АРЧ АП11 - Актуализировать документацию turnaround 11 по текущему архитектурному аудиту и graphify

docs/ARCH/11 - architecture_turnaround/04 - coverage_evidence_truth_gate.md

@@ -32,15 +32,28 @@ Answer policy must not own the truth gate.
 
 ## Current Code Owners
 
-The gate already exists in code in fragmented form:
+The gate is no longer only a fragmented idea.
 
-- [assistantCoverageGrounding.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantCoverageGrounding.ts:1)
+The current explicit owners are:
-- [assistantClaimBoundEvidence.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantClaimBoundEvidence.ts:1)
-- [assistantDataLayer.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantDataLayer.ts:622)
-- [addressQueryService.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/addressQueryService.ts:2806)
-- [answerComposer.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/answerComposer.ts:22)
 
-The architectural problem is not absence, but insufficient naming and isolation.
+- [addressTruthGatePolicy.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/addressTruthGatePolicy.ts:1)
+- [addressCoverageEvidencePolicy.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/addressCoverageEvidencePolicy.ts:1)
+- [assistantRuntimeContractResolver.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantRuntimeContractResolver.ts:256)
+- [assistantTruthAnswerPolicyRuntimeAdapter.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantTruthAnswerPolicyRuntimeAdapter.ts:127)
+
+These contracts are currently named:
+
+- `address_truth_gate_v1`
+- `address_coverage_evidence_v1`
+
+Residual gate-related pressure still exists in:
+
+- [addressQueryService.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/addressQueryService.ts:3082)
+- [composeStage.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/address_runtime/composeStage.ts:2684)
+
+The current architectural problem is no longer absence.
+
+It is incomplete end-to-end isolation of truth semantics from final answer shaping.
 
 ## Gate Inputs
 
@@ -194,3 +207,19 @@ This layer is considered architecturally established only when:
 - its outputs are explicit inputs to answer shaping;
 - carryover policy depends on gate output rather than hidden heuristics;
 - scenario acceptance can fail specifically on gate behavior, not only on final wording.
+
+## Honest Current Status (2026-04-17)
+
+This layer is `mostly established`, but not complete.
+
+What is already true:
+
+- exact-lane truth and coverage/evidence contracts are explicit and machine-readable;
+- runtime adapters consume those contracts directly;
+- scenario acceptance can already fail on truth/coverage invariants.
+
+What is still not fully true:
+
+- user-facing blocked/limited semantics are still partly coupled to final packaging branches;
+- `composeFactualReply()` still carries too much architectural weight;
+- not every business contour is equally mature in explicit truth/coverage signaling.

docs/ARCH/11 - architecture_turnaround/05 - assistantService_extraction_map.md

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ The goal is to turn it from a god-service into a thinner coordinator.
 
 Approximate size:
 
-- `6243` lines
+- `5770` lines
 
 It currently mixes concerns from:
 
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ Current location:
 
 Target owner:
 
-- `assistantRoutePolicyRuntimeAdapter`
+- `assistantRoutePolicy`
 
 Expected artifact:
 
@@ -77,8 +77,7 @@ Current location:
 
 Target owner:
 
-- `assistantTransitionRuntimeAdapter`
+- `assistantTransitionPolicy`
-- `assistantContinuationContractBuilder`
 
 Expected artifact:
 
@@ -198,6 +197,31 @@ It should become thinner.
 
 This order is chosen because route and transition pressure are currently the main source of runtime fragility.
 
+## Honest Current Status (2026-04-17)
+
+This extraction is materially underway and no longer just a proposal.
+
+Current active owner creation and wiring in [assistantService.ts](/x:/1C/NDC_1C/llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/assistantService.ts:4725):
+
+- provider owner near `4725`
+- meta and memory owners near `4738-4743`
+- route owner near `4748`
+- transition owner near `4785`
+- boundary owner near `5439`
+
+What is already true:
+
+- route, transition, boundary, meta, memory, and provider policies have explicit external owners;
+- runtime already delegates important decisions to those owners.
+
+What is still not fully true:
+
+- legacy helper bodies still physically remain inside `assistantService.ts`
+- the coordinator is still too large to be called thin
+- some reviews still require reading both extracted owners and the coordinator to understand final behavior
+
+This means Phase 5 is substantially advanced, but not finished.
+
 ## Non-Goals
 
 - do not split the file mechanically just to reduce line count;

docs/ARCH/11 - architecture_turnaround/06 - phase_acceptance_matrix.md

@@ -12,6 +12,39 @@ Each phase must specify:
 - `non-goals`
 - `acceptance signals`
 
+## Current Execution Snapshot (2026-04-17)
+
+Current honest estimate of overall turnaround completion: `~85%`
+
+Current phase status:
+
+- `Phase 0` - `100%`
+- `Phase 1` - `100%`
+- `Phase 2` - `92%`
+- `Phase 3` - `86%`
+- `Phase 4` - `84%`
+- `Phase 5` - `76%`
+- `Phase 6` - `80%`
+- `Phase 7` - `90%`
+
+This estimate is supported by:
+
+- graph snapshot: `5228 nodes`, `11338 edges`, `133 communities`
+- explicit truth/coverage contracts in code
+- extracted policy owners in code
+- machine-readable scenario acceptance artifacts
+- mixed AGENT semantic source catalogs and accepted packs
+
+Main remaining blockers:
+
+- `assistantService.ts` is still too large
+- `resolveAddressIntent()` remains a high-pressure god node
+- `composeFactualReply()` remains a high-pressure god node
+
+For the full audit, see:
+
+- [08 - current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md](./08%20-%20current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md)
+
 ## Phase 0. Shared Baseline
 
 Goal:

docs/ARCH/11 - architecture_turnaround/08 - current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md

@@ -0,0 +1,300 @@
+# 08 - Current Status Audit (2026-04-17)
+
+## Purpose
+
+This note is the honest execution snapshot for the turnaround package after the latest architecture passes, graph rebuild, and semantic acceptance work.
+
+It is not a replacement for the phase documents.
+
+It is the current-state audit that answers:
+
+- what is already real in code;
+- what still remains architectural debt;
+- how far the turnaround has actually progressed.
+
+## Audit Basis
+
+This snapshot is based on:
+
+- `graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md` rebuilt on `2026-04-17`
+- current owner modules in `llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/`
+- current scenario acceptance scripts under `scripts/`
+- current AGENT semantic source catalog under `docs/orchestration/`
+
+## Graph Snapshot
+
+Latest graph rebuild:
+
+- `5228 nodes`
+- `11338 edges`
+- `133 communities`
+
+Most relevant current god nodes for turnaround `11`:
+
+1. `resolveAddressIntent()`  
+2. `ChannelRegistry`  
+3. `composeFactualReply()`  
+4. `CanonicalStore`  
+5. `compactWhitespace()`
+
+The relevant conclusion is not that every god node is part of turnaround `11`.
+
+The relevant conclusion is:
+
+- `resolveAddressIntent()` remains the main unresolved domain-intent concentration point;
+- `composeFactualReply()` remains the main unresolved answer-shaping concentration point;
+- `assistantService` still appears as a large coordinator-heavy community rather than a thin shell.
+
+## What Is Already Real In Code
+
+### 1. Policy owners are no longer hypothetical
+
+The following owner modules exist and are live architectural objects:
+
+- `assistantRoutePolicy.ts`
+- `assistantTransitionPolicy.ts`
+- `assistantBoundaryPolicy.ts`
+- `assistantMetaFollowupPolicy.ts`
+- `assistantMemoryRecapPolicy.ts`
+- `assistantProviderExecutionPolicy.ts`
+
+`assistantService.ts` wires these owners in active runtime paths around:
+
+- provider policy creation near line `4725`
+- route/meta/memory policy creation near lines `4738-4783`
+- transition policy creation near line `4785`
+- boundary policy creation near line `5439`
+
+### 2. Truth and coverage/evidence are explicit contracts
+
+The exact lane now exposes explicit machine-readable contracts:
+
+- `address_truth_gate_v1`
+- `address_coverage_evidence_v1`
+
+Primary current owners:
+
+- `addressTruthGatePolicy.ts`
+- `addressCoverageEvidencePolicy.ts`
+- `assistantRuntimeContractResolver.ts`
+- `assistantTruthAnswerPolicyRuntimeAdapter.ts`
+
+This means exact-lane answers are no longer judged only by final text or hidden heuristics.
+
+### 3. Scenario acceptance is now a real gate artifact
+
+The truth harness now writes:
+
+- `scenario_acceptance_matrix.json`
+- `scenario_acceptance_matrix.md`
+- `pack_state.json`
+- `final_status.md`
+
+Primary current owners:
+
+- `domain_truth_harness.py`
+- `scenario_acceptance_policy.py`
+
+This is the main reason the project is no longer relying on unit tests alone for architecture verification.
+
+### 4. Mixed AGENT semantic source material already exists
+
+Current source catalog snapshot:
+
+- `truth_harness_steps_total = 58`
+- `saved_session_questions_total = 81`
+
+The source catalog already covers mixed reusable tags such as:
+
+- `inventory_root`
+- `selected_object`
+- `selected_object_supplier`
+- `counterparty_documents`
+- `counterparty_shipment_fallback`
+- `settlements_account_60`
+- `settlements_receivables`
+- `vat`
+- `meta_smalltalk`
+- `meta_scope`
+- `meta_capability`
+- `meta_historical_capability`
+- `meta_memory`
+- `same_date_pivot`
+- `same_date_restore`
+
+This is enough to build targeted semantic packs that are not single-domain toy scripts.
+
+## Honest Phase Status
+
+Estimated overall turnaround completion: `~85%`
+
+### Phase 0. Shared Baseline
+
+Status: `100%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- architecture vocabulary is stable;
+- planning discussions already use the package and current owner names.
+
+### Phase 1. Formal Layer Separation
+
+Status: `100%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- subsystem boundaries are explicit enough in planning and in code ownership;
+- `canonical_layer`, `llm_normalizer/backend`, and domain loop/orchestration assets are no longer treated as one blob.
+
+### Phase 2. State And Transition Contracts
+
+Status: `92%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- root, selected-object, same-date, and carryover classes are materially operational;
+- transition policy is extracted;
+- scenario acceptance now evaluates continuity explicitly.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- legacy transition helpers still physically exist inside `assistantService.ts`;
+- not every follow-up family is represented as equally clean first-class transition taxonomy.
+
+### Phase 3. Capability Contracts
+
+Status: `86%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- critical inventory/address capabilities are materially contract-driven;
+- selected-object and root capability behavior is much more explicit than before.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- `resolveAddressIntent()` is still too central;
+- some business contours outside the most exercised inventory/address scenarios remain less explicit.
+
+### Phase 4. Coverage / Evidence / Truth Gate Isolation
+
+Status: `84%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- explicit truth and coverage/evidence contracts exist;
+- answer policy reads those contracts rather than rebuilding verdicts blindly from raw rows.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- `composeFactualReply()` is still a major concentration point;
+- humanized blocked/limited semantics are not yet fully separated from final packaging logic across all paths.
+
+### Phase 5. AssistantService Extraction
+
+Status: `76%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- major policy categories have real owners outside the coordinator.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- `assistantService.ts` is still about `5770` lines;
+- runtime uses extracted owners, but legacy bodies and fallback branches still live in the coordinator file;
+- code review still sometimes requires reading `assistantService` together with extracted owners.
+
+### Phase 6. Provider / Runtime Axis Hardening
+
+Status: `80%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- provider/runtime behavior is now an explicit policy concern;
+- local/openai semantics are materially less entangled with business routing.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- compatibility is stronger than before, but not yet the final universal execution contract for every contour and acceptance pack.
+
+### Phase 7. Scenario Acceptance As Primary Gate
+
+Status: `90%`
+
+Reason:
+
+- acceptance writes first-class artifacts;
+- AGENT source catalog and mixed packs exist;
+- meta-space, domain-space, and cross-domain interruptions are already represented.
+
+Remaining debt:
+
+- semantic replay remains intentionally tool-driven and script-driven rather than promoted to a mandatory UI-first loop;
+- coverage breadth should continue to grow as new domain slices are hardened.
+
+## What Has Improved Relative To The Original State
+
+Compared with the pre-turnaround baseline, the system is now materially better in the following ways:
+
+- long mixed conversations are more stable;
+- selected-object continuity is no longer treated as optional polish;
+- temporal honesty is now evaluated as an explicit invariant;
+- factual-negative answers can remain truthful instead of collapsing into generic technical refusals;
+- meta questions and memory recap are no longer purely incidental side effects of route logic;
+- architecture regressions can now be localized to route, transition, truth gate, coverage/evidence, boundary, or meta/memory layers.
+
+## What Still Remains The Main Architectural Debt
+
+### 1. `assistantService.ts` is still too large
+
+The extracted owners are real, but the coordinator has not yet been fully reduced to a thin orchestration shell.
+
+### 2. `resolveAddressIntent()` is still too central
+
+Intent resolution remains one of the most connected business nodes in the graph.
+
+This means capability and contour growth still concentrate pressure there.
+
+### 3. `composeFactualReply()` is still too central
+
+Truth contracts are now explicit, but final answer-shaping still retains too much architecture weight.
+
+This is the main remaining reason why user-facing humanization and limitation semantics are not completely isolated yet.
+
+### 4. Coverage breadth is stronger, but still selective
+
+The project is now strong on:
+
+- inventory root
+- selected-object provenance/documents
+- counterparty document and shipment-fallback cases
+- key settlement and VAT follow-ups
+- meta/memory/context integrity
+
+But not every business family has reached the same contract maturity.
+
+## Recommended Next Work
+
+The next honest architecture slice should be:
+
+1. continue reducing `assistantService.ts` to a thinner coordinator;
+2. isolate answer-shaping semantics further away from `composeFactualReply()`;
+3. keep extending AGENT packs with mixed business + meta + interruption patterns instead of single-family smoke tests;
+4. keep using scenario acceptance as the main sign-off rather than unit-test green status alone.
+
+## Bottom Line
+
+Turnaround `11` is no longer a proposal.
+
+It is an operational architecture program that is already mostly implemented in the critical path.
+
+The current state is best described as:
+
+- `architecturally real`
+- `operationally useful`
+- `not yet fully cleaned up`
+
+The remaining work is now mostly about:
+
+- removing residual concentration points;
+- tightening the last humanized answer-policy seams;
+- and broadening acceptance coverage without regressing the hard-won exact-data behavior.

docs/ARCH/11 - architecture_turnaround/README.md

@@ -25,6 +25,31 @@ This package answers the next question:
 5. [05 - assistantService_extraction_map.md](./05%20-%20assistantService_extraction_map.md)
 6. [06 - phase_acceptance_matrix.md](./06%20-%20phase_acceptance_matrix.md)
 7. [07 - external_reference_appendix.md](./07%20-%20external_reference_appendix.md)
+8. [08 - current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md](./08%20-%20current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md)
+
+## Current Status Snapshot (2026-04-17)
+
+This package is no longer planning-only.
+
+It now documents a turnaround that is already partially operational in code:
+
+- route, transition, boundary, meta, memory, and provider policy owners exist as separate modules;
+- exact-lane truth and coverage/evidence contracts exist as explicit runtime artifacts;
+- scenario acceptance writes machine-readable `scenario_acceptance_matrix.json` and `pack_state.json`;
+- AGENT semantic packs and source catalogs already exist for mixed domain/meta validation.
+
+Current honest status:
+
+- estimated overall completion: `~85%`
+- graph snapshot after latest rebuild: `5228 nodes`, `11338 edges`, `133 communities`
+- main remaining architectural pressure:
+  - `resolveAddressIntent()`
+  - `composeFactualReply()`
+  - residual coordinator/legacy pressure inside `assistantService.ts`
+
+For the detailed audit, current percentages, and remaining debt, read:
+
+- [08 - current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md](./08%20-%20current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md)
 
 ## Architectural Objects Of Planning
 
@@ -50,6 +75,7 @@ Read in this order:
 6. `05 - assistantService_extraction_map.md`
 7. `06 - phase_acceptance_matrix.md`
 8. `07 - external_reference_appendix.md`
+9. `08 - current_status_audit_2026-04-17.md`
 
 ## Planning Rules
 
@@ -68,3 +94,11 @@ When this package is fully operational, the project should stop being described
 and start being described as:
 
 - "a stateful exact-data assistant with explicit transition contracts and isolated truth gating."
+
+As of `2026-04-17`, the project is already materially closer to the target description, but not fully there yet.
+
+The biggest remaining blockers are:
+
+- residual `assistantService` overload;
+- central answer-shaping pressure in `composeFactualReply()`;
+- central intent pressure in `resolveAddressIntent()`.