Lens applicability dispositions — RUN AGS-20260821-sequentialthinking

Logical record 6. Both dispositions are explicit records, decided after the mandatory step-4 runtime baseline and before any lens ran. Neither is implied by the presence or absence of a section elsewhere.

Disposition 1 — Memory / context lens

Field Value
Lens memory/context
Disposition applicable
Trigger evidence IDs OBJ-4, OBJ-5, RTE-6, RTE-7, RTE-9, SRC-1:94, SRC-1:96-101, SRC-1:113-114
Inspected boundary search boundary B0 — the four subtree files at 2ecb382, each read in full, plus targeted rg over thoughtHistory, branches, and all persistence/IO symbols
Rationale The trigger asks for a path by which material accumulated or changed through use can affect a later invocation or action. Such a path exists and is inspected in implementation. OBJ-4 and OBJ-5 grow monotonically with use (RTE-6, RTE-7). At SRC-1:113-114 the response builder reads both — Object.keys(branches) and thoughtHistory.length — and RTE-9 returns those values to the host as part of OBJ-6. Call n+1 therefore receives two values computed from material accumulated during calls 1..n. Each MCP tools/call is a distinct invocation, and the CMP-5 singleton spans all of them for the process lifetime, so this is cross-invocation return, not ordinary current-run state. The definitional exclusions do not apply: OBJ-1/OBJ-2 are static shipped material and are excluded as triggers, but OBJ-4/OBJ-5 are not shipped and are not per-call.
The path is thin — derived scalars and keys, never content (ABS-3) — but thinness is a finding of the lens, not a reason to skip it. Step 5 states a candidate trigger means applicable, not uncertain.
Action Run the embedded memory/context lens (step 6) in a fresh worker consuming only evidence-packet.md, runtime-account.md, and the frozen read-only boundary.
Prevented conclusions Not applicable — the lens runs. Findings will be capped at implemented by ABS-8 (no run artifact anywhere in the boundary), so no observed activation or causal effect can be established.

Disposition 2 — Epistemic lens

Field Value
Lens epistemic
Disposition applicable
Trigger evidence IDs CLM-1, CLM-2, CLM-3, CLM-4, CLM-5, CLM-8, CLM-10; OBJ-3.thought, OBJ-4, OBJ-5; RTE-4, RTE-6; SRC-1a:154-157, SRC-1a:187, SRC-2:12
Inspected boundary search boundary B0, as above
Rationale Both halves of the trigger fire independently, so either alone would suffice.
(a) A material route handles truth-apt content. The thought field is unconstrained natural language whose documented contents include "Hypothesis generation", "Hypothesis verification", "Realizations about needing more analysis", and "Questions about previous decisions" (SRC-1a:160-167). Content of that kind is capable of truth or falsity over a named scope. RTE-4 disposes it (accept/reject the envelope), RTE-6 retains it, and RTE-8 renders it to a human reader — retention for later reliance and disposition of a candidate are both material-route criteria.
(b) The system makes consequential knowledge-production and warrant claims. CLM-2 claims hypothesis verification; CLM-3 claims a correct answer; CLM-4 is in the README's own system voice and claims the server's feature set includes "Generate and verify solution hypotheses". Verification and correctness are warrant claims, and assessing them requires the epistemic method.
The direct-adaptation exception does not apply: it exempts evaluated direct behavior or policy adaptation that has no truth-apt object and no knowledge or warrant claim. Here there is both a truth-apt object and explicit warrant claims.
Step 5 is explicit that the trigger fires "even when the eventual finding is failure or absence", and that "successful knowledge production is never a prerequisite for running the lens". ABS-5, ABS-6, and ABS-9 make an absence-shaped finding likely; that strengthens the case for running the lens, since the claims can only be adjudicated by running it.
Action Invoke Analyse an external system's epistemic architecture (step 7) in a fresh worker, inside this run's frozen boundary, under the step-7.3 wrapper rules.
Prevented conclusions Not applicable — the lens runs. ABS-8 caps every observed-candidate-state field at no instance observed; no lifecycle phase can be evidenced, and no causal support is available for any claim.

Worker topology decision

Fresh worker contexts are available and are used, per the step-3 preference. Each worker receives only evidence-packet.md, runtime-account.md, this file, and read-only access to the frozen boundary at 2ecb382. Neither worker may reacquire, refresh, or widen sources, mint a canonical ID, decide publication, or establish its own boundary. Lens-local proposal tags (MEM-n, EPI-n) are used for any new record and are rewritten or merged by the orchestrator at registration.