You are auditing the Memento repo at `/Users/raghuveer/dev/memento` for drift between documentation and actual code/behavior. The user is preparing a "stale content cleanup" PR. You may be running alone or as one of several parallel agents covering different slices; cover only your slice.

## Your slice: docs/architecture/ — 10 technical-detail docs

Files to audit:

- `docs/architecture/overview.md`
- `docs/architecture/data-model.md`
- `docs/architecture/scope-semantics.md`
- `docs/architecture/retrieval.md`
- `docs/architecture/decay-and-supersession.md`
- `docs/architecture/conflict-detection.md`
- `docs/architecture/config.md`
- `docs/architecture/scrubber.md`
- `docs/architecture/performance.md`
- `docs/architecture/privacy.md`

These are the canonical descriptions of how each subsystem works. They are HIGH risk for drift because they're hand-maintained while code evolves.

## What to look for, in priority order

1. **Concrete claims that contradict code.** When the doc says:
   - "we use `bge-base-en-v1.5`" — verify against `packages/embedder-local/src/` and `packages/schema/src/config-keys.ts`.
   - "default decay half-life is 90 days for facts" — verify against `packages/schema/src/config-keys.ts` (search for `decay.halfLife.fact`).
   - "scope types are X / Y / Z" — verify against `packages/schema/src/scope.ts`.
   - "kinds are fact / preference / decision / todo / snippet" — verify against `packages/schema/src/memory.ts`.
   - "FTS5 + brute-force vector backend" — verify against `packages/core/src/storage/` and `packages/core/src/retrieval/`.
   - any specific config key (e.g. `retrieval.ranker.weights.confidence`) — verify it's in `config-keys.ts`.
   - any specific command name (e.g. `memory.context`, `memento doctor`) — verify it's in the registry or is a lifecycle command.
   - specific table / column names, file layouts — spot-check against migrations / repos.
   - specific numbers, percentages, counts.
   - any architectural diagram (ASCII art) — verify the boxes / arrows match the actual package structure. The repo has caught drifts here before — the storage repository lives at `packages/core/src/repository/memory-repository.ts`, not `packages/core/src/storage/memory-repository.ts`.

2. **Mention of features that have been removed or renamed.**

3. **Internal / session notes.** TODOs, FIXMEs, "(rewrite)", lorem ipsum, scratch text.

4. **Dead cross-references.** Links to `../adr/0NNN-...`, `../guides/...`, `../../packages/...` — verify each target exists. The structural `pnpm docs:links` check catches naive misses, but verify any link your prose claims with semantic context attached.

5. **Stale "future work" sections.** "We plan to" / "in v2 we will" — verify it's still planned vs. shipped vs. abandoned.

## Skip auto-generated content

Do **not** audit `docs/reference/`. Those four files (`cli.md`, `mcp-tools.md`, `config-keys.md`, `error-codes.md`) are auto-generated by `pnpm docs:check` and CI keeps them in sync.

## Verify against actual code

Use Grep / Read / Bash on the actual source. Don't speculate. If you can't verify a claim, say so explicitly ("could not verify, recommend grep for X") rather than asserting either way.

## How to report

Plain text, file by file, line numbers cited. For each finding:

- File and line.
- Exact stale or wrong claim (quote the sentence or fragment).
- Correct version (or file + symbol to check).
- Severity: HIGH (factually wrong, will mislead readers) / MEDIUM (technically stale) / LOW (cosmetic / wording / dead link).

Aim for 1500–2500 words.
