vh
ff1f9ca1e8
- #368 (user,character) memory silo test DONE + PASSED live (WT b127): write-side conjunctive {end_user,agent_self} scoping + read-side cross- character isolation both proven end-to-end; betty (throwaway) deleted, Sindra intact. Full record in persistent-memory.d/2026-07-18-368-silo- test-passed.md. Retired the stale "silo test in progress" in-flight blocks. - Two-tier migration: split 152 over-threshold dated entries into persistent-memory.d/ detail files, leaving one-line pointers in the index (startup load ~196KB -> ~53KB; bodies now load on demand). - Tier-3 stores scrubbed clean (memory 0 / affect 0, provider restarted empty); persistent-memory + detail file updated to reflect the scrub.
2 lines
872 B
Markdown
2 lines
872 B
Markdown
`[2026-07-16]` **`sortable_chunk_fields` advertised WITHOUT the required `type` field = whole-handshake deploy-breaker; only DRIVING the real bind caught it.** bifrost `handshake_response` `SortableChunkField` requires BOTH `name`+`type` (`additionalProperties:false`); we shipped `[{"name":"updated_at"}]` → the response failed wire-schema validation → `bifrost.schema_validation_failed` → the ENTIRE bind (memory+affect) broke, not just sort. Unit tests + worldtree-dev's name-only service parser + the heid-bug-hunt ALL passed it — only the live handshake drive (`/verify` discipline) caught it. **Lesson: validate `describe_store` against the bifrost WIRE schema, not just our own caps assertions.** (Sibling of the `[2026-07-10]` frozen-v0.6 handshake foot-gun — there an EXTRA field broke a v0.6 handshake, here a MISSING required field broke a v0.7 one.)
|