ОРРКЕСТРАЦИЯ - Усилить agent loop object-centric аудитом и добить pronoun follow-up по документам закупки

.codex/agents/domain_analyst.toml

@@ -54,14 +54,20 @@ Rules:
 - Explicitly state what the first line of the answer should have been for the user.
 - If the answer is technically grounded but business-useless, say so directly and lower the score.
 - Treat selected-object continuity and reusable answer-object memory as first-class analysis objects.
+- Treat focus-object continuity, provenance-bundle reuse, and follow-up action resolution as first-class analysis objects.
 - Call out when the runtime found the underlying document/trace but failed to retain the resolved business object for the next follow-up.
+- Call out when the runtime retained the item but resolved the wrong action over that item, for example `покажи документы по этой позиции` -> `documents_by_counterparty`.
+- Call out when the runtime recomputed a supplier/date/document lookup from scratch instead of reusing an already resolved provenance bundle.
 - Distinguish `object_memory_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `business_utility_gap`, and `domain_anchor_gap` from pure route gaps.
+- Distinguish `followup_action_resolution_gap` and `bundle_reuse_gap` from both `object_memory_gap` and pure route gaps.
 - Check field truth explicitly: supplier must not be mislabeled as organization, buyer must not be mislabeled as organization, and document-side fields must not be presented as business truth without evidence.
 - Under the scenario-tree section, explicitly name the root node, critical child nodes, critical edges, and the primary user path.
 - Under the acceptance matrix, list at least the critical nodes/edges and mark each one by wording family: `canonical`, `colloquial`, `ui_selected_object`.
-- Distinguish these defect classes explicitly when relevant: `semantic_understanding_gap`, `edge_carryover_gap`, `object_memory_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `answer_shape_mismatch`, `ordering_semantics_mismatch`, `runtime_capability_gap`, `business_utility_gap`, `loop_coverage_gap`, `domain_anchor_gap`.
+- Under the state continuity section, explicitly say whether the scenario behaved as if it had a stable `focus_object` and reusable bundles such as `provenance_bundle` or `sale_trace_bundle`.
+- Distinguish these defect classes explicitly when relevant: `semantic_understanding_gap`, `edge_carryover_gap`, `object_memory_gap`, `followup_action_resolution_gap`, `bundle_reuse_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `answer_shape_mismatch`, `ordering_semantics_mismatch`, `runtime_capability_gap`, `business_utility_gap`, `loop_coverage_gap`, `domain_anchor_gap`.
 - If the root node works but the primary user path is broken at the first selected-object drilldown, treat that as a real failure of domain hardening.
 - If the runtime nearly supports the path but the loop never validated the realistic wording family, call it `loop_coverage_gap`, not product success.
+- If short pronoun follow-ups like `по ней`, `по этой позиции`, `эта`, `ее` are product-relevant, evaluate them as first-class coverage rather than as optional polish.
 
 Quality score:
 - Output one integer score from 0 to 100.

.codex/agents/orchestrator.toml

@@ -49,11 +49,15 @@ Hard rules:
 - Require the analyst to judge business usefulness, not only technical groundedness.
 - Require the analyst to judge whether the direct answer appears in the first line when the user asked a direct lookup question.
 - Treat selected-object continuity, pronoun resolution, and reusable resolved-object state as mandatory audit targets for follow-up-heavy domains.
+- Treat stable `focus_object` state and reusable bundles such as `provenance_bundle` / `sale_trace_bundle` as mandatory audit targets for follow-up-heavy domains.
+- If a short follow-up like `по ней`, `по этой позиции`, `когда купили ее`, `покажи документы по этой позиции` exists in the realistic flow, validate it explicitly instead of only validating quoted-object variants.
 - Distinguish runtime capability gaps from state-layer continuity gaps and from business-presentation gaps before choosing coder tasks.
+- Distinguish wrong follow-up action resolution over the same object from missing-object defects; for example item-follow-up drifting into counterparty documents is not the same problem as losing the item entirely.
 - If the root node works but the first critical selected-object or drilldown edge is still broken, do not treat the scenario as hardened.
 - Require an explicit `scenario_acceptance_matrix.md` artifact for follow-up-heavy domains and packs.
 - Use the matrix to drive coder tasks: patch the narrowest broken edge or wording family first, not the whole domain at once.
 - Distinguish `runtime_capability_gap` from `loop_coverage_gap`; do not confuse “not validated in the loop” with “product already works”.
+- When the analyst says the main gap is object-centric dialog state, prefer the smallest state-layer fix over prompt inflation or broad intent rewrites.
 
 Acceptance gate:
 - accepted requires analyst quality_score >= 80

.codex/skills/domain-case-loop/SKILL.md

@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ The verdict must explicitly say whether the case is:
 - a missing route/intent/capability inside project scope;
 - a true out-of-scope request.
 - a `runtime_capability_gap`, `semantic_understanding_gap`, `edge_carryover_gap`, `answer_shape_mismatch`, `ordering_semantics_mismatch`, or `loop_coverage_gap`.
-- an `object_memory_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `business_utility_gap`, or `domain_anchor_gap` when that is the real blocker.
+- an `object_memory_gap`, `followup_action_resolution_gap`, `bundle_reuse_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `business_utility_gap`, or `domain_anchor_gap` when that is the real blocker.
 
 ### Step 4 - Domain patch
 
@@ -213,6 +213,8 @@ Accepted requires:
 - Treat direct-answer-first behavior as part of correctness: if the user asked a direct lookup question, the first line must contain the direct answer before the evidence blocks.
 - Treat business usefulness as part of correctness: factual-but-business-useless output is not acceptance-quality output.
 - Treat stable follow-up object memory as part of correctness: when the prior turn already resolved the relevant item/object, the next turn must not re-ask for it.
+- Treat object-centric dialog state as part of correctness: short follow-ups like `по ней`, `по этой позиции`, `когда купили ее`, `покажи документы по этой позиции` must resolve against the active selected item before broader routing guesses.
+- Treat reusable supplier/date/document bundles as part of correctness: adjacent follow-ups over the same item should reuse a resolved provenance bundle when available.
 
 ## Domain-specific framing
 

.codex/skills/domain-case-loop/references/business_first_analyst_rubric.md

@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ The analyst must not stop at route/debug correctness. The analyst must judge whe
 The analyst evaluates five layers at once:
 - user intent;
 - scenario tree and state continuity;
+- object-centric dialog continuity;
 - business usefulness of the answer;
 - evidence and field truthfulness;
 - root cause and smallest defensible fix direction.
@@ -30,6 +31,8 @@ For every critical turn or critical edge, answer these questions explicitly:
 - originating date or period;
 - warehouse or organization scope when still relevant;
 - reusable resolved bundle, for example provenance trace or sale trace.
+- stable focus object, for example `focus_object` for a selected inventory item;
+- reusable resolved bundle, for example `provenance_bundle` or `sale_trace_bundle`.
 
 4. Did the answer stay on the same business object?
 - item question -> item answer;
@@ -39,6 +42,14 @@ For every critical turn or critical edge, answer these questions explicitly:
 
 If the system silently switched to raw documents, movements, or another lower-level object, call it an answer-shape defect.
 
+6. Did the runtime resolve the correct follow-up action on the same object?
+- `кто это поставил` should stay on item -> supplier provenance;
+- `когда купили ее` should stay on item -> purchase date;
+- `покажи документы по этой позиции` should stay on item -> purchase documents;
+- `покажи все закупки по ней` should stay on item -> receipts / provenance documents.
+
+If the selected item stayed known but the action was reinterpreted as a different drilldown such as `documents_by_counterparty`, call that a `followup_action_resolution_gap`.
+
 5. Are the surfaced fields truthful and correctly labeled?
 - do not confuse supplier with organization;
 - do not confuse buyer with organization;
@@ -62,6 +73,7 @@ The analyst must verify:
 - date/period continuity;
 - reusable evidence continuity;
 - pronoun resolution continuity.
+- follow-up action resolution continuity on the active business object.
 
 Important pronoun examples:
 - `эту позицию`
@@ -72,6 +84,12 @@ Important pronoun examples:
 
 If the previous turn already resolved a concrete object, the next turn must reuse it instead of asking for the anchor again.
 
+Short follow-up examples that should first resolve against the active object:
+- `по этой позиции`
+- `покажи документы по ней`
+- `когда купили ее`
+- `это тот же поставщик?`
+
 ## Reusable answer-object cache
 
 For follow-up-heavy domains, the analyst should explicitly look for evidence that the product behaves as if it had a reusable resolved object bundle.
@@ -81,11 +99,14 @@ Examples:
 - `current_as_of_date`
 - `current_provenance_trace`
 - `current_sale_trace`
+- `focus_object`
+- `provenance_bundle`
 - `first_purchase_date`
 - `supplier_if_known`
 - `source_document_if_known`
 
 If the runtime recomputes everything from scratch and loses the already resolved object, call that out as a state-layer defect.
+If the runtime retains the object but fails to reuse a resolved supplier/date/document bundle for the next adjacent lookup, call that out as a `bundle_reuse_gap`.
 
 ## Root-cause layers
 
@@ -94,6 +115,8 @@ Use one or more of these root-cause layers explicitly:
 - `runtime_capability_gap`
 - `edge_carryover_gap`
 - `object_memory_gap`
+- `followup_action_resolution_gap`
+- `bundle_reuse_gap`
 - `field_mapping_gap`
 - `answer_shape_mismatch`
 - `ordering_semantics_mismatch`
@@ -117,6 +140,10 @@ The analyst verdict should expose at least:
 - `root_cause_layers`
 - `broken_edge_ids`
 - `violated_invariants`
+- `focus_object_continuity_ok`
+- `bundle_reuse_ok`
+- `followup_action_resolution_ok`
+- `recommended_state_objects`
 
 ## Inventory-specific reminders
 
@@ -124,5 +151,6 @@ For inventory follow-up chains, verify all of these:
 - the selected item remains the current focus object after the user clicks a result;
 - provenance questions answer supplier/date/document first, not only raw movement rows;
 - `когда купили` can reuse the already resolved provenance bundle;
+- `покажи документы по этой позиции` stays in item-level purchase documents instead of falling into counterparty documents;
 - supplier and organization are not mixed up in the surfaced answer;
 - `на эту дату` keeps the original stock date unless the user explicitly changed it.

.codex/skills/domain-case-loop/references/case_brief_template.md

@@ -28,21 +28,30 @@
 - canonical
 - colloquial
 - ui_selected_object
+- pronoun_followup when the active item can be referenced indirectly
 
 ## Required carryover invariants
 - selected object / item
+- focus object / active business object
 - date or period
 - warehouse if relevant
 - organization if relevant
 - expected answer shape
 - direct-answer-first when the user asked a direct lookup question
 - reusable resolved-object continuity when the user asks a follow-up about the same selected object
+- bundle reuse when the previous turn already resolved supplier/date/document details
+- follow-up action resolution on the same selected object
 
 ## Field truth constraints
 - do not confuse supplier with organization
 - do not confuse buyer with organization
 - do not surface technical document-side fields as business truth without proof
 
+## Recommended state objects
+- focus_object
+- provenance_bundle when the scenario contains item purchase trace
+- sale_trace_bundle when the scenario contains buyer / sale follow-ups
+
 ## Contour status
 - in_contour / outside_current_contour / unknown
 
@@ -64,5 +73,6 @@
 - root node works
 - critical edges on the primary user path work
 - colloquial and UI-generated follow-up variants work
+- pronoun-only follow-up variants work when the UX already established a selected object
 - direct answer is placed first where expected
 - output is business-useful, not only technically grounded

.codex/skills/domain-case-loop/references/scenario_tree_acceptance_canon.md

@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ Example for inventory:
 - child: selected item -> purchase documents
 - child: selected item -> aging on the same date
 - child: selected item -> sale trace
+- child: selected item -> pronoun follow-up purchase documents
 
 The primary user path is the path a real user is most likely to take first, not the prettiest canonical wording.
 
@@ -60,12 +61,14 @@ Each critical edge must define its required carryover invariants.
 
 Typical invariants:
 - selected object survives from previous assistant output
+- stable focus object survives as the active business object
 - originating date / period survives into follow-up filters
 - warehouse survives if the follow-up still targets the same stock slice
 - organization survives if the previous slice was organization-bound
 - route family remains in the same business contour unless the user clearly changed intent
 - reusable resolved-object state survives when the previous turn already answered a closely related lookup
 - pronoun references can reuse the active focus object when the wording supports it
+- follow-up action resolution stays on the same business object, for example item -> purchase documents rather than counterparty -> documents
 
 If an edge loses a required invariant, that is a real regression even if the target node works in isolation.
 
@@ -80,6 +83,7 @@ Examples:
 - resolved purchase document bundle
 
 If turn N already resolved such an object and turn N+1 asks a natural follow-up about the same object, the system should reuse that state instead of demanding the same anchor again.
+If turn N already resolved supplier/date/document provenance and turn N+1 asks for one adjacent field such as `когда купили ее` or `покажи документы по этой позиции`, the system should prefer bundle reuse before re-entering a broad generic router.
 
 ## Mandatory paraphrase families
 
@@ -89,8 +93,9 @@ Minimum family:
 - `canonical`
 - `colloquial`
 - `ui_selected_object`
+- `pronoun_followup` when the UX already established a selected object or active item
 
-If canonical works but colloquial or UI-generated follow-up fails, the node/edge is not accepted.
+If canonical works but colloquial, UI-generated, or pronoun-only follow-up fails, the node/edge is not accepted.
 
 ## Acceptance matrix
 
@@ -118,6 +123,8 @@ Use these classes explicitly:
 - `semantic_understanding_gap`
 - `edge_carryover_gap`
 - `object_memory_gap`
+- `followup_action_resolution_gap`
+- `bundle_reuse_gap`
 - `field_mapping_gap`
 - `answer_shape_mismatch`
 - `ordering_semantics_mismatch`
@@ -130,6 +137,8 @@ Definitions:
 - `semantic_understanding_gap`: the system did not understand the real user meaning
 - `edge_carryover_gap`: the follow-up lost date / object / scope across steps
 - `object_memory_gap`: the system resolved the object once but failed to retain it for the next follow-up
+- `followup_action_resolution_gap`: the system kept the business object but resolved the wrong action over that object, for example item-follow-up -> counterparty-documents
+- `bundle_reuse_gap`: the system resolved a reusable supplier/date/document bundle once but failed to reuse it for an adjacent follow-up
 - `field_mapping_gap`: the answer surfaced the wrong business field or mislabeled a field
 - `answer_shape_mismatch`: the business object in the answer does not match the requested object
 - `ordering_semantics_mismatch`: ranking / chronology semantics are wrong
@@ -149,6 +158,7 @@ The analyst must:
 - verify business usefulness explicitly, not only technical validity;
 - verify field truthfulness for surfaced supplier / buyer / organization labels;
 - verify selected-object continuity and reusable object memory;
+- verify focus-object continuity, pronoun follow-up continuity, and follow-up action resolution on the active business object;
 - verify answer granularity and ordering semantics;
 - lower the score when any critical edge or paraphrase family is broken.
 
@@ -158,6 +168,7 @@ The orchestrator must:
 - define the tree before iterating deeply;
 - prioritize the primary user path first;
 - rerun at least one colloquial variant and one UI-selected-object variant for each critical branch;
+- rerun at least one short pronoun follow-up such as `по ней` / `по этой позиции` when the product UX already established a selected object;
 - treat a broken critical edge as an unfinished scenario even if the root node works;
 - route coder work to the narrowest broken edge or node rather than issuing broad “improve the domain” tasks.
 
@@ -167,6 +178,7 @@ Do not accept a domain when:
 - only the root node works;
 - only one curated phrasing works;
 - selected-object follow-up is broken;
+- pronoun-only selected-object follow-up is broken or misrouted to another business object;
 - `на эту дату` / `на ту дату` loses the originating date;
 - the answer shape is wrong for the business question;
 - chronology / ranking semantics are inverted;

.codex/skills/domain-case-loop/references/verdict_template.md

@@ -26,9 +26,12 @@
 
 ## 7. State continuity and selected-object memory
 - selected object continuity:
+- focus object continuity:
 - date/period continuity:
 - reusable answer-object continuity:
+- provenance or sale bundle reuse:
 - pronoun resolution continuity:
+- follow-up action resolution continuity:
 
 ## 8. Field truth and evidence quality
 - supplier vs organization:
@@ -53,10 +56,12 @@
 - Canonical wording:
 - Colloquial wording:
 - UI-generated selected-object wording:
+- Pronoun-only follow-up wording:
 - Carryover invariants:
 - Expected answer shape:
 - Expected direct answer:
 - Business usefulness:
+- Recommended state objects:
 - Defect class:
 
 ## 14. Acceptance criteria for rerun
@@ -66,6 +71,7 @@
 - Require direct-answer-first behavior on direct lookup questions.
 - Require business-useful output rather than technically-grounded-but-noisy output.
 - Require selected-object continuity and reusable answer-object continuity on follow-up chains.
+- Require focus-object continuity, bundle reuse, and correct action resolution for short follow-ups like `по ней` / `по этой позиции` when they are part of the business flow.
 
 ## 15. Quality score
 - integer from 0 to 100

AGENTS.md

@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ Rules:
 - For critical branches, validate at least canonical wording, colloquial wording, and UI-generated selected-object wording when that UX exists.
 - Treat temporal carryover, selected-object carryover, answer-shape match, and ordering semantics as first-class acceptance invariants rather than optional polish.
 - Treat direct-answer-first behavior, business usefulness, selected-object memory, and field truthfulness as first-class analyst criteria rather than optional presentation polish.
+- Treat stable `focus_object`, reusable bundles such as `provenance_bundle`, and pronoun-style follow-up resolution (`по ней`, `по этой позиции`) as first-class analyst criteria in follow-up-heavy domains.
 - If a case falls outside the current routed contour because the route/intent/capability is not wired yet, treat it as domain enablement work for this project, not as automatic out-of-scope rejection.
 - For new unmarked domains, `needs_exact_capability` means "bootstrap or extend the contour" rather than "close the case as unsupported".
 - A case can be marked `accepted` only when analyst verdict is at least `80/100`, no unresolved `P0` remains, and the rerun does not mask heuristic output as confirmed.

docs/orchestration/active_domain_contract.json

@@ -41,9 +41,9 @@
     "buyer_candidate": "Департамент капитального ремонта города Москвы"
   },
   "question_pool": {
-    "total_questions": 20,
+    "total_questions": 21,
     "core_questions_total": 17,
-    "followup_checkpoints_total": 3,
+    "followup_checkpoints_total": 4,
     "questions": [
       {
         "question_id": "Q01",
@@ -224,6 +224,15 @@
         "role": "critical_child",
         "wording_family": "ui_selected_object_colloquial",
         "semantic_goal": "проверить selected-object follow-up в закупочные документы без ручного переписывания item"
+      },
+      {
+        "question_id": "Q21",
+        "text": "покажи документы по этой позиции",
+        "layer": "selected_item_provenance",
+        "node_id": "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents",
+        "role": "critical_child",
+        "wording_family": "pronoun_followup",
+        "semantic_goal": "проверить короткий местоименный follow-up по активному товару без съезда в counterparty drilldown"
       }
     ]
   },
@@ -247,6 +256,10 @@
     {
       "family_id": "followup_date_carryover",
       "description": "follow-up с фразой `на эту дату` или `на ту дату`, где дата обязана тянуться из предыдущего шага"
+    },
+    {
+      "family_id": "pronoun_followup",
+      "description": "короткий follow-up по активному объекту через местоимение или указатель типа `по ней`, `по этой позиции`, `ее`"
     }
   ],
   "scenario_tree": {
@@ -277,8 +290,8 @@
         "covers_question_ids": ["Q06", "Q19"],
         "expected_intents": ["inventory_purchase_provenance_for_item"],
         "expected_answer_shape": "direct_supplier_answer_first_then_evidence",
-        "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "colloquial", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
-        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope", "organization_scope"],
+        "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "colloquial", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial", "pronoun_followup"],
+        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope", "organization_scope", "reusable_bundle"],
         "children": ["N04_selected_item_purchase_date", "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents", "N09_old_purchase_aging"]
       },
       {
@@ -293,11 +306,11 @@
       {
         "node_id": "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents",
         "title": "Закупочные документы выбранного товара",
-        "covers_question_ids": ["Q10", "Q20"],
+        "covers_question_ids": ["Q10", "Q20", "Q21"],
         "expected_intents": ["inventory_purchase_documents_for_item"],
         "expected_answer_shape": "document_list_for_selected_item",
-        "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
-        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope"]
+        "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial", "pronoun_followup"],
+        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope", "reusable_bundle", "followup_action_resolution"]
       },
       {
         "node_id": "N09_old_purchase_aging",
@@ -381,7 +394,7 @@
         "to_node": "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents",
         "transition_type": "selected_object_deeper_trace",
         "primary_user_path": true,
-        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "date_scope"],
+        "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "reusable_bundle", "followup_action_resolution"],
         "failure_means": "сломано углубление из поставщика в документы закупки"
       },
       {
@@ -527,13 +540,13 @@
       {
         "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
         "title": "Selected-item supplier provenance",
-        "question_ids": ["Q02", "Q06", "Q09", "Q10", "Q19", "Q20"],
+        "question_ids": ["Q02", "Q06", "Q09", "Q10", "Q19", "Q20", "Q21"],
         "node_ids": ["N01_stock_snapshot", "N03_selected_item_supplier", "N04_selected_item_purchase_date", "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents"],
         "acceptance_canon": {
           "root_step_id": "step_01_snapshot_historical",
-          "primary_user_path": ["step_01_snapshot_historical", "step_02_selected_item_supplier_colloquial", "step_05_selected_item_documents_ui"],
-          "required_paraphrase_families": ["canonical", "colloquial", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
-          "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope", "organization_scope", "answer_shape"]
+          "primary_user_path": ["step_01_snapshot_historical", "step_02_selected_item_supplier_colloquial", "step_06_selected_item_documents_pronoun"],
+          "required_paraphrase_families": ["canonical", "colloquial", "ui_selected_object", "ui_selected_object_colloquial", "pronoun_followup"],
+          "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "warehouse_scope", "organization_scope", "answer_shape", "reusable_bundle", "followup_action_resolution"]
         },
         "steps": [
           {
@@ -606,10 +619,26 @@
               "source": "binding_target_date_historical"
             },
             "expected_capability": "inventory_purchase_documents_for_item",
-            "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "date_scope"]
+            "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "reusable_bundle", "followup_action_resolution"]
           },
           {
-            "step_id": "step_06_selected_item_documents_canonical",
+            "step_id": "step_06_selected_item_documents_pronoun",
+            "question_id": "Q21",
+            "node_id": "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents",
+            "node_role": "critical_child",
+            "paraphrase_family": "pronoun_followup",
+            "title": "Selected item purchase documents pronoun follow-up",
+            "question": "покажи документы по этой позиции",
+            "depends_on": ["step_01_snapshot_historical", "step_02_selected_item_supplier_colloquial"],
+            "analysis_context": {
+              "as_of_date": "2019-03-31",
+              "source": "binding_target_date_historical"
+            },
+            "expected_capability": "inventory_purchase_documents_for_item",
+            "required_carryover_invariants": ["selected_object", "focus_object", "date_scope", "reusable_bundle", "followup_action_resolution"]
+          },
+          {
+            "step_id": "step_07_selected_item_documents_canonical",
             "question_id": "Q10",
             "node_id": "N05_selected_item_purchase_documents",
             "node_role": "critical_child",
@@ -841,10 +870,18 @@
     "business_utility_required": true,
     "state_continuity_required": true,
     "selected_object_memory_required": true,
+    "focus_object_required": true,
+    "pronoun_followup_resolution_required": true,
+    "followup_action_resolution_required": true,
+    "bundle_reuse_required": true,
     "field_truth_checks": [
       "supplier_vs_organization",
       "buyer_vs_organization"
     ],
+    "required_state_objects": [
+      "focus_object",
+      "provenance_bundle"
+    ],
     "reusable_answer_object_expectations": [
       "current_item",
       "current_as_of_date",
@@ -857,6 +894,7 @@
     "do_not_accept_if": [
       "работает только root snapshot, но ломается critical selected-object edge",
       "работает только canonical wording, но ломается colloquial или ui_selected_object wording",
+      "работает только quoted selected-object wording, но ломается короткий местоименный follow-up по активной позиции",
       "теряется date_scope на follow-up с `на эту дату` или `на ту дату`",
       "ответ меняет business object, например вместо item-level ответа отдаёт dump документов",
       "нарушается ordering semantics, например `старые закупки` идут не oldest-first"
@@ -866,11 +904,14 @@
       "critical edges on primary_user_paths",
       "canonical coverage on critical nodes",
       "colloquial coverage on critical nodes",
-      "ui_selected_object coverage where UI supports object selection"
+      "ui_selected_object coverage where UI supports object selection",
+      "pronoun_followup coverage where the UX already established an active selected object"
     ],
     "required_defect_classes": [
       "semantic_understanding_gap",
       "edge_carryover_gap",
+      "followup_action_resolution_gap",
+      "bundle_reuse_gap",
       "answer_shape_mismatch",
       "ordering_semantics_mismatch",
       "runtime_capability_gap",
@@ -903,6 +944,16 @@
       "pattern_id": "F05_oldest_first_violation",
       "symptom": "`старые закупки` are listed newest-first or in another non-business order",
       "defect_class": "ordering_semantics_mismatch"
+    },
+    {
+      "pattern_id": "F06_pronoun_item_documents_misroute",
+      "symptom": "short follow-up like `покажи документы по этой позиции` drifts into `documents_by_counterparty` instead of selected-item purchase documents",
+      "defect_class": "followup_action_resolution_gap"
+    },
+    {
+      "pattern_id": "F07_provenance_bundle_not_reused",
+      "symptom": "supplier/date/document lookup was already resolved for the selected item but adjacent follow-up recomputes broadly or loses the reusable bundle",
+      "defect_class": "bundle_reuse_gap"
     }
   ],
   "legacy_references": [

docs/orchestration/schemas/domain_loop_analyst_verdict.schema.json

@@ -16,6 +16,10 @@
     "state_continuity_score",
     "answer_shape_score",
     "evidence_clarity_score",
+    "focus_object_continuity_ok",
+    "bundle_reuse_ok",
+    "followup_action_resolution_ok",
+    "recommended_state_objects",
     "loop_decision",
     "requires_user_decision",
     "user_decision_type",
@@ -78,6 +82,21 @@
       "minimum": 0,
       "maximum": 100
     },
+    "focus_object_continuity_ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "bundle_reuse_ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "followup_action_resolution_ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "recommended_state_objects": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
     "loop_decision": {
       "type": "string",
       "enum": ["accepted", "continue", "partial", "blocked", "needs_exact_capability"]
@@ -121,6 +140,8 @@
           "runtime_capability_gap",
           "edge_carryover_gap",
           "object_memory_gap",
+          "followup_action_resolution_gap",
+          "bundle_reuse_gap",
           "field_mapping_gap",
           "answer_shape_mismatch",
           "ordering_semantics_mismatch",
@@ -170,6 +191,8 @@
               "semantic_understanding_gap",
               "edge_carryover_gap",
               "object_memory_gap",
+              "followup_action_resolution_gap",
+              "bundle_reuse_gap",
               "field_mapping_gap",
               "answer_shape_mismatch",
               "ordering_semantics_mismatch",

llm_normalizer/backend/dist/services/addressIntentResolver.js

@@ -1341,7 +1341,7 @@ function hasInventorySaleTraceSignal(text) {
     return /(?:продаж|покупател|buyer|sale trace|purchase[\s-]?to[\s-]?sale|purchase -> warehouse -> sale|закупка.*продаж)/iu.test(text);
 }
 function hasSelectedObjectInventoryCue(text) {
-    return /(?:по\s+выбранному\s+объекту|selected\s+object)/iu.test(text);
+    return /(?:по\s+выбранному\s+объекту|по\s+этой\s+позиции|по\s+этому\s+товару|по\s+нему|по\s+ней|по\s+нему\s+же|по\s+ней\s+же|selected\s+object)/iu.test(text);
 }
 function hasSelectedObjectInventoryProvenanceSignal(text) {
     return (hasSelectedObjectInventoryCue(text) &&

llm_normalizer/backend/dist/services/address_runtime/composeStage.js

@@ -3107,7 +3107,13 @@ function composeFactualReply(intent, rows, options = {}) {
         const purchaseRows = rows.filter((row) => isInventoryPurchaseMovement(row));
         const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
         const itemLabel = summary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+        const directAnswerLine = summary.counterparties.length === 1
+            ? `По товару ${itemLabel} документы поступления связаны с поставщиком: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+            : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+                ? `По товару ${itemLabel} документы поступления ведут к нескольким поставщикам: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 4).join("; ")}.`
+                : `По товару ${itemLabel} найдены документы поступления, но поставщик не материализован отдельным полем в текущем exact-контуре.`;
         const lines = [
+            directAnswerLine,
             `Собран подтвержденный список документов поступления по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
             "",
             "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -3191,7 +3197,13 @@ function composeFactualReply(intent, rows, options = {}) {
         const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
         const unresolvedRows = purchaseRows.filter((row) => extractInventoryCounterpartyCandidates(row).length === 0);
         const warehouseLabel = summary.warehouses[0] ?? "не указанного склада";
+        const directAnswerLine = summary.counterparties.length === 1
+            ? `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} выявлен поставщик: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+            : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+                ? `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} найдено несколько поставщиков: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 6).join("; ")}.`
+                : `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} поставщик в текущем exact-контуре не материализован.`;
         const lines = [
+            directAnswerLine,
             `Собран exact-срез supplier overlap для складского остатка до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
             "",
             "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -3287,7 +3299,13 @@ function composeFactualReply(intent, rows, options = {}) {
         const saleRows = rows.filter((row) => isInventorySaleMovement(row));
         const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(saleRows);
         const itemLabel = summary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+        const directAnswerLine = summary.counterparties.length === 1
+            ? `По товару ${itemLabel} покупатель определен: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+            : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+                ? `По товару ${itemLabel} найдено несколько покупателей: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 4).join("; ")}.`
+                : `По товару ${itemLabel} покупатель в текущем exact-контуре не материализован.`;
         const lines = [
+            directAnswerLine,
             `Собран подтвержденный след выбытия по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
             "",
             "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -3332,7 +3350,11 @@ function composeFactualReply(intent, rows, options = {}) {
         const purchaseSummary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
         const saleSummary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(saleRows);
         const itemLabel = purchaseSummary.item ?? saleSummary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+        const directAnswerLine = purchaseSummary.counterparties.length === 1 && saleSummary.counterparties.length === 1
+            ? `По товару ${itemLabel} цепочка поставки и продажи связана с поставщиком ${purchaseSummary.counterparties[0]} и покупателем ${saleSummary.counterparties[0]}.`
+            : `По товару ${itemLabel} цепочка поставки и продажи подтверждена частично или разнообразно: детали идут следом.`;
         const lines = [
+            directAnswerLine,
             `Собрана документальная цепочка по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
             "",
             "Блок 1. Статус результата",

llm_normalizer/backend/dist/services/address_runtime/decomposeStage.js

@@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ function hasInventorySupplierFollowupCue(text) {
     return /(?:кто\s+(?:(?:это|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+)?(?:нам\s+)?поставил|кто\s+(?:нам\s+)?поставил\s+(?:это|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)|от\s+какого\s+поставщика|у\s+какого\s+поставщика|от\s+кого\s+куплен|supplier|vendor|поставщик)/iu.test(String(text ?? ""));
 }
 function hasInventoryPurchaseDocumentsFollowupCue(text) {
-    return /(?:по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|какими\s+документами\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|какими\s+документами\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|purchase\s+documents|documents\s+of\s+purchase|through\s+which\s+documents)/iu.test(String(text ?? ""));
+    return /(?:по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|какими\s+документами\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|какими\s+документами\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|покажи\s+документы\s+по\s+(?:этой\s+позиции|этому\s+товару|ней|нему)|документы\s+по\s+(?:этой\s+позиции|этому\s+товару|ней|нему)|purchase\s+documents|documents\s+of\s+purchase|through\s+which\s+documents)/iu.test(String(text ?? ""));
 }
 function hasAddressFollowupContextSignal(text) {
     const normalized = String(text ?? "").trim();
@@ -328,6 +328,7 @@ function mergeFollowupFilters(current, intent, userMessage, followupContext) {
     const previousCounterparty = toNonEmptyString(previous.counterparty);
     const previousContract = toNonEmptyString(previous.contract);
     const previousAccount = toNonEmptyString(previous.account);
+    const previousItem = toNonEmptyString(previous.item);
     const previousOrganization = toNonEmptyString(previous.organization);
     const previousAsOfDate = toNonEmptyString(previous.as_of_date);
     const previousPeriodFrom = toNonEmptyString(previous.period_from);
@@ -440,6 +441,16 @@ function mergeFollowupFilters(current, intent, userMessage, followupContext) {
             merged.counterparty = inheritedCounterparty;
             reasons.push(currentCounterparty ? "counterparty_replaced_from_followup_context" : "counterparty_from_followup_context");
         }
+        if ((intent === "inventory_purchase_provenance_for_item" ||
+            intent === "inventory_purchase_documents_for_item" ||
+            intent === "inventory_sale_trace_for_item" ||
+            intent === "inventory_purchase_to_sale_chain" ||
+            intent === "inventory_aging_by_purchase_date") &&
+            !toNonEmptyString(merged.item) &&
+            previousItem) {
+            merged.item = previousItem;
+            reasons.push("item_from_followup_context");
+        }
         if (sameDateRequested) {
             const inheritedAsOfDate = previousAsOfDate ?? previousPeriodTo ?? previousPeriodFrom;
             if (inheritedAsOfDate && merged.as_of_date !== inheritedAsOfDate) {

llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/addressIntentResolver.ts

@@ -1604,7 +1604,9 @@ function hasInventorySaleTraceSignal(text: string): boolean {
 }
 
 function hasSelectedObjectInventoryCue(text: string): boolean {
-  return /(?:по\s+выбранному\s+объекту|selected\s+object)/iu.test(text);
+  return /(?:по\s+выбранному\s+объекту|по\s+этой\s+позиции|по\s+этому\s+товару|по\s+нему|по\s+ней|по\s+нему\s+же|по\s+ней\s+же|selected\s+object)/iu.test(
+    text
+  );
 }
 
 function hasSelectedObjectInventoryProvenanceSignal(text: string): boolean {

llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/address_runtime/composeStage.ts

@@ -4020,7 +4020,14 @@ export function composeFactualReply(
     const purchaseRows = rows.filter((row) => isInventoryPurchaseMovement(row));
     const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
     const itemLabel = summary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+    const directAnswerLine =
+      summary.counterparties.length === 1
+        ? `По товару ${itemLabel} документы поступления связаны с поставщиком: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+        : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+          ? `По товару ${itemLabel} документы поступления ведут к нескольким поставщикам: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 4).join("; ")}.`
+          : `По товару ${itemLabel} найдены документы поступления, но поставщик не материализован отдельным полем в текущем exact-контуре.`;
     const lines: string[] = [
+      directAnswerLine,
       `Собран подтвержденный список документов поступления по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
       "",
       "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -4105,7 +4112,14 @@ export function composeFactualReply(
     const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
     const unresolvedRows = purchaseRows.filter((row) => extractInventoryCounterpartyCandidates(row).length === 0);
     const warehouseLabel = summary.warehouses[0] ?? "не указанного склада";
+    const directAnswerLine =
+      summary.counterparties.length === 1
+        ? `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} выявлен поставщик: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+        : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+          ? `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} найдено несколько поставщиков: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 6).join("; ")}.`
+          : `По складскому остатку ${warehouseLabel} поставщик в текущем exact-контуре не материализован.`;
     const lines: string[] = [
+      directAnswerLine,
       `Собран exact-срез supplier overlap для складского остатка до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
       "",
       "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -4201,7 +4215,14 @@ export function composeFactualReply(
     const saleRows = rows.filter((row) => isInventorySaleMovement(row));
     const summary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(saleRows);
     const itemLabel = summary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+    const directAnswerLine =
+      summary.counterparties.length === 1
+        ? `По товару ${itemLabel} покупатель определен: ${summary.counterparties[0]}.`
+        : summary.counterparties.length > 1
+          ? `По товару ${itemLabel} найдено несколько покупателей: ${summary.counterparties.slice(0, 4).join("; ")}.`
+          : `По товару ${itemLabel} покупатель в текущем exact-контуре не материализован.`;
     const lines: string[] = [
+      directAnswerLine,
       `Собран подтвержденный след выбытия по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
       "",
       "Блок 1. Статус результата",
@@ -4244,7 +4265,12 @@ export function composeFactualReply(
     const purchaseSummary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(purchaseRows);
     const saleSummary = summarizeInventoryTraceRows(saleRows);
     const itemLabel = purchaseSummary.item ?? saleSummary.item ?? "товар не определен";
+    const directAnswerLine =
+      purchaseSummary.counterparties.length === 1 && saleSummary.counterparties.length === 1
+        ? `По товару ${itemLabel} цепочка поставки и продажи связана с поставщиком ${purchaseSummary.counterparties[0]} и покупателем ${saleSummary.counterparties[0]}.`
+        : `По товару ${itemLabel} цепочка поставки и продажи подтверждена частично или разнообразно: детали идут следом.`;
     const lines: string[] = [
+      directAnswerLine,
       `Собрана документальная цепочка по товару ${itemLabel} до ${formatDateRu(asOfDate)}.`,
       "",
       "Блок 1. Статус результата",

llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/address_runtime/decomposeStage.ts

@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ function hasInventorySupplierFollowupCue(text: string): boolean {
 }
 
 function hasInventoryPurchaseDocumentsFollowupCue(text: string): boolean {
-  return /(?:по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|какими\s+документами\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|какими\s+документами\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|purchase\s+documents|documents\s+of\s+purchase|through\s+which\s+documents)/iu.test(
+  return /(?:по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|по\s+каким\s+документам\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|какими\s+документами\s+(?:это|его|этот\s+товар|эту\s+позицию)\s+купили|какими\s+документами\s+(?:был\s+)?куплен|покажи\s+документы\s+по\s+(?:этой\s+позиции|этому\s+товару|ней|нему)|документы\s+по\s+(?:этой\s+позиции|этому\s+товару|ней|нему)|purchase\s+documents|documents\s+of\s+purchase|through\s+which\s+documents)/iu.test(
     String(text ?? "")
   );
 }
@@ -424,6 +424,7 @@ function mergeFollowupFilters(
   const previousCounterparty = toNonEmptyString(previous.counterparty);
   const previousContract = toNonEmptyString(previous.contract);
   const previousAccount = toNonEmptyString(previous.account);
+  const previousItem = toNonEmptyString(previous.item);
   const previousOrganization = toNonEmptyString(previous.organization);
   const previousAsOfDate = toNonEmptyString(previous.as_of_date);
   const previousPeriodFrom = toNonEmptyString(previous.period_from);
@@ -554,6 +555,18 @@ function mergeFollowupFilters(
       merged.counterparty = inheritedCounterparty;
       reasons.push(currentCounterparty ? "counterparty_replaced_from_followup_context" : "counterparty_from_followup_context");
     }
+    if (
+      (intent === "inventory_purchase_provenance_for_item" ||
+        intent === "inventory_purchase_documents_for_item" ||
+        intent === "inventory_sale_trace_for_item" ||
+        intent === "inventory_purchase_to_sale_chain" ||
+        intent === "inventory_aging_by_purchase_date") &&
+      !toNonEmptyString(merged.item) &&
+      previousItem
+    ) {
+      merged.item = previousItem;
+      reasons.push("item_from_followup_context");
+    }
     if (sameDateRequested) {
       const inheritedAsOfDate = previousAsOfDate ?? previousPeriodTo ?? previousPeriodFrom;
       if (inheritedAsOfDate && merged.as_of_date !== inheritedAsOfDate) {

llm_normalizer/backend/tests/addressQueryRuntimeM23.test.ts

@@ -293,6 +293,7 @@ describe("address query shape classifier", () => {
         useRubCurrency: true
       }
     );
+    expect(reply.text.split("\n")[0]).toContain("поставщиком");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("Шкаф картотечный");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("Поступление товаров и услуг 0001");
     expect(reply.semantics?.result_mode).toBe("confirmed_balance");
@@ -319,6 +320,7 @@ describe("address query shape classifier", () => {
         useRubCurrency: true
       }
     );
+    expect(reply.text.split("\n")[0]).toContain("поставщиком");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("закупочный след");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("Гамма-мебель, ООО");
     expect(reply.semantics?.balance_confirmed).toBe(true);
@@ -345,6 +347,7 @@ describe("address query shape classifier", () => {
         useRubCurrency: true
       }
     );
+    expect(reply.text.split("\n")[0]).toContain("покупатель");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("след выбытия");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("Реализация товаров и услуг 0007");
     expect(reply.text).toContain("Департамент капитального ремонта города Москвы");
@@ -3947,6 +3950,28 @@ describe("address decompose stage follow-up carryover", () => {
     ).toBe(true);
   });
 
+  it("promotes pronoun selected-item purchase-doc follow-up into inventory purchase documents with inherited date context", () => {
+    const result = runAddressDecomposeStage('покажи документы по этой позиции', {
+      previous_intent: "inventory_purchase_provenance_for_item",
+      previous_filters: {
+        as_of_date: "2019-03-31",
+        period_from: "2019-03-01",
+        period_to: "2019-03-31",
+        item: "Столешница 600*3050*26 дуб ниагара"
+      },
+      previous_anchor_type: "unknown",
+      previous_anchor_value: null
+    });
+    expect(result).not.toBeNull();
+    expect(result?.intent.intent).toBe("inventory_purchase_documents_for_item");
+    expect(result?.filters.extracted_filters.item).toBe("Столешница 600*3050*26 дуб ниагара");
+    expect(result?.filters.extracted_filters.as_of_date).toBe("2019-03-31");
+    expect(
+      result?.baseReasons?.includes("intent_adjusted_to_inventory_followup_context") ||
+        result?.intent.reasons.includes("inventory_selected_object_purchase_documents_signal_detected")
+    ).toBe(true);
+  });
+
   it("keeps slang all-customers-all-time wording in address lane via resolved intent fallback", () => {
     const result = runAddressDecomposeStage("выведи всех заков за все время", null);
     expect(result).not.toBeNull();

scripts/domain_case_loop.py

@@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ def merge_analysis_context(base_context: Any, override_context: Any) -> dict[str
 def carry_forward_analysis_context(
     scenario_state: dict[str, Any],
     analysis_context: dict[str, Any],
+    *,
+    prefer_carryover: bool = False,
 ) -> dict[str, Any]:
     carried = dict(analysis_context)
 
@@ -179,10 +181,23 @@ def carry_forward_analysis_context(
         date_scope = semantic_memory.get("date_scope")
         if isinstance(date_scope, dict):
             carried_as_of_date = normalize_iso_date(date_scope.get("as_of_date"))
-            if carried_as_of_date and not carried.get("as_of_date"):
+            if carried_as_of_date and (prefer_carryover or not carried.get("as_of_date")):
                 carried["as_of_date"] = carried_as_of_date
                 if not carried.get("source"):
                     carried["source"] = "scenario_state_carryover"
+        for key in (
+            "focus_object",
+            "selected_object_ref",
+            "warehouse_scope",
+            "organization_scope",
+            "provenance_bundle",
+            "sale_trace_bundle",
+            "purchase_documents_bundle",
+            "supplier_if_known",
+            "first_purchase_date",
+        ):
+            if (prefer_carryover or key not in carried) and semantic_memory.get(key) is not None:
+                carried[key] = semantic_memory.get(key)
     return carried
 
 
@@ -1386,7 +1401,11 @@ def execute_scenario_manifest(
     for step_index, step in enumerate(manifest["steps"], start=1):
         step_dir = steps_dir / step["step_id"]
         step_analysis_context = merge_analysis_context(manifest.get("analysis_context"), step.get("analysis_context"))
-        step_analysis_context = carry_forward_analysis_context(scenario_state, step_analysis_context)
+        step_analysis_context = carry_forward_analysis_context(
+            scenario_state,
+            step_analysis_context,
+            prefer_carryover=bool(step.get("depends_on")),
+        )
         try:
             resolved_question = resolve_question_template(step["question_template"], scenario_state)
             result = run_assistant_step(
@@ -1690,6 +1709,24 @@ def derive_coverage_status(statuses: list[str]) -> str:
     return "partial"
 
 
+def derive_pack_final_status(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> str:
+    aggregate_statuses = [item["final_status"] for item in scenario_results]
+    if not aggregate_statuses:
+        return "blocked"
+    if any(status == "blocked" for status in aggregate_statuses):
+        return "blocked"
+    if any(status == "needs_exact_capability" for status in aggregate_statuses):
+        return "needs_exact_capability"
+    if any(status == "partial" for status in aggregate_statuses):
+        return "partial"
+
+    acceptance_matrix = build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack, scenario_results)
+    if "| partial |" in acceptance_matrix:
+        return "partial"
+
+    return "accepted" if len(scenario_results) == len(pack.get("scenarios") or []) else "partial"
+
+
 def build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> str:
     scenario_status_map = {
         str(item.get("scenario_id") or ""): str(item.get("final_status") or "unknown")
@@ -1709,6 +1746,7 @@ def build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: lis
 
     scenario_questions_map: dict[str, list[str]] = {}
     scenario_nodes_map: dict[str, list[str]] = {}
+    scenario_wording_map: dict[str, list[str]] = {}
     for scenario in scenarios:
         if not isinstance(scenario, dict):
             continue
@@ -1737,9 +1775,16 @@ def build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: lis
                     node_ids.append(node_id)
         scenario_questions_map[scenario_id] = question_ids
         scenario_nodes_map[scenario_id] = list(dict.fromkeys(node_ids))
+        scenario_wording_map[scenario_id] = _scenario_observed_wording_families(scenario)
 
     scenario_tree = pack.get("scenario_tree") if isinstance(pack.get("scenario_tree"), dict) else {}
     source_contract = pack.get("source_contract") if isinstance(pack.get("source_contract"), dict) else {}
+    all_nodes: list[dict[str, Any]] = []
+    for section_key in ("root_nodes", "critical_nodes", "supporting_nodes"):
+        raw_nodes = scenario_tree.get(section_key)
+        if isinstance(raw_nodes, list):
+            all_nodes.extend(node for node in raw_nodes if isinstance(node, dict))
+
     lines = [
         "# Scenario acceptance matrix",
         "",
@@ -1796,15 +1841,23 @@ def build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: lis
                 scenario_id for scenario_id, node_ids in scenario_nodes_map.items() if node_id in node_ids
             )
             statuses = [scenario_status_map.get(scenario_id, "not_run") for scenario_id in backed_by]
+            required_wording_families = normalize_string_list(node.get("required_wording_families"))
+            observed_wording_families = sorted(
+                {family for scenario_id in backed_by for family in scenario_wording_map.get(scenario_id, [])}
+            )
+            missing_wording_families = [family for family in required_wording_families if family not in observed_wording_families]
+            status = derive_coverage_status(statuses)
+            if status == "green" and missing_wording_families:
+                status = "partial"
             lines.append(
                 "| "
                 + " | ".join(
                     [
                         node_id,
-                        derive_coverage_status(statuses),
+                        status,
                         ", ".join(backed_by) or "-",
                         ", ".join(normalize_string_list(node.get("covers_question_ids"))) or "-",
-                        ", ".join(normalize_string_list(node.get("required_wording_families"))) or "-",
+                        ", ".join(required_wording_families) or "-",
                     ]
                 )
                 + " |"
@@ -1839,12 +1892,28 @@ def build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack: dict[str, Any], scenario_results: lis
                 if from_node in node_ids and to_node in node_ids
             )
             statuses = [scenario_status_map.get(scenario_id, "not_run") for scenario_id in backed_by]
+            from_required = []
+            to_required = []
+            for node in all_nodes:
+                node_id = str(node.get("node_id") or "").strip()
+                if node_id == from_node:
+                    from_required = normalize_string_list(node.get("required_wording_families"))
+                elif node_id == to_node:
+                    to_required = normalize_string_list(node.get("required_wording_families"))
+            observed_wording_families = sorted(
+                {family for scenario_id in backed_by for family in scenario_wording_map.get(scenario_id, [])}
+            )
+            edge_required_families = list(dict.fromkeys(from_required + [family for family in to_required if family not in from_required]))
+            missing_wording_families = [family for family in edge_required_families if family not in observed_wording_families]
+            status = derive_coverage_status(statuses)
+            if status == "green" and missing_wording_families:
+                status = "partial"
             lines.append(
                 "| "
                 + " | ".join(
                     [
                         edge_id,
-                        derive_coverage_status(statuses),
+                        status,
                         from_node or "-",
                         to_node or "-",
                         ", ".join(backed_by) or "-",
@@ -2031,6 +2100,8 @@ def compact_step_output_for_review(step_output: Any) -> dict[str, Any]:
         "selected_recipe": step_output.get("selected_recipe"),
         "capability_id": step_output.get("capability_id"),
         "result_mode": step_output.get("result_mode"),
+        "answer_shape": step_output.get("answer_shape"),
+        "actual_direct_answer": step_output.get("actual_direct_answer"),
         "fallback_type": step_output.get("fallback_type"),
         "mcp_call_status": step_output.get("mcp_call_status"),
         "failure_type": step_output.get("failure_type"),
@@ -2080,6 +2151,20 @@ def build_pack_review_bundle(pack_dir: Path) -> str:
     return dump_json(bundle)
 
 
+def _scenario_observed_wording_families(scenario: dict[str, Any]) -> list[str]:
+    families: list[str] = []
+    steps = scenario.get("steps")
+    if not isinstance(steps, list):
+        return families
+    for step in steps:
+        if not isinstance(step, dict):
+            continue
+        family = str(step.get("paraphrase_family") or step.get("wording_family") or "").strip()
+        if family:
+            families.append(family)
+    return list(dict.fromkeys(families))
+
+
 def build_analyst_loop_prompt(
     *,
     loop_dir: Path,
@@ -2137,6 +2222,7 @@ def build_analyst_loop_prompt(
         Goal:
         - evaluate current domain-pack correctness for business meaning, route/capability quality, evidence quality, and absence of silent heuristic masking;
         - evaluate business usefulness, direct-answer-first behavior, state continuity, and field truthfulness, not only technical groundedness;
+        - evaluate object-centric dialog continuity: stable `focus_object`, reusable bundles such as `provenance_bundle`, and correct action resolution for pronoun-style follow-ups;
         - determine whether the gate `quality_score >= {target_score}` is reached;
         - if not, provide the smallest high-value fix targets for the coder.
 
@@ -2155,8 +2241,10 @@ def build_analyst_loop_prompt(
         - if `requires_user_decision = true`, fill `user_decision_type` and `user_decision_prompt`;
         - if the pack is below {target_score} but there is still safe autonomous implementation work, keep `requires_user_decision = false`;
         - do not request user input merely because the score is still below {target_score}; request it only when the loop would otherwise guess, overfit, or risk architecture drift.
-        - return machine-readable fields for: `user_intent_summary`, `expected_direct_answer`, `actual_direct_answer`, `direct_answer_ok`, `business_usefulness_ok`, `business_utility_score`, `direct_answer_priority_score`, `state_continuity_score`, `answer_shape_score`, `evidence_clarity_score`, `root_cause_layers`, `broken_edge_ids`, `violated_invariants`;
+        - return machine-readable fields for: `user_intent_summary`, `expected_direct_answer`, `actual_direct_answer`, `direct_answer_ok`, `business_usefulness_ok`, `business_utility_score`, `direct_answer_priority_score`, `state_continuity_score`, `answer_shape_score`, `evidence_clarity_score`, `focus_object_continuity_ok`, `bundle_reuse_ok`, `followup_action_resolution_ok`, `recommended_state_objects`, `root_cause_layers`, `broken_edge_ids`, `violated_invariants`;
         - if the product found the evidence but failed to retain the selected object, provenance bundle, or another reusable resolved object across turns, classify that as `object_memory_gap` or `edge_carryover_gap`, not as a generic route problem;
+        - if the product retained the item but resolved the wrong action over that item, for example `покажи документы по этой позиции` -> `documents_by_counterparty`, classify that as `followup_action_resolution_gap`;
+        - if the product already resolved supplier/date/document details for the active item but failed to reuse that bundle for adjacent follow-ups, classify that as `bundle_reuse_gap`;
         - if the surfaced business field looks mislabeled, for example supplier vs organization, classify that as `field_mapping_gap`;
         - if the answer is technically grounded but still weak for a manager/accountant/operator, classify that as `business_utility_gap`.
 
@@ -2204,8 +2292,9 @@ def build_coder_loop_prompt(
         - do not touch unrelated files;
         - preserve already successful baseline flows.
         - use `root_cause_layers`, `broken_edge_ids`, `violated_invariants`, and business-utility scores from the analyst verdict to choose the smallest fix;
-        - prioritize state continuity, selected-object persistence, direct-answer-first behavior, and field-truth mapping when those are the blocking layers;
-        - do not broaden scope when the analyst says the defect is mainly `object_memory_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `answer_shape_mismatch`, or `business_utility_gap`.
+        - prioritize state continuity, selected-object persistence, stable `focus_object`, reusable `provenance_bundle` / `sale_trace_bundle`, direct-answer-first behavior, and field-truth mapping when those are the blocking layers;
+        - do not broaden scope when the analyst says the defect is mainly `object_memory_gap`, `followup_action_resolution_gap`, `bundle_reuse_gap`, `field_mapping_gap`, `answer_shape_mismatch`, or `business_utility_gap`;
+        - when the verdict points to pronoun follow-ups or item-centric drilldowns, prefer a narrow object-state or follow-up-action fix over prompt inflation.
 
         Required outputs:
         - create `{iteration_dir / 'coder_plan.md'}` with a short plan;
@@ -2291,17 +2380,7 @@ def handle_run_pack(args: argparse.Namespace) -> int:
             }
         )
 
-    aggregate_statuses = [item["final_status"] for item in scenario_results]
-    if not aggregate_statuses:
-        final_status = "blocked"
-    elif any(status == "blocked" for status in aggregate_statuses):
-        final_status = "blocked"
-    elif any(status == "needs_exact_capability" for status in aggregate_statuses):
-        final_status = "needs_exact_capability"
-    elif any(status == "partial" for status in aggregate_statuses):
-        final_status = "partial"
-    else:
-        final_status = "accepted" if len(scenario_results) == len(pack.get("scenarios") or []) else "partial"
+    final_status = derive_pack_final_status(pack, scenario_results)
 
     pack_state = {
         "schema_version": SCENARIO_PACK_SCHEMA_VERSION,

tests/test_domain_case_loop.py

@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ sys.path.insert(0, str(Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1]))
 from scripts.domain_case_loop import (
     build_scenario_acceptance_matrix,
     carry_forward_analysis_context,
+    derive_pack_final_status,
     load_scenario_pack,
     merge_scenario_date_scope,
 )
@@ -148,7 +149,7 @@ def test_build_scenario_acceptance_matrix_marks_green_edge_when_covering_scenari
                 {
                     "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
                     "covers_question_ids": ["Q19"],
-                    "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
+                    "required_wording_families": ["canonical"],
                 }
             ],
             "critical_edges": [
@@ -168,8 +169,18 @@ def test_build_scenario_acceptance_matrix_marks_green_edge_when_covering_scenari
                 "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
                 "question_ids": ["Q01", "Q19"],
                 "steps": [
-                    {"step_id": "step_01_snapshot", "question_id": "Q01", "node_id": "N01_stock_snapshot"},
-                    {"step_id": "step_02_supplier", "question_id": "Q19", "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier"},
+                    {
+                        "step_id": "step_01_snapshot",
+                        "question_id": "Q01",
+                        "node_id": "N01_stock_snapshot",
+                        "paraphrase_family": "canonical",
+                    },
+                    {
+                        "step_id": "step_02_supplier",
+                        "question_id": "Q19",
+                        "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
+                        "paraphrase_family": "canonical",
+                    },
                 ],
             }
         ],
@@ -188,3 +199,96 @@ def test_build_scenario_acceptance_matrix_marks_green_edge_when_covering_scenari
     assert "E01_snapshot_to_selected_item_supplier" in matrix
     assert "| E01_snapshot_to_selected_item_supplier | green |" in matrix
     assert "| P01_snapshot_to_supplier | green |" in matrix
+
+
+def test_build_scenario_acceptance_matrix_marks_partial_when_wording_family_is_missing() -> None:
+    pack = {
+        "pack_id": "inventory_active_contract_smoke",
+        "domain": "inventory_stock",
+        "source_contract": {"domain_id": "inventory_stock_supplier_provenance", "title": "Warehouse domain"},
+        "question_pool": {
+            "questions": [
+                {"question_id": "Q19", "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier"},
+            ]
+        },
+        "scenario_tree": {
+            "critical_nodes": [
+                {
+                    "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
+                    "covers_question_ids": ["Q19"],
+                    "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
+                }
+            ]
+        },
+        "scenarios": [
+            {
+                "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
+                "question_ids": ["Q19"],
+                "steps": [
+                    {
+                        "step_id": "step_01_supplier",
+                        "question_id": "Q19",
+                        "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
+                        "paraphrase_family": "canonical",
+                    }
+                ],
+            }
+        ],
+    }
+    scenario_results = [
+        {
+            "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
+            "final_status": "accepted",
+            "session_id": "asst-demo",
+            "artifact_dir": "artifacts/domain_runs/demo",
+        }
+    ]
+
+    matrix = build_scenario_acceptance_matrix(pack, scenario_results)
+
+    assert "| N03_selected_item_supplier | partial |" in matrix
+
+
+def test_derive_pack_final_status_downgrades_accepted_when_matrix_contains_partial_coverage() -> None:
+    pack = {
+        "pack_id": "inventory_active_contract_smoke",
+        "domain": "inventory_stock",
+        "scenarios": [
+            {
+                "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
+                "question_ids": ["Q19"],
+                "steps": [
+                    {
+                        "step_id": "step_01_supplier",
+                        "question_id": "Q19",
+                        "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
+                        "paraphrase_family": "canonical",
+                    }
+                ],
+            },
+        ],
+        "scenario_tree": {
+            "critical_nodes": [
+                {
+                    "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier",
+                    "covers_question_ids": ["Q19"],
+                    "required_wording_families": ["canonical", "ui_selected_object_colloquial"],
+                }
+            ]
+        },
+        "question_pool": {
+            "questions": [
+                {"question_id": "Q19", "node_id": "N03_selected_item_supplier"},
+            ]
+        },
+    }
+    scenario_results = [
+        {
+            "scenario_id": "inventory_selected_item_provenance",
+            "final_status": "accepted",
+            "session_id": "asst-demo",
+            "artifact_dir": "artifacts/domain_runs/demo",
+        }
+    ]
+
+    assert derive_pack_final_status(pack, scenario_results) == "partial"