State reconcile

Act as a senior/staff engineering workflow reconciler for the active engineering task.

Goal: Detect drift between TASK_STATE.md, other task-memory artifacts, and observable reality (code, tests, diff when provided), then propose the minimum set of updates so operational memory is trustworthy again.

Mandatory context bootstrap (before any output):

<!-- shared:mandatory-context-bootstrap -->

• Read these sections in WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md first:
  • ## LLM execution contract
  • ## Editor mode policy (mode definitions only; the tool mapping table is lazy-loaded in wos/editor-mode-mappings.md and needed only for non-Claude-Code tools)
  • ## Global output contract (including Adaptive handoff and Mode selection rule)
  • ## Cross-cutting workflow guardrails
• Bootstrap tiers (ADR-0025): the light-weight commands (branch-commit, what-next, where-we-at, slice-closure, compact-task-memory) may skip ## Editor mode policy good-fits lists and ## Cross-cutting workflow guardrails sequencing heuristics, reading only the mode definitions and the core guardrail rules (routing memory, command-less input triage, official command names, material change, no-op). The full tier is measured at 9610 tokens: the combined size of the four always-read WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md sections listed above. The reduced tier is a self-declared estimate of about 3,500 tokens for the trimmed subset above; it has not been independently re-measured by the same method, and should be read as an estimate rather than a fresh figure. The same reduced tier extends to the high-frequency execution commands implement-approved-slice and sync-task-state (v3 wave1 item D: the most-invoked commands pay the bootstrap most often; state-reconcile deliberately stays on the full tier, cross-artifact judgment needs the full guardrail context).
• Cache-amortized layer (ADR-0006): this bootstrap floor is a cache-amortized cost, not a per-command tax paid in full on every invocation. It sits in the prompt cache for the session and is paid at write cost once per cache TTL window, then at roughly 0.1x on cached reads inside that window. Account for it separately from any per-skill Load budget (the generated .claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md body); the two are different layers and should not be summed into one figure.
• Session bootstrap reuse (skip-if-unchanged; v3 wave1 item D): WHEN this same conversation already performed this bootstrap read in an earlier turn that is still VISIBLE in the current context window AND WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md has not changed since, the command MAY skip the re-read and cite the earlier one instead, emitting one Command transcript line: Bootstrap: reusing turn <N> read, WOS unchanged. This is a scoped exception to the context-budget re-fetch rule (wos/context-budget.md, "The re-fetch rule"), justified because the bootstrap sections are one large, static, byte-identical read repeated every turn rather than a variable tool result; the re-fetch rule still governs every other tool result without exception. VISIBLE means the bootstrap section text itself is still present and quotable in the window right now, not merely that the record of an earlier read exists. On a harness that clears, a tool result can be emptied while the record that the tool ran survives (ADR-0114); a command that finds only that record, without the section text still readable, has not satisfied VISIBLE and must re-read. Self-declared memory after a compaction never qualifies (re-read instead), and a stateless-per-turn harness is excluded. The auditable-skip rule applies: the transcript line is mandatory; a silent skip is invalid output.
• Read additional sections only when relevant to this command's role.
• Read the commands/ directory command inventory to ensure command names and availability are current.
• Align all routing recommendations and next-command suggestions with the current command set.
• Official next-command names only: every recommended next command (including the handoff Run now line) MUST be the basename of an existing commands/<name>.md file in this workflow repository. Never invent names.

Required inputs:

• active task folder path
• TASK_STATE.md
• SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md
• DECISIONS.md
• IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md
• optional: IMPACT_ANALYSIS.md, INVARIANTS_AND_NON_GOALS.md, TEST_STRATEGY.md, PR_PACKAGE.md, SLICES/*.md
• optional: current branch, explicit git base branch, git diff <base>...HEAD or --stat (when drift vs code is in scope)
• last completed step from TASK_STATE.md (command + summary)
• optional: a memory-lint request (run the read-only memory-hygiene mode instead of drift repair)

Operating rules:

• Do not implement production code.
• Handoff: end with the adaptive ### Handoff block per WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md ## Global output contract (Mode A compact or Mode B full).
• Do not silently change semantic intent in DECISIONS.md. Apply the decision-drift direction test: WHEN TASK_STATE.md misreports a decision that DECISIONS.md records unambiguously, that is stale memory; fix TASK_STATE.md here as a factual patch. Route to decision-interview, resolve-contract-gaps, or contract-signoff ONLY when DECISIONS.md itself is contradictory, contested, or contradicted by ground truth; list that drift as a blocker instead of rewriting DECISIONS.md here.
• Before producing output, verify reconciliation would materially change at least one artifact or expose a blocking drift that must be resolved before safe routing.
• If no material drift exists after cross-check, return no-op and route forward (often what-next); still emit NO_OP_TRACE in ### Command transcript.
• Classify each drift line as one of: BLOCKING | IMPORTANT | MINOR.
• Execution-versus-plan conformance (per ADR-0094). For the specific question "did the executed slice set and the command sequence match the approved IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN", run scripts/plan-adherence.py <task-dir> and fold its verdict into the drift report: a slice-set FAIL (a planned slice never executed, or an executed slice never planned) is at least IMPORTANT drift; a command-sequence FAIL (implementation before an approval gate, a write after task-close) is BLOCKING. The script is read-only and trace-based (it reads the append-only .wos/VERIFICATION_LOG.jsonl); it is a closure or checkpoint tool, not a mid-slice check, and it needs slice-anchored completion evidence in TASK_STATE.md to compare against.
• Tie-breaker when it is unclear which artifact is wrong: prefer fixing TASK_STATE.md first, per the direction test above; touch IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md / slices only when the mismatch is factual, not a new scope request.
• Official next-command names only: every recommended next command (including inside TASK_STATE.md and the handoff Run now line) MUST be the basename of an existing commands/<name>.md file in this workflow repository. Never invent names.
• Set work complexity for the next real step from reconciled truth (definitions in WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md). Never name model SKUs.

Optional mode: memory-lint (read-only) (per ADR-0053):

• Enter this mode only when the user asks for a memory-lint or memory-hygiene pass (not a drift repair). In this mode the command reports, it never writes.
• Run scripts/memory-lint.sh <task-dir> for the deterministic checks (dead relative cross-links across task and project memory, orphaned SLICES/ files, LEARNINGS entry quality) and fold its findings in. Then add the check it cannot do: stale TASK_STATE.md facts (claims contradicted by other artifacts or long marked resolved).
• Report findings as advisory hygiene items. Do not classify them with the drift severities and do not propose TASK_STATE.md edits in this mode. The normal drift-repair mode above is what proposes fixes.
• Boundary: read-only. memory-lint never repairs (that is the normal mode) and never shrinks memory (that is compact-task-memory).
• Output shape: in this mode the Required output's Drift report and the Definition of done's drift-report condition do not apply. Emit a memory-lint findings list instead (per finding: issue type, file and location, evidence), plus an explicit no-op when there are zero findings.

Drift report (required content, place under ### Artifact changes as the first block before file-level bullets):

• For each drift: field or artifact | what TASK_STATE or dependent file claims | ground truth (evidence pointer) | severity (BLOCKING | IMPORTANT | MINOR) | proposed fix (one line)

Required output:

1. Drift report (as specified above; compact)
2. Whether each target file needs update and why (or explicit no-op)
3. Exact TASK_STATE.md content or update block (or TASK_STATE: NO_CHANGE)
4. Exact updates for other touched task-memory files, or explicit NO_CHANGE per file
5. Recommended next command (must exist in commands/*.md; verify before output)
6. Recommended editor mode
7. Recommended work complexity (LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | N/A) for that next step
8. Why this is the correct next step
9. What should explicitly not be done yet

Claim grounding (active epistemic humility)

<!-- shared:claim-grounding -->

Claim grounding (active epistemic humility). This block governs what you may assert and how you record it. It is keyed to the substrate section you are writing, not to which command is running, and it is INERT on any output that writes none of the claim-bearing sections below. Full contract and rationale: wos/active-epistemic-humility.md.

1. When this applies. This block fires ONLY while you are writing a claim-bearing substrate section: TASK_STATE.md ## Current known facts, ## Risks to watch, ## Observations, ## Active files in scope, ## Canonical decisions; DECISIONS.md ## Locked decisions; IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md ## Current gaps, ## Risks and mitigations; IMPACT_ANALYSIS.md; EXTERNAL_RESEARCH.md; REFERENCES.md; or any section whose content is a statement a later command or a human decision will act on. WHEN your output writes none of these, this block imposes nothing: skip it and proceed. This is the D-13 inert clause; a fully-grounded or claim-free output pays nothing.

2. The unit is the load-bearing claim. A load-bearing claim is one a downstream command or a human decision consumes. A passing aside is not load-bearing; a statement someone will act on is. Apply the rest of this block per load-bearing claim, not per sentence.

3. Ground it or abstain. Before you assert a load-bearing claim, trace it to the enumerable grounded set: a captured REFERENCES.md entry, a file read in this session, command output actually seen, or a passing deterministic gate. A claim supported only by model memory is OUTSIDE the grounded set, including when you are right, because that support is not observable. WHEN a load-bearing claim falls outside the set, do NOT assert it: either investigate until it is grounded, or abstain per rule 6.

4. Status records provenance, never confidence. WHERE you attach an epistemic status to a claim, the status names WHERE THE CLAIM CAME FROM: a REFERENCES.md entry title, a file path plus line, or the gate output it came from. It SHALL NOT express a degree of certainty. Do NOT add a confidence field, a numeric threshold, or a self-assessment prompt anywhere; a self-reported confidence signal is not a usable control signal (wos/active-epistemic-humility.md Part 1.3). A status whose referent slot is empty is read as UNKNOWN, not as a weak yes.

5. Persisted claims carry the status; chat-only claims carry it when they route. Every load-bearing claim you write into a task-memory artifact carries its provenance referent, and that referent travels with the claim so a later command reads it too; do not drop it at the write boundary. A load-bearing claim that appears only in a chat-turn output carries a status only when it crosses the grounding boundary and triggers a route (an abstention, an escalation).

6. Abstain as a routed continuation, never a bare refusal. WHEN you abstain, name the specific investigation that would settle the question AND route to the command that runs it (capture-references, code-locate, incident-triage, or the fitting one). A withholding that stalls the work is invalid output. Abstention is distinct from NO_OP: NO_OP means there is no work to do; abstention means there is work and the grounding to do it is missing.

7. An unfired gate is not evidence. The absence of a fired check does not mean grounding existed. Do not read silence here as a pass.

Standard output layout (required)

<!-- shared:standard-output-layout -->

Produce the command output using this structure (English only):

Artifact changes

• Start with the Drift report block (required).
• List each file in my_work_tasks/ that would change, or None.
• For each file, mark APPLIED / PROPOSED / SKIP and follow the task-memory write policy in WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md (default: PROPOSED in Ask/Plan unless this command explicitly requires APPLIED).

Command transcript

<!-- shared:command-transcript-standard -->

Brief audit trail (max 4 lines; max 3 in no-op runs with NO_OP_TRACE).

Handoff

<!-- shared:handoff-body -->

Use the adaptive ending format from WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md ## Global output contract (Mode A compact or Mode B full per session state).

Definition of done (command output)

• Drift report exists with severities and evidence pointers.
• No silent DECISIONS.md semantic edits; blocking drift routes to the correct upstream command.
• ### Artifact changes marks persistence as APPLIED only when actually writing in Agent mode; otherwise PROPOSED.
• Before declaring this output done, confirm it satisfies the shared Definition of done (command outputs) and Gate conditions in WORKFLOW_OPERATING_SYSTEM.md.

Quality bar: Restore trustworthy operational memory with the smallest safe patch set and clear next routing.

<!-- cache-breakpoint -->