run was needed for that diagnostic work.