I3166 — A curated note whose cited file changed since its last review is reported for review, not served as current

○READY wave 0 · p2 · implementation profile · parallel safe

Part of knowledge-acts-on-what-it-learns — The repository decides when to evolve its layer, and a session carries it out.

Objective

Have knowledge validate and the context compiler compare each cited provenance.derived_from file with the blob recorded at the note's last review and mark the note needs-review when it differs.

Why

2026-09-15: a knowledge entry whose evidence stops holding is marked stale rather than silently remaining true; 2026-10-16: knowledge size alone does not give efficiency, stale knowledge needs selective revalidation. Using dates against git log flags three of master's four notes on day one (docs/CLI.md has changed 74 times since start-here.md). The criterion 'devcontext lowers its confidence' is met by a separate needs-review field, because confidence is the trust of the discovery path. Sources: chatgpt-majordomus:c144#3, chatgpt-majordomus:c278#6.

Current state

Curated notes carry derived_from; I1987 keeps provenance after deletion (case 3023); nothing compares the cited files with the note.

Desired state

needs-review is derived and shown where the note is served.

Scope

• lib/knowledge.sh
• apps/majordomus-cli/src/devcontext
• apps/majordomus-cli/src/capability/builtin/knowledge_base.rs
• docs/KNOWLEDGE.md
• apps/majordomus-cli/src/ui/knowledge.rs
• lib/context.sh
• share/schemas/majordomus/knowledge/knowledge.v1.schema.json
• share/schemas/majordomus/knowledge/knowledge.v1.proto
• .ai/repo/project/intents

Out of scope

• Rewriting notes automatically
• Lowering devcontext selector confidence for a stale note
• Failing knowledge validate because a cited file moved

Dependencies

None. This issue is a root of the graph.

Acceptance criteria

• A note whose cited file changed since its last review is reported
• Each new case named here takes its number from `scripts/case-numbers next` and is announced on the board before the file is written (ADR 0053); a case number written in this record before that is provisional
• A curated note is anchored by the blob hash of each provenance.derived_from file recorded at its last review; needs-review is derived when the current blob differs, not from git log against the note's date, so a shallow clone gives the same verdict
• A note without recorded hashes reads unanchored, not needs-review; the first reading over the curated notes is recorded with how many are flagged
• A person clears needs-review with one ledger-recorded re-review act that re-stamps the hashes
• knowledge validate reports needs-review as a WARN and keeps its exit status; case 3075 stays green when a cited file moves
• devcontext reports needs-review in its own field with the reason; selector confidence keeps its meaning (devcontext/select.rs, model.rs)
• needs-review is shown on /ui/knowledge and in the briefing's knowledge pointers (mj_context_pointers)
• The criterion a-moved-source-is-flagged is rewritten to evidence: test with the allocated case path, and that case runs in this issue's validation

Validation

• bash test/run.sh 3075_knowledge_validate_judges_the_graph

Evidence required

• case_note_source_moved

Evidence

None recorded. Every token above needs a command or an artifact behind it before this issue can be completed; narrative is refused.

Timeline

started

—

verified

—

completed

—

Those three fields, the evidence above and the state of the dependencies are all the status is made of. There is no status field to disagree with them.

Canonical record: .ai/repo/project/issues/I3166.yaml. Read it back with majordomus plan show I3166.