AREX-Skill report verification

Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-verification.md

Verification

The supplied reports support publication of a bounded account, with the inventory limit below. I read all five reports, the boundary, the empty correction-answer files and the structural report. The structural report contains no findings. I independently inspected frozen source text rather than relying on the analysts' reported validation. HEAD equals the registered revision and the source checkout is clean. No target program, test, example, provider or service was executed.

Runtime and operating guidance

I checked the identities, evidence strength and consumer distinctions of RT-CMP-model-runtime, RT-OBJ-skill-registry, RT-OBJ-operating-graph, RT-OBJ-session-context, RT-RTE-foreground-task, RT-RTE-skill-delivery, RT-CLM-mode-contract and RT-BAP-operating-guidance. Source checks covered SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/sdk.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/model-runtime.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/agent-session.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/resource-loader.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/skills.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/system-prompt.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/tools/bash.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/modes/print-mode.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/modes/skill-policy.ts and skills/repositories/repo-skills-router/SKILL.md.

The distinctions hold: SDK inference routing does not expose weight updates or pin weight bytes; registry filtering does not confine shell/file authority; model-visible discovery supplies descriptions and locations, while explicit expansion reads and inserts a body. Disabled automatic listing does not remove explicit expansion. Print mode sends prompts serially, distinguishes error/aborted text responses and disposes the runtime. The local shell executor carries process authority, not a filesystem jail. These support wired delivery and execution mechanisms, not observed compliance, accurate routing or improved performance. The records' minimum passages support these scoped findings.

For RT-RTE-graph-admission, I traced draft validation, staging, collision rechecks, backup, live validation and caught-error restoration in SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/distill-ml-knowledge/scripts/import_operating_skill_graph.mjs. The separate treatment of requested approval and executable checks is correct. For RT-RTE-library-update, I inspected staging, digest checking, visibility preservation and sequential swap/rollback in SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/repo-skills-library-manager.ts. Neither mechanism supports semantic certification, universal write control or all-reader atomicity; the reports do not claim those guarantees.

Retained context and orchestration

I checked RT-RTE-context-compaction, MEM-OBJ-compaction, MEM-OBJ-branch-summary, MEM-RTE-branch-summary and MEM-BAP-summary-context against SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/compaction/compaction.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/compaction/utils.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/compaction/branch-summarization.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/agent-session.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/session-manager.ts and cli/packages/coding-agent/src/core/messages.ts. Serialization truncates tool-result text; compaction can combine incremental history and split-turn summaries; branch navigation has a distinct destination attachment. Reconstruction delivers summary text and selected entries, not all stored history or arbitrary metadata. Requested rationale retention is not a preservation test. The two summary objects are genuine parts of the session container, not duplicate containers.

I traced RT-RTE-workflow-agent, MEM-OBJ-journal, MEM-OBJ-agent-history and MEM-RTE-journal-replay through SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/agent.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/workflow.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/workflow-manager.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/run-persistence.ts and cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/agent-history.ts. Fresh child sessions, diagnostic snapshots and journal values have different consumers. Schema-valid prose recovery is a real alternate return path. Replay returns cached values under finite hash/prefix checks; checkpoint defaults and current filesystem bytes are not comprehensive dependencies. The replay subroute's containment in the broader workflow route is supported. No schema or replay result licenses semantic correctness.

For MEM-OBJ-saved-workflow and MEM-RTE-saved-workflow, storage, command registration and named nesting establish actual shipped consumers, not a hypothetical API caller. I checked SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/workflow-saved.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/saved-commands.ts, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/dynamic-workflows/extension-factory.ts and the workflow resolver. Registration captures a script; existence checks do not refresh its content. This is executable reuse, distinct from journal replay. MEM-OBJ-library-state correctly identifies access metadata and future-discovery withdrawal, while MEM-OBJ-context-files identifies separately loaded instruction bodies. Their source anchors and supporting passages preserve the distinction between initial context, physical loading and use-derived memory.

Epistemic checks and selected workflow

I checked the operative distinctions in EPI-OBJ-skill-assertions, EPI-OBJ-skill-policy and EPI-OBJ-recovery-evidence. Assertions and imperatives can be parts of the graph without sharing warrant; evidence files consumed by paper checks are a separate bundle. The meta-skill instructions evidence requested construction and revision, not an authenticated generated instance.

Independent reads of SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/verify-repo-skill/scripts/run_native_cases.py and cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/recover-paper-result/scripts/evaluate_qa.py support EPI-RTE-native-checks and EPI-RTE-qa-metrics. Native PASS follows process status, including runnable accelerator-labelled cases without independent backend attestation. QA scores follow supplied-string normalization and arithmetic; both worked deductions are correct. Neither route is a universal answer oracle.

I traced EPI-RTE-paper-checks, EPI-RTE-paper-decision and EPI-RTE-final-report through SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/analyze-paper-recovery/scripts/compare_recovery.py, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/paper-skills-distiller/scripts/validate_distillation_run.py, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/paper-skills-distiller/scripts/write_final_report.py and cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/paper-skills-distiller/SKILL.md. Comparator conjunction, optional-field behavior, metric fallback, hard-mode validator differences and missing-decision tolerance in reporting agree with the report. This establishes bounded evidence-consuming acceptance architecture, not authenticated measurements, causal mechanism proof or observed acceptance. Experiment-gate internals remain expressly uninspected; no complete characterization of that gate is accepted. Retention and reporting are not promoted to post-acceptance lifecycle integration.

I checked EPI-CLM-verified-skills and EPI-CLM-benchmark-gains against SRC-1, README.md. The public claims are faithfully attributed, not adopted as corpus verification or a controlled component-effect experiment.

The workflow account and annotations match the conditional direct branch in SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/distill-ml-knowledge/references/construction-strategy-and-adequacy.md and cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/distill-ml-knowledge/references/direct-construction-and-handoff.md. Approval ordering, affected repair, importer ownership of caught filesystem failure and the external Researcher handoff are supported. The account does not invent mandatory child delegation or a completed downstream task.

Reconciliation and omission disposition

I checked every declared record, its supplied source anchors and passages, route status, annotation and Part of: relation. No evidenced-absence record or supersession is declared. All five containment relations preserve a valid container and distinct parts. The reconciliation correctly treats added memory and paper coverage as extensions, not contradictory statuses. Its no-supersession decision is supported by the different referents and consumers. No unresolved cross-report conflict was found; no correction objection requires disposition.

Omission questions were selected from the frozen top-level tree and producer/consumer dependencies: could another return path bypass the claimed schema behavior; could replay or command loading substitute stale retained state; could specialized import machinery inherit a generic semantic guarantee; and could task-oriented evaluator feedback make the mechanism inventory appear complete? The first two were resolved by tracing prose recovery, journal matching and registration-time capture. Scoped searches of SRC-1, cli/packages/coding-agent/src/disco/skills/verify-repo-skill/scripts/import_repo_skill.mjs identified a separate transaction; no generic-import guarantee is transferred to it. Full specialized recovery remains outside the accepted local finding. The task-oriented search located the additional feedback procedure retained below.

Further optional search stopped because these challenges have dispositions, the reports make positive local architectural findings rather than system-complete negatives, and no identified material contradiction remains. Individual graph correctness, all benchmark loops, exporter recovery and live deployment cannot be compared comprehensively. More repository contents would improve an inventory but are not needed to preserve the selected runtime and workflow account. Learning, reflection, theory criticism, autonomy and self-improvement remain separate unestablished properties, not one inferred negative.

Blockers

none

Limits

• The mechanism inventory remains partial beyond RT-RTE-graph-admission, EPI-RTE-paper-decision and the memory coverage inventory. An omitted task-oriented feedback procedure is documented in SRC-1, skills/task-oriented/PassNet/skills/passnet-feedback/SKILL.md: graph analysis and pattern checks precede GPU evaluation, then parsed evaluation feedback directs the next repair. Its individual script predicates, deployed evaluator and retained-product lineage were not traced here. This does not invalidate the selected generic construction or paper-helper findings, but readers must withhold complete evaluator, feedback-directed revision and admission-route comparisons across task-oriented collections. It establishes additional doctrine, not observed operation, learning or self-improvement.

The iteration loop is: analyze_graph once → author passes → check_pattern until green → GPU evaluate → parse_eval_log → fix the top issue → repeat. --- skills/task-oriented/PassNet/skills/passnet-feedback/SKILL.md