# 08 - Archived Current Status Audit (2026-04-17)

## Status Canon Update - 2026-05-01

This is an archived execution snapshot, not the current progress dashboard.

The percentages and graph counts below were correct for the `2026-04-17` audit window.

Current module wording lives in:

- [README.md](./README.md)
- [21 - current_status_canon_2026-05-01.md](./21%20-%20current_status_canon_2026-05-01.md)

## 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 `2026-04-19`
- current owner modules in `llm_normalizer/backend/src/services/`
- current scenario acceptance scripts under `scripts/`
- current AGENT semantic source catalog under `docs/orchestration/`
- live replay comparison between:
  - `address_truth_harness_phase12_wider_saved_session_pool_live_20260419_rerun16`
  - `address_truth_harness_phase14_counterparty_tail_resume_live_20260418_rerun2`
  - `address_truth_harness_phase15_answer_inspection_followup_live_20260419_rerun11`
  - `address_truth_harness_phase16_multicompany_late_pivot_live_20260419_rerun10`
  - `address_truth_harness_phase17_clarification_resume_and_counterparty_tail_live_20260419_rerun5`
- [10 - regression_breakpoint_analysis_2026-04-17.md](./10%20-%20regression_breakpoint_analysis_2026-04-17.md)
- [11 - continuity_stabilization_plan_2026-04-17.md](./11%20-%20continuity_stabilization_plan_2026-04-17.md)

## Graph Snapshot

Latest graph rebuild:

- `5372 nodes`
- `11525 edges`
- `135 communities`

Most relevant current god nodes for turnaround `11`:

1. `resolveAddressIntent()`  
2. `ChannelRegistry`  
3. `CanonicalStore`  
4. `compactWhitespace()`
5. `ExecuteQueryParams`

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;
- `composeFactualReplyBody()` no longer appears in the top god-node slice after the latest compose extractions, which means the central answer-shaping pressure has materially dropped;
- `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

Turnaround implementation progress: `~96%`

Pre-expansion readiness: `~78%`

This split is intentional.

The codebase already contains most of the required architectural objects, but the mixed saved-session runtime is still not stable enough to justify aggressive domain expansion.

### 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: `88%`

Reason:

- root, selected-object, same-date, and carryover classes exist as real owner seams;
- transition policy is extracted;
- scenario acceptance evaluates continuity explicitly.

Remaining debt:

- there is still no single authoritative continuity contract for every live mixed session path;
- continuity priority is still split across route policy, transition policy, recap policy, navigation state, and coordinator glue;
- the flagship repaired chains are now stable, but more non-flagship saved-session paths still need proof before this phase can be treated as expansion-safe.

### Phase 3. Capability Contracts

Status: `91%`

Reason:

- critical inventory/address capabilities are materially contract-driven;
- selected-object and root capability behavior is much more explicit than before.
- inventory intent-family now has an explicit owner in `addressInventoryIntentSignals.ts` instead of staying only as inline signal pressure inside `resolveAddressIntent()`.
- counterparty / documents / contracts / open-items intent-family now also has an explicit owner in `addressCounterpartyIntentSignals.ts`, even though legacy inline branches still remain as cleanup debt inside the central resolver.

Remaining debt:

- `resolveAddressIntent()` is still too central;
- extracted owner seams now exist for the hottest inventory and counterparty families, but the legacy inline body still keeps graph pressure high until the final cleanup pass is done;
- some business contours outside the most exercised inventory/address scenarios remain less explicit.

### Phase 4. Coverage / Evidence / Truth Gate Isolation

Status: `89%`

Reason:

- explicit truth and coverage/evidence contracts exist;
- answer policy reads those contracts rather than rebuilding verdicts blindly from raw rows.
- reply-packaging mechanics are now explicitly split into `address_runtime/replyPackaging.ts` instead of staying fully in `composeStage.ts`.
- named reply contracts and answer semantics presets now also live in `address_runtime/replyContracts.ts` instead of being rebuilt inline across major factual branches.
- inventory answer construction now has an explicit owner in `address_runtime/inventoryReplyBuilders.ts` instead of staying inline inside `composeFactualReplyBody()`.
- counterparty / lifecycle / value / contract-profile factual replies now also have an explicit owner in `address_runtime/counterpartyAnalyticsReplyBuilders.ts` instead of staying inline inside `composeFactualReplyBody()`.
- `composeStage.ts` is now down to about `4305` lines after the counterparty analytics extraction and duplicate-body cleanup.

Remaining debt:

- `composeFactualReplyBody()` is still not fully decomposed, but it is no longer one of the top graph pressure points in the current snapshot;
- humanized blocked/limited semantics are not yet fully separated from answer semantics across all paths;
- `composeStage.ts` still remains too large even after packaging extraction, inventory-family extraction, and counterparty analytics extraction.

### Phase 5. AssistantService Extraction

Status: `84%`

Reason:

- major policy categories have real owners outside the coordinator.
- data-scope probing and organization-history extraction are now delegated to a dedicated owner.
- address/backend debug payload assembly is no longer owned only by the coordinator.

Remaining debt:

- `assistantService.ts` is still about `5050` lines;
- runtime uses extracted owners, but priority and fallback seams still cross the coordinator boundary;
- code review still requires reading `assistantService` together with extracted owners to understand real behavior.

### 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: `86%`

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:

- narrow packs and seam tests are much stronger than before, and the main saved-session flagship replay family is now green;
- acceptance is no longer failing on the original continuity-critical edges, but replay breadth is still under the intended multi-domain blast radius;
- coverage breadth should continue to grow across additional mixed trajectories before expansion is treated as low-risk.

## Current Breakpoint Evidence

The strongest current architectural reading is no longer "the system still collapses on the original mixed continuity breakpoint".

It is now:

- `phase12_wider_saved_session_pool` is green end-to-end on the broader flagship saved-session family;
- `phase14_counterparty_tail_resume` is green on a different late-session counterparty/inventory/activity contour;
- `phase15_answer_inspection_followup` is green on grounded self-correction plus neighboring VAT bridge continuity;
- `phase16_multicompany_late_pivot` is green on late company switch plus referential inventory/receivables authority;
- `phase17_clarification_resume_and_counterparty_tail` is green on the specific semantic seams exposed by the manual run `assistant-stage1-uWH6xahSDt`: company clarification resumption, historical inventory continuation, short `СВК` retarget, and counterparty tail follow-up;
- therefore the original collapse has been materially repaired, and the main remaining risk has shifted from acute failure to incomplete generalization.

In practical terms, the active breakpoint is now:

- owner extraction has progressed far enough to make the system materially safer than before;
- saved-session mixed runtime still does not have one fully final governing authority consumed uniformly across every hot path;
- replay breadth is now the main honest gate before multi-domain expansion, not the old flagship continuity collapse itself.

## 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;
- organization data-scope probing is no longer owned only by coordinator-local helper bodies;
- debug payload assembly is now further isolated from top-level turn coordination;
- reply formatting and reply-type classification now have an explicit owner outside `composeStage.ts`;
- confirmed-balance and heuristic-candidate reply contracts now have explicit builders instead of repeated inline `semantics` objects in major compose branches;
- inventory factual replies are now owned by a dedicated module rather than embedded directly in the central compose body;
- counterparty analytics, lifecycle, customer/supplier value rankings, and contract-value factual replies are now owned by a dedicated module rather than embedded directly in the central compose body;
- inventory intent classification now has a dedicated owner instead of being only an inline segment inside the central address intent resolver;
- counterparty / contract / documents intent classification now also has a dedicated owner instead of being only an inline segment inside the central address intent resolver;
- 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. Mixed-session continuity still has no single authority

The project now has real route, transition, recap, and boundary owners, but the live session still does not resolve:

- active root frame
- selected object
- organization scope
- temporal carryover
- clarification state
- recap source of truth

from one governing contract.

This is still the highest-risk debt before domain expansion, even though the repaired replay families are now green.

### 2. `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.

### 3. `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.

### 4. `composeFactualReplyBody()` is still too central

Truth contracts are now explicit, and reply packaging, reply contracts, and the inventory answer family have all started moving into their own owners, 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.

### 5. 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. finish one authoritative continuity contract for live mixed sessions;
2. subordinate clarification to restored business continuity instead of letting it act as a default escape hatch;
3. continue reducing `assistantService.ts` to a thinner coordinator;
4. continue isolating answer semantics further away from `composeFactualReplyBody()` now that reply packaging and reply contracts have their own owner seams;
5. keep extending AGENT packs with mixed business + meta + interruption patterns instead of single-family smoke tests;
6. keep using mixed 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.