# Phase 161: Hypothesis Route Transition Followthrough Surface - Context

**Gathered:** 2026-04-12
**Status:** Ready for execution

<domain>
## Phase Boundary

This phase owns the next post-`v1.86` research-control slice.

The phase should:

- derive a bounded route transition-followthrough summary from route transition
  clearance plus existing transition refs
- keep follow-through visibility explicit without widening into fresh runtime
  mutation
- coexist with current route transition-clearance, escalation, and helper
  mechanisms

</domain>

<decisions>
## Implementation Decisions

- **D-01:** Build on the existing route transition-clearance and helper
  surfaces instead of inventing a disconnected post-checkpoint subsystem.
- **D-02:** Keep the first slice declarative and operator-visible: summarize
  what bounded transition work should resume after clearance, do not widen into
  fresh runtime mutation.
- **D-03:** Preserve the current action queue, transition repair/escalation/
  clearance, and helper mechanisms as the execution-level machinery.
- **D-04:** Add one isolated acceptance lane so the transition-followthrough
  path can close independently.

</decisions>

<canonical_refs>
## Canonical References

- `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md`
- `.planning/ROADMAP.md`
- `research/knowledge-hub/knowledge_hub/runtime_read_path_support.py`
- `research/knowledge-hub/knowledge_hub/topic_replay.py`
- `.planning/phases/161-hypothesis-route-transition-followthrough-surface/PHASE.md`

</canonical_refs>

<deferred>
## Deferred Ideas

- fresh runtime mutation after follow-through becomes explicit
- auto-committing route state from checkpoint answers
- helper-driven route continuation without an explicit follow-through surface

</deferred>

---

*Phase: 161-hypothesis-route-transition-followthrough-surface*
*Context gathered: 2026-04-12*
