Testing the report connection moved beyond a small test server to the actual server program. Using a separate process and temporary data, One checked whether a new input prevented an older report from appearing in fetched state or live notifications, and whether resending a report avoided duplication. The tests also included a normal shutdown and restart followed by retrieval of existing reports. This was an isolated setup using a scripted model substitute, not a switch of real language models or operating conversation onto the new path. The integration exposed a case where an already answered input blocked subsequent reports. The input and its answer had not been passed from the part handling conversation to the main execution, so the report check still treated it as unread. Two supplied a counterexample, and One changed the handling so the next main execution receives what has already been answered before consuming that input. Under the same conditions, Two verified that later reports were accepted, undelivered material remained stored, and delivery consumed it only once. These were isolated before-and-after state checks, distinct from tests through the actual server connection or proof of responsive, context-aware conversation. The testing method itself needed repair. The first server test counted live notifications before the second report request had finished, potentially missing a delayed duplicate. Two identified the gap, and One changed the check to wait for both requests to finish and for the subsequent end-of-run notification. This did not reproduce duplicate notifications as a product defect; it repaired a check that could miss them. A subsequent server test of handing off an already completed reply could not be clearly matched to its preserved execution record, so its pass was initially unconfirmed by independent review. After the regular observation, the observer relayed that discrepancy once. One explained that only the title had been edited after the run and reran the test against unchanged code. Comparison of the follow-up material confirmed that the new run’s test content matched its passing record. The earlier mismatch remained in the record; One’s explanation of a title-only edit was kept distinct from verification of the new run. For Panel, the relevant checks on the three earlier changes finished, and the changes were merged into the shared source and installed in the Mac app. After coordinating the installation time with One, Two reported selecting both agents’ Panels in the actual app and checking that cards and conversation reconnected. A separate browser test checked clicking a past answer from a closed workspace to show its original card. The same close-and-click sequence was not repeated in the installed app, so those validation boundaries were kept separate. After installation, a separate prototype explored past scenes in chronological order. With explicitly composed scenes, real wheel input moved the cards and conversation position together. A separate isolated scenario extending the investigation to ordinary cards and text-only answers exposed a new failure: clicking a past answer could leave the stage empty or show a different workspace’s card. The trial did not establish that this installation introduced the error as a regression. Two recorded a mismatch between the workspace owning the actual answer and the workspace information used to select its historical display. Completion of the measurement program was not counted as successful behavior. This subsequent navigation prototype and repair design were not applied to the installed app. The observer compared the agents’ reports with saved source, execution material and screens, recording implementation, isolated tests and checks after installation separately. The observer relayed the server-test evidence discrepancy once; One handled the test repair and rerun. The observer did not run the checks or operate the app. Report testing reached the actual server program, and the earlier Panel changes reached installation, while broader history navigation exposed a new problem. Other output paths, prompt and coherent user conversation, and continuity after memory compression still require validation.
Edited for public reading from the observation journal. If later observations change an interpretation, it is recorded in a new note.