Autogenesis reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Evidence boundary

The reports share the boundary Source register. SRC-1 supplies implementation and doctrine/design evidence; no observed runs or causal experiments were supplied. This reconciliation compares the pinned members, without reading target source or judging their support. Requested behavior, implemented delivery, exercised reliance and demonstrated benefit remain separate. Faithfully scoped uncertainty and different inspection coverage do not themselves establish disagreements.

Duplicate supersessions and distinct parts

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-working-memory is superseded by MEM-OBJ-working-memory. Both identify _SessionState.working, a bounded resident deque of natural-language summaries also serialized by the renderer. Both cite SRC-1 autogenesis/memory/default/tiered.py and autogenesis/memory/default/general_memory_system.py. These are the same summaries, not separate stores. The epistemic inventory and compaction/retention ledger therefore concern the memory report's summary object. This identity changes no fidelity, selection or operation finding.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-corpus is superseded by MEM-OBJ-knowledge-corpus. Both identify the named base's corpus.jsonl documents and manifest.json backend selection in SRC-1 autogenesis/knowledge/server.py. Acquisition, ranking and read-back findings concern the same retained documents. Neither record treats their storage or relevance scores as endorsement.

MEM-RTE-history-compaction covers overflow selection, summarization, admission, persistence and subsequent delivery. EPI-RTE-history-compact isolates the candidate transformation; EPI-RTE-summary-retain isolates retention and later selection. Neither narrower route is identical to the whole memory route. Their passages from SRC-1 autogenesis/memory/default/tiered.py connect nonempty-output append to empty-output raw-chunk restoration. The memory container remains valid alongside these parts, so no split supersession is asserted. Requested summarization does not contradict the epistemic finding that semantic preservation is indeterminate without an input/output pair.

MEM-RTE-corpus-retrieval combines ingestion and retrieval; EPI-RTE-corpus-ingest and EPI-RTE-corpus-retrieve separate their operations and authorities. These are parts, not identities of the combined route. The shared result-construction passage in SRC-1 autogenesis/knowledge/server.py connects document fields to scored result data. The combined route's findings remain valid; no split supersession is needed. Both accounts require authored downstream wiring rather than inferring automatic model-context delivery.

MEM-CLM-memory-guidance spans creator-renderer guidance and evaluator-interface claims. EPI-CLM-memory-rubric isolates the evaluator's quality promise; EPI-RTE-memory-evaluate describes the report-producing route. Their shared evaluator prompt in SRC-1 autogenesis/prompt/default/memory_evaluate_agent.html does not make the narrower claim identical to the combined claim, or either claim identical to the executable route. The creator-renderer finding has a separate source and consequence. No supersession is asserted.

The explicitly declared memory parts retain their runtime containers. MEM-RTE-tiered-context, MEM-RTE-todo-context and MEM-RTE-conversation-replay have different state and consumers within RT-RTE-gateway-task. MEM-RTE-memory-admission isolates the memory-module branch of RT-RTE-extension-admission. Corpus operations, EPI-RTE-json-parse and EPI-RTE-exact-match add operations within RT-RTE-workflow-execution, not duplicate graph-execution identities. EPI-RTE-workflow-evaluation admits and summarizes evaluation records rather than executing or restoring graph frames. WF-RTE-ui-verification is a product-verification phase within Gateway task execution using RT-RTE-child-delegation, not a duplicate child-allocation route.

Other object comparisons rule out identity. MEM-OBJ-memory-config is resident registration/configuration, while RT-OBJ-extension-manifest is disk capability-version metadata. MEM-OBJ-memory-display, MEM-OBJ-todo-files, MEM-OBJ-conversation-events and MEM-OBJ-execution-records identify distinct session displays, explicit plans, client transcripts and execution artifacts. EPI-OBJ-checkpoint is per-run workflow recovery state, not a capability archive or a memory-tier snapshot. EPI-OBJ-evaluation holds scores and evaluation records, not those recovery objects. EPI-OBJ-response isolates returned semantic content, not its producing route or RT-CMP-model-manager. MEM-OBJ-plugin-history concerns external history adapters, not the built-in summary deque. RT-OBJ-skill-content retains authored instructions, not use-derived history. No further duplicate identity is established by the pinned records.

Cross-report disagreements and integration dispositions

No unresolved disagreement between the current pinned reports is established. The previous reconciliation's live-memory conflict no longer describes the runtime and epistemic findings supplied here. No correction-answer files or declined objections were supplied; their dispositions cannot be inferred from report changes alone.

The memory-specific correction is now shared by MEM-RTE-memory-admission, RT-RTE-extension-admission, RT-BAP-capability-load and the epistemic adaptation ledger. The runtime now explicitly reports class registration retaining instance=None, temporary constructor effects, and instance-guarded lifecycle/context consumers. Its added passages from SRC-1 autogenesis/extension/server.py, autogenesis/memory/context.py and autogenesis/hook/default/memory.py align with memory's branch finding. Epistemic likewise preserves the missing-live-instance exception in its adaptation and disposition rows and bounded conclusion. All retain other supported live capability consumers and separate build/supplied-instance memory paths. Memory's integration section still calls this a qualification of generic live registration; it does not require an assertion the current runtime or epistemic report now denies. The former dependent-finding disagreement is therefore not carried forward.

Workflow recovery is also aligned. RT-RTE-workflow-execution and EPI-OBJ-checkpoint, together with the epistemic recovery ledger, distinguish rejection of unequal nonempty hashes from the supported hashless migration branch. Runtime supplies the empty-hash default, manager/Gateway forwarding, current-hash stamping and completed-invocation caching passages from SRC-1 autogenesis/workflow/types.py, autogenesis/workflow/server.py, autogenesis/gateway/service.py and autogenesis/workflow/runtime.py. Epistemic limits the hashless license to legacy compatibility rather than original executable identity. Memory's annotation describes version/program-hash checks without asserting universal hash presence or verification, and separately distinguishes capability-version checkpoint commands from graph recovery. It does not conflict with these branch-specific findings.

The renderer issue remains a source-native contract discrepancy, not an analyst disagreement. MEM-CLM-memory-guidance, MEM-OBJ-memory-display and MEM-RTE-tiered-context distinguish _render() persistence from get() prompt selection. Creator guidance does not establish that a renderer-only edit changes next-prompt retention. This is distinct from RT-CLM-evolution-guidance, whose approval and staging discrepancies concern general capability admission.

Memory and epistemic converge on evaluator limits. MEM-CLM-memory-guidance records incompatible interfaces and bounded unsuccessful searches for named probes; EPI-RTE-memory-evaluate records an ordinary advisory model loop, rubric mismatch and unestablished probe availability. Report-generation wiring does not settle probe callability or score validity. The generic smoke and delegation findings assert neither.

MEM-ABS-tiered-reload supplies a bounded absence for inspected built-in tiered backends. Runtime's unestablished backend restart completeness and epistemic's unestablished rehydration do not disagree with that narrower absence. Todo disk reload, client transcript replay and workflow resume retain different consumers and recovery scopes. Conversation deletion's lack of demonstrated cascade remains local to the inspected handler, not a universal erasure conclusion.

Independent convergence and retained limits

WF-RTE-ui-verification adds exact-URL/browser-evidence handoffs, advisory review and parent-directed product repair to the generic runtime route. RT-RTE-gateway-task supplies return bookkeeping and the repeated-batch success countercase. Both distinguish requested checking and actual product acceptance from runtime completion. Product repair does not by itself change the runtime's own capability organization.

EPI-RTE-exact-match and EPI-RTE-workflow-evaluation add bounded checks to runtime's explicitly incomplete workflow coverage. Reference equality, evidence-record consistency and advisory health summaries have different targets and consumers from extension smoke. These positives neither contradict smoke's limits nor establish a universal evaluator veto or factual acceptance route.

MEM-BAP-memory-context, RT-BAP-method-instructions and RT-BAP-capability-load are distinct authority paths: retained history/plan guidance, authored method guidance and module-specific executable availability. Their shared ability to affect later behavior does not make their referents identical. The reports preserve trace-fed memory rewriting, localized method text, criticism, iteration, reflection, learning and improvement-directed machinery change as independent findings. No supplied episode closes later causal dependence on an update or demonstrates benefit. Provider histories, training consumers, process transforms, domain evaluators and full frontend behavior remain local coverage limits, not system-wide negatives.