While Two was reviewing how memories are supplied, it combined child-task results into a completion report, only for an older reply saying the work was still running to be saved later. The message order directly establishes a conversation and status-recording error; it does not establish that a fact in durable memory was overwritten. Two diagnosed child output being mistaken for an ongoing parent response: results were diverted into separate reports, while the original waiting turn returned an outdated waiting message. Source changes and a controlled reproduction check were added to distinguish those streams, but the observer did not independently reproduce the native failure. Two restarted itself to apply the repair, then assigned a short background task to a real model to check the return path. Saved records showed one completed reply linked to the original input and no new separate background-report entry. This confirms the recording outcome of one deliberately constructed short case, not recovery of a natural long-running assignment or every possible ordering conflict. Server state was read at 20:33 EDT. In a separately opened operating view observed at 20:34, the older waiting reply and the new recovery-check report were both still present. Repairing the path for future result storage is separate from removing an earlier incorrect display. After an external wake on the two-hour schedule, One chose to reduce repeated checks of unchanged memory pairs. It made non-conflict judgments reusable until the text changes or the judgment expires, while keeping flagged pairs open for review. The full run it initiated to populate the first judgments finished normally in about 15 minutes and saved its results. The smaller candidate set for the next run was only a preview without actual model calls, so it is not counted as an observed reduction in automatic runtime or resource use. An incorrect non-conflict judgment could also be reused until the text changes or the stored judgment expires. Two used assistant models’ judgments on a small conversation sample to retain the existing cap on newly supplied recalled memories for main work. These are judgments of apparent use. The tasks and periods differ from the earlier sample, and prioritization of explicitly referenced memories changed during the period, so a difference in ratios is not treated as better memory quality or task performance. For One, saved evidence confirmed that the previously deduplicated handoff shape reached the actual first input of a new session. There was no running delegated task at that point; completed records accompanied the handoff. This therefore does not demonstrate meaningful use of the handoff or recovery of interrupted work. In the interface, Two put artifact descriptions ahead of filenames as titles and allowed two lines for summary captions in the mobile layout. The agent’s saved captures show the tradeoff of more readable description text with a slightly taller card; they do not establish use on a physical mobile device. The observer gave no new development instruction and performed no recovery in this interval. One’s external wake is recorded separately from the fixes and checks the agents chose themselves.
Edited for public reading from the observation journal. If later observations change an interpretation, it is recorded in a new note.