sequenceDiagram
    %% The Catastrophe: When Proposals Look Like Decisions

    participant RA as Research Agent
    participant E as Episteme
    participant LO as Lead Orchestrator
    participant IA as Implementation Agent
    participant DA as Deploy Agent
    participant P as Production

    RA->>E: Store RFC finding
    Note right of E: RFC proposes ES256. Stored as PROPOSED.

    LO->>E: What's the JWT algorithm?
    Note right of E: ⚠️ No lifecycle filter. This is the bug.

    E-->>LO: ES256 (conf: 0.87)
    Note right of LO: ⚠️ Returns the proposal. Most recent wins.

    LO->>IA: Use ES256 for JWT
    Note right of IA: ⚠️ Orchestrator passes 'truth' downstream.

    IA->>DA: Config ready
    Note right of DA: ⚠️ Code written against ES256.

    DA->>P: Deploy JWT config
    Note right of P: ⚠️ Deployed with confidence. Tests passed.

    P->>P: 401 Unauthorized
    Note over P: ⚠️ Auth service expects RS256. Every token fails.


---

sequenceDiagram
    %% The Correct Path: With Lifecycle Filtering

    participant RA as Research Agent
    participant E as Episteme
    participant LO as Lead Orchestrator
    participant IA as Implementation Agent
    participant DA as Deploy Agent
    participant P as Production

    RA->>E: Store RFC finding
    Note right of E: Same RFC. Still stored as PROPOSED.

    LO->>E: What's the APPROVED JWT algorithm?
    Note right of E: ✓ Lifecycle filter: approved only.

    E-->>LO: RS256 (conf: 0.92)
    Note right of LO: ✓ Returns the approved decision. Proposal excluded.

    LO->>IA: Use RS256 for JWT
    Note right of IA: ✓ Correct algorithm propagates.

    IA->>E: Pre-flight constraint check
    Note right of E: ✓ Check for forbidden patterns before coding.

    E-->>IA: No violations
    Note right of IA: ✓ No negative constraints for RS256.

    IA->>DA: Config ready
    Note right of DA: ✓ Code written against RS256.

    DA->>P: Deploy JWT config
    Note right of P: ✓ Deployed. Matches production expectation.

    P->>P: 200 OK
    Note over P: ✓ Auth works. No pager. Sleep continues.


---

sequenceDiagram
    %% The Correction Loop: Tracing, Fixing, Learning

    participant H as Human Supervisor
    participant E as Episteme
    participant G as Gardener

    H->>E: Trace deploy agent queries
    Note right of E: SRE investigates: what did the agent believe?

    E-->>H: Query audit trail
    Note right of H: ⚠️ Found it: no lifecycle filter. Proposal returned.

    H->>E: Mark assertion incorrect
    Note right of E: Supersede the problematic assertion.

    E->>G: Correction event
    Note right of G: Gardener wakes up.

    G->>E: TrustRank back-propagation
    Note right of E: Lead Orchestrator's reputation on auth topics drops.

    G->>E: Store negative constraint
    Note right of E: ✓ Future queries will see this constraint.


---

sequenceDiagram
    %% Persistent Learning: Fixing the Optimization Conflict

    participant H as Human Supervisor
    participant E as Episteme
    participant G as Gardener
    participant IA as Implementation Agent

    H->>E: Correct the agent
    Note right of E: Human stores correction with forbidden alternative.

    E->>G: Negative constraint stored
    Note right of G: Gardener sees the correction event.

    G->>E: TrustRank penalty
    Note right of E: Implementation Agent's confidence on HTTP libs drops.

    IA->>IA: New session begins
    Note over IA: 30 days later. Fresh context. No memory of correction.

    IA->>E: Pre-flight constraint check
    Note right of E: ✓ Before writing code, check constraints.

    E-->>IA: Constraint found
    Note right of IA: ✓ The correction from Day 1 is still there.

    IA->>IA: Write code with axios
    Note over IA: ✓ Agent uses axios. Constraint honored.

    E->>E: Resurrection
    Note over E: ✓ Constraint used successfully. Stays fresh forever.


---

sequenceDiagram
    %% Time Travel Debugging: What Did We Believe Then?

    participant H as Human Supervisor
    participant E as Episteme

    H->>E: What's the current JWT algorithm?
    Note right of E: Current state shows RS256 (post-fix).

    E-->>H: RS256 (current)
    Note right of H: This is useless for debugging. We need history.

    H->>E: What did we believe at 9pm?
    Note right of E: Time-travel query.

    E-->>H: ES256 (at 9pm)
    Note right of H: ⚠️ At 9pm, the system believed ES256 was correct.

    H->>E: What changed in last 24h?
    Note right of E: Diff view for change analysis.

    E-->>H: Diff result
    Note right of H: ✓ Clear view: RFC added at 2:30pm caused the issue.