# Wave 20 — Review Sweep Summary (Pass 1)

**Date:** 2026-05-03
**Mode:** Architect review pass 1
**Scope:** 1 combo prompt (Combo D: AD-539c + AD-539d gap pipeline extensions)
**Closes:** GH #106 + #107 (after Builder commit)

---

## Verdicts

| Combo | Children | Verdict | Required | Recommended | Nits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Combo D | AD-539c + AD-539d | ✅ Approved | 0 | 1 (AD-539d) | 2 (1 AD-539d, 1 AD-539c) |

**Total findings:** 0 Required + 1 Recommended + 2 Nits. Well within Wave-15 convention #15 tolerance (1 ⚠️ permitted on highest-risk child).

---

## Six high-priority verification checkpoints

| # | Checkpoint | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Per-child verify-first grep evidence | ✅ Both children cite real `GapReport` fields (gap_predictor.py:186-208); all field names verified |
| 2 | Observational discipline (no remediation in c, no federation in d) | ✅ AD-539c only records candidates; AD-539d only aggregates local-ship reports |
| 3 | AD-685 + AD-685b kwarg/method-name sweep | ✅ `runtime.ontology.get_agent_department` pattern verified; signature mismatch flagged as Recommended (see review file) |
| 4 | Section 0 EventType collision against events.py | ✅ `GAP_REMEDIATION_RECORDED` + `FLEET_GAP_SNAPSHOT_TAKEN` both absent from events.py |
| 5 | Public-attribute discipline (no leading underscore) | ✅ `runtime.gap_remediation_tracker`, `runtime.gap_aggregator` — both public; wiring follows AD-525/AD-530 `_wire_<feature>` sync pattern |
| 6 | Privacy invariant on AD-539d snapshot payload | ✅ `FleetGapSnapshot` field list contains no `agent_id`/`agent_ids`; only counts; test #10 enforces |

---

## GapReport field-name verification result

All 6 referenced fields verified against `src/probos/cognitive/gap_predictor.py:186-208`:

| Field | Line | Used by |
|---|---|---|
| `id` | 188 | AD-539c (gap_id reference) |
| `agent_id` | 189 | AD-539c, AD-539d |
| `agent_type` | 194 | AD-539d (Recommended: should be helper input) |
| `gap_type` | 191 | Both children |
| `affected_intent_types` | 196 | AD-539d top_intents |
| `qualification_path_id` | 201 | AD-539c proposed_action mapping |
| `priority` | 202 | AD-539d by_priority |

No drift. No phantom field names. ✅

---

## Section 0 EventType collision check

```
grep -n "GAP_REMEDIATION_RECORDED\|FLEET_GAP_SNAPSHOT_TAKEN" src/probos/events.py
  (no matches)
```

Existing related events confirm no naming-pattern conflict:
- `GAP_IDENTIFIED` (events.py:132, AD-539)
- `CAPABILITY_GAP_PREDICTED` (events.py:73)
- `NOTIFICATION_SNAPSHOT` (events.py:107)
- `OBSERVABILITY_SNAPSHOT_PUBLISHED` (events.py:226)

Both new EventTypes are collision-free. ✅

---

## Privacy invariant verification on AD-539d

`FleetGapSnapshot` fields enumerated:
- `snapshot_at: float`
- `total_gaps: int`
- `by_gap_type: dict[str, int]`
- `by_priority: dict[str, int]`
- `by_department: dict[str, int]`
- `top_intents: tuple[tuple[str, int], ...]`

No `agent_id`, no list of agents, no per-agent fan-out. All groupings collapse to counts. Test #10 explicitly asserts payload excludes agent_ids. ✅

---

## Top failure modes (if any)

| # | Failure mode | Severity | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AD-539d `_resolve_department(agent_id)` signature mismatch with live `get_agent_department(agent_type)` pattern | Recommended | Defensive helper returns empty string on failure; worst case `by_department: {"": N}`. Fix in revision pass. |
| 2 | AD-539c `proposed_action_for` silent fall-through for knowledge gap with empty qualification_path | Nit | Observational hole only; not a correctness bug. |

No hard-stop conditions tripped. Combo D is build-ready pending optional revisions.

---

## Standing-conventions audit (23 conventions)

All 23 satisfied. See `combo-D-gap-pipeline-extensions-review.md` for the full table.

Notable strengths:
- Section 0 EventType table with child + purpose mapping
- Inter-Child File Conflict Sequencing section (disjoint new files)
- 5 hard-stops enumerated explicitly
- Sibling late-bind `emit_event` setter pattern (AD-456/AD-530) used uniformly
- Per-child test plans with happy/error/edge boundary coverage

---

## Recommendation

✅ **Approved for revision pass.** Either fold the 1 Recommended + 2 Nits into a single revision commit, or proceed directly to GATE 1 with the prompt as-is — the AD-539d signature mismatch will land as `by_department: {"": N}` in the worst case, which is observationally inert and Builder-detectable in test #6/#7.

Convergence target for Pass 2: 1 ✅ (no changes expected unless revision pass mutates the prompt).
