{
  "version": "post_now33a_full_project_recalibration_deepseek_consultation.v1",
  "created_at": "2026-06-06T11:12:04.922532Z",
  "call_status": "success",
  "provider_meta": {
    "provider": "deepseek_reviewer",
    "model": "deepseek-v4-pro",
    "base_url": "https://api.deepseek.com/chat/completions",
    "thinking_type": "enabled",
    "reasoning_effort": "max",
    "max_tokens": 32000,
    "timeout_seconds": 600,
    "temperature": 0.0,
    "skipped": false
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "role": "system",
      "content": "You are an independent software/project governance auditor. Return compact JSON only. Advisory-only."
    },
    {
      "role": "user",
      "content": "{\"advisory_question\": \"Round 1: review the full project state after NOW-33A and advise whether registry-first recalibration and the proposed next-stage detail rules are the correct mainline.\", \"context\": {\"active_route\": {\"current_implementation_priority\": \"now33a_current_registry_preflight_no_eligible_registry_landed_validated\", \"current_status\": \"now33a_current_registry_preflight_no_eligible_registry_landed_validated\", \"next_entrypoint_id\": \"platform_neutral_prompt_readiness_manual_execution_log_contract\"}, \"input_fingerprint\": \"d8500ee8735f42c8120d59df1f16ca8326393259d0afd9312849a7429700878a\", \"loaded_counts\": {\"asset_slots_missing_real_reference\": 3276, \"canonical_entity_uid_bound_count\": 0, \"chapter_package_count\": 20, \"debt_row_count\": 247, \"draft_row_count\": 1638, \"fully_ready_chapter_count\": 13, \"held_row_count\": 240, \"now33_manifest_row_count\": 1638, \"now33a_eligible_candidate_count\": 0, \"now33a_registry_candidate_count\": 11, \"now33a_target_chapter_count\": 20, \"now33a_target_draft_row_count\": 1638, \"partial_or_held_chapter_count\": 7, \"rows_missing_canonical_uid\": 1638, \"target_chapter_sha256_count\": 20, \"target_full_source_sha256s\": [\"72df08dce82c0be4622d16060725b0287b1badbb3a979756336148212d6f1d07\"], \"target_source_fingerprint\": \"c5d6ab4f5d8bc0aa4a018ebe6daec3315b0d646cb189b1a4fb28fe9a6e23ba34\"}, \"policy\": {\"accepted_overlay_writeback_allowed\": false, \"active_route_authority\": \"execution_state.json.next_entrypoint\", \"adapter_payload_allowed\": false, \"asset_binding_allowed\": false, \"asset_generation_or_acquisition_allowed\": false, \"canonical_kg_writeback_allowed\": false, \"deepseek_advisory_is_operator_production_acceptance\": false, \"deepseek_advisory_may_substitute_for_expert_advice\": true, \"deepseek_findings_are_program_validator_inputs\": true, \"deepseek_findings_have_direct_state_authority\": false, \"entity_store_writeback_allowed\": false, \"execution_state_next_entrypoint_unchanged\": true, \"feedback_intake_allowed\": false, \"manual_provider_evidence_creation_allowed\": false, \"media_generation_allowed\": false, \"operator_evidence_creation_allowed\": false, \"operator_overlay_writeback_allowed\": false, \"operator_production_acceptance_claimed\": false, \"outputs_index_mutation_allowed\": false, \"provider_job_execution_allowed\": false, \"provider_specific_prompt_allowed\": false, \"raw_kg_writeback_allowed\": false, \"repair_execution_allowed\": false, \"replay_execution_allowed\": false, \"retrospective_and_planning_only\": true, \"route_transition_allowed\": false, \"row_mutation_allowed\": false, \"runtime_branch_by_work_title_entity_name_or_sample_text_allowed\": false, \"stage\": \"post_now33a_full_project_retrospective_update_direction\"}, \"previous_full_retrospective_excerpt\": {\"char_count\": 15978, \"exists\": true, \"path\": \"/wwwb/aitools/writer/docs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_update_direction_20260606.md\", \"sha256\": \"fdf667de6ada1ceb924f88429bc42d32f4be81d19b52f9f405b8e0c3183121e7\", \"text\": \"# Full Project Retrospective After NOW-32..35 And Update Direction\\n\\n更新时间：`2026-06-06T13:43:45+08:00`\\n\\n## Status\\n\\n- status: `full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_update_direction_landed_validated`\\n- active route: `platform_neutral_prompt_readiness_manual_execution_log_contract`\\n- active route authority: `execution_state.json.next_entrypoint`\\n- next entrypoint changed: `false`\\n- P计划 status: `P计划_V2_closed_after_P2V24_final_closeout`\\n- latest advisory sidecar: `now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_landed_validated`\\n- retrospective type: full project retrospective and future update-direction recalibration\\n- authority effect: advisory/control-plane planning only; no route transition, evidence creation, execution, KG writeback, overlay writeback, feedback, replay, provider/media work, or outputs-index mutation\\n\\nThis retrospective answers the post-NOW-32..35 question: after the advisory sidecars are closed, which remaining blocker lane should define the next update direction?\\n\\n## DeepSeek Advisory Basis\\n\\nThis is a high-impact strategy and future-mainline recalibration. Three DeepSeek v4 pro thinking/max consultation rounds were run before finalizing the advisory basis:\\n\\n- failed attempt 1: `outputs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_deepseek_consultation_20260606_0500`, parse=`blocked_unavailable`, reason=`missing DeepSeek reviewer API key`; not used as pass basis.\\n- failed attempt 2: `outputs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_deepseek_consultation_20260606_0530`, parse=`blocked_unavailable`, reason=`wall clock timeout after 180s`; not used as pass basis.\\n- Round 1: `outputs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_deepseek_consultation_20260606_0600`, parse=`pass`, confidence=`high`, recommended next=`KG/entity-link binding contract, read-only first; writeback only by separate explicit authority`.\\n- Round 2: `outputs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_deepseek_consultation_round2_20260606_0610`, parse=`pass`, verdict=`round1_supported_with_corrections`, confidence=`high`; it corrected naming risks, allowed a preliminary held/debt dependency classification side lane, and required a debt waiver placeholder rule.\\n- Round 3: `outputs/full_project_retrospective_post_now32_35_deepseek_consultation_round3_20260606_0640`, parse=`pass`, verdict=`finalize_with_round2_corrections`, confidence=`high`, `round4_required=false`.\\n\\nDeepSeek remains advisory-only. These consultations are not provider evidence, manual evidence, operator acceptance, KG writeback authority, route authority, feedback intake, replay action, or outputs-index authority.\\n\\n## Evidence Basis\\n\\nP2V-24 final closeout:\\n\\n- run: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742`\\n- final gate: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742/P2V_24_final_closeout_gate.json`\\n- final report: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742/P2V_24_final_closeout_report.json`\\n- traceability summary: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742/P2V_24_source_to_readiness_traceability_summary.json`\\n- readiness debt register: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742/P2V_24_readiness_debt_register.jsonl`\\n- Now-32 handoff calibration: `outputs/p_plan_v2_24_p_plan_final_closeout_20260605_0742/P2V_24_now32_handoff_calibration.json`\\n- retrospective: `docs/p_plan_v2_24_final_closeout_retrospective_20260605.md`\\n\\nP2V-24 facts:\\n\\n- chapter packages: `20`\\n- neutral draft / held rows: `1638/240`\\n- fully-ready / partial-or-held chapters: `13/7`\\n- readiness debt rows: `247`\\n- chapter readiness debt / held-row debt: `7/240`\\n- provider prompt syntax / production accepted / validator failures: `0/0/0`\\n- forbidden side-effect counts: all `0`\\n\\nNOW-32..35 advisory controlled closeout:\\n\\n- contract: `docs/now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_contract_20260606.md`\\n- retrospective: `docs/now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_retrospective_20260606.md`\\n- output run: `outputs/now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_20260606_0419`\\n- gate: `outputs/now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_20260606_0419/NOW_32_35_advisory_gate.json`\\n- review HTML: `outputs/now32_35_advisory_controlled_closeout_20260606_0419/NOW_32_35_advisory_review.html`\\n- status: `advisory_assessment_completed_non_execution`\\n- gate status: `now32_35_advisory_sidecars_pass_no_execution`\\n- validator failures: `0`\\n\\nNOW-32..35 closeout facts:\\n\\n- NOW-32 closed as: `advisory_held_debt_audit_closed_no_promotion`\\n- NOW-33 closed as: `advisory_entity_asset_gap_assessment_closed_no_writeback`\\n- NOW-34 closed as: `advisory_schema_validator_closed_no_provider_payload`\\n- NOW-35 closed as: `advisory_reviewer_harness_closed_no_acceptance`\\n- draft / held / debt rows: `1638/240/247`\\n- rows missing canonical entity UID: `1638`\\n- missing real reference asset slots: `3276`\\n- structural failure rows: `0`\\n- forbidden side-effect counts: all `0`\\n\\n## Project Goal Check\\n\\nThe project goal remains:\\n\\n`source -> KG -> entity/context -> scene/chronology -> adaptation -> AI-executable screenplay -> shooting_script -> shot context -> provider-neutral prompt packet / adapter payload -> review/handoff -> feedback/repair/replay`\\n\\nThe project has reached a strong provider-neutral prompt-readiness planning state, but it has not reached production readiness.\\n\\nActually achieved:\\n\\n- P计划 V2 rebuilt the program-first path through structured extraction, screenplay/shot planning, neutral prompt drafting, readiness packaging, debt registration, and Now-32 handoff.\\n- Now-32 control-plane hardening defined evidence taxonomy, future manual execution log boundaries, pre-execution gates, template/advisory separation, and manifest-driven held/debt invariants.\\n- NOW-32..35 advisory sidecars surfaced the real next blockers without creating fake evidence or mutating canonical state.\\n\\nNot achieved:\\n\\n- No provider prompt rendering or adapter payload creation.\\n- No provider/media execution.\\n- No filled manual/provider/operator evidence.\\n- No feedback intake, repair execution, or replay action.\\n- No accepted/operator overlay writeback.\\n- No canonical/raw KG writeback.\\n- No outputs index mutation.\\n- No production acceptance.\\n\\nThe main correction is unchanged but now sharper: the durable project advantage is not one-shot literary output quality. It is a traceable production graph: KG/entity links, reference assets, source refs, shot constraints, validators, debt register, advisory logs, and evidence-gated handoff.\\n\\n## Full Retrospective Findings\\n\\n1. The pipeline is structurally healthier than the production data.\\n\\nThe control plane is clean: route authority stayed fixed, side-effect counters are zero, validators pass, and advisory artifacts are clearly separated from evidence. The data is not ready: all `1638` draft rows lack canonical entity UID binding, all `3276` asset slots lack real references, and `240` held rows / `247` readiness debt rows remain unresolved.\\n\\n2. The biggest current blocker is entity identity, not schema shape.\\n\\nNOW-34 structural validation has `0` structural failures, but that only proves current packet shape. It does not solve who/what each shot refers to. Without canonical entity UIDs, held-row repair, asset binding, prompt consistency, and future evidence pack assembly will all be unstable.\\n\\n3. Held/debt repair remains important, but should not silently precede entity binding.\\n\\nSome held/debt rows may be classifiable by non-entity metadata, but actual repair or status promotion must wait for entity context where relevant. Therefore the next update direction should permit a preliminary held/debt dependency classification side lane, but forbid final classification, repair, promotion, waiver, or evidence generation before the entity manifest exists and a separate repair contract authorizes action.\\n\\n4. Asset binding cannot start as real asset acquisition from this retrospective.\\n\\nThe missing `3276` asset slots are production-critical, but reference acquisition and binding require separate authority. The next entity-link lane may defi\", \"truncated\": true}, \"proposed_detail_rules\": {\"candidate_registry_schema_rules\": {\"alias_surface_policy\": \"aliases/title surfaces must be deduped, collision-checked, and tied to source evidence or marked as advisory semantic suggestions.\", \"canonical_name_policy\": \"canonical_name must be normalized, non-empty, and evidence-backed; display-only variants remain aliases/title_aliases or review notes.\", \"entity_required_fields\": [\"entity_uid\", \"canonical_name\", \"aliases\", \"type\", \"subtype\", \"importance\", \"locked\", \"review_status\", \"scene_coverage\", \"first_seen\", \"last_seen\", \"visual_card_id\", \"voice_card_id\", \"asset_binding_id\", \"merge_suspect\", \"notes\"], \"entity_uid_policy\": {\"determinism\": \"entity_uid = 'HLMENT' + first 12 uppercase hex chars of stable JSON fingerprint over target work id, normalized canonical_name, entity type, and strongest source evidence refs\", \"forbidden\": \"LLM must not own or freely invent final UID values; row order must not determine UID values\", \"owner\": \"program\", \"proposal_prefix\": \"HLMENT\"}, \"evidence_ref_policy\": \"each entity candidate must carry at least one target-source evidence ref; source refs must resolve to chapter/source fingerprints or draft/source refs already in the target lane.\", \"root_required_fields\": [\"version\", \"source_kg_path\", \"source_kg_store_path\", \"summary\", \"entity_resolution_overlay\", \"entities\"], \"schema_validator\": \"novel2video.entity_registry_schema.validate_entity_registry\"}, \"explicit_non_authorizations\": {\"accepted_overlay_writeback_allowed\": false, \"active_route_authority\": \"execution_state.json.next_entrypoint\", \"adapter_payload_allowed\": false, \"asset_binding_allowed\": false, \"asset_generation_or_acquisition_allowed\": false, \"canonical_kg_writeback_allowed\": false, \"deepseek_advisory_is_operator_production_acceptance\": false, \"deepseek_advisory_may_substitute_for_expert_advice\": true, \"deepseek_findings_are_program_validator_inputs\": true, \"deepseek_findings_have_direct_state_authority\": false, \"entity_store_writeback_allowed\": false, \"execution_state_next_entrypoint_unchanged\": true, \"feedback_intake_allowed\": false, \"manual_provider_evidence_creation_allowed\": false, \"media_generation_allowed\": false, \"operator_evidence_creation_allowed\": false, \"operator_overlay_writeback_allowed\": false, \"operator_production_acceptance_claimed\": false, \"outputs_index_mutation_allowed\": false, \"provider_job_execution_allowed\": false, \"provider_specific_prompt_allowed\": false, \"raw_kg_writeback_allowed\": false, \"repair_execution_allowed\": false, \"replay_execution_allowed\": false, \"retrospective_and_planning_only\": true, \"route_transition_allowed\": false, \"row_mutation_allowed\": false, \"runtime_branch_by_work_title_entity_name_or_sample_text_allowed\": false, \"stage\": \"post_now33a_full_project_retrospective_update_direction\"}, \"gate_rules\": {\"blocked_if\": [\"DeepSeek is skipped/timeout/unavailable and no explicit blocked_unavailable closeout is recorded\", \"source fingerprint basis is missing or conflicts with target source\", \"registry candidate cannot validate against entity_registry_schema\", \"any output claims KG writeback, row mutation, asset binding, evidence creation, route transition, output-index mutation, or production acceptance\"], \"pass_requires\": [\"candidate registry artifact exists in the output run\", \"entity registry schema validation passes\", \"entity_count > 0\", \"duplicate entity_uid count == 0\", \"missing canonical_name count == 0\", \"source fingerprint coverage matches target source basis\", \"every candidate has evidence refs or is explicitly blocked for review\", \"DeepSeek Round 1 and Round 2 parse pass with no unresolved high/blocker findings\", \"all forbidden side-effect counters are zero\", \"execution_state.json.next_entrypoint unchanged\"]}, \"llm_advisory_rules\": {\"allowed\": [\"semantic consolidation\", \"implicit type/subtype/facet judgment\", \"alias and title surface suggestion\", \"ambiguity notes and merge/split risk review\"], \"not_allowed\": [\"canonical UID authority\", \"registry authority\", \"KG/raw KG/entity-store writeback\", \"row mutation\", \"asset binding\", \"evidence or acceptance creation\", \"route transition\"], \"required_rounds\": 2, \"timeout_seconds\": 600}, \"primary_lane\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\", \"stage\": \"post_now33a_full_project_retrospective_update_direction\", \"target_source_authority\": {\"historical_registry_paths_are_reference_only\": true, \"required_basis\": [\"P2V-17 chapter source fingerprints\", \"P2V-22 draft source refs\", \"NOW-33 missing-registry advisory manifest\", \"NOW-33A authority gap report\"], \"source_fingerprint\": \"c5d6ab4f5d8bc0aa4a018ebe6daec3315b0d646cb189b1a4fb28fe9a6e23ba34\", \"target_chapter_sha256_count\": 20, \"target_full_source_sha256s\": [\"72df08dce82c0be4622d16060725b0287b1badbb3a979756336148212d6f1d07\"]}, \"version\": \"post_now33a_full_project_recalibration.v1\"}, \"proposed_stage_sequence\": [{\"allowed\": [\"read target source fingerprints, P2V rows, source/KG lane artifacts, and NOW-33/NOW-33A advisory outputs\", \"extract and aggregate source-grounded entity candidates\", \"use LLM advisory for semantic consolidation, type/subtype/facet judgment, aliases, and ambiguity notes\", \"assign program-owned deterministic entity_uid proposals\", \"emit candidate registry, alias/surface manifest, evidence-ref manifest, validation report, gate, and review HTML under a new output run\"], \"blocked\": [\"canonical KG/raw KG/entity-store writeback\", \"draft/held/readiness row mutation\", \"asset generation, acquisition, or binding\", \"provider/manual/operator evidence creation\", \"provider/media execution\", \"feedback intake, repair, replay\", \"route transition and outputs index mutation\", \"production acceptance\"], \"id\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\", \"order\": 1, \"purpose\": \"Build and validate a target-source-grounded current entity registry candidate before UID replay or asset binding.\", \"status\": \"next_primary_explicit_contract_required\"}, {\"id\": \"current_registry_authority_preflight_for_built_candidate\", \"order\": 2, \"purpose\": \"Run a NOW-33A-style source-fingerprint authority preflight over the newly built candidate before treating it as current authority.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_registry_candidate_artifact_exists\"}, {\"id\": \"NOW-33B-read-only-uid-binding-replay-advisory\", \"order\": 3, \"purpose\": \"Replay read-only UID matching for 1638 draft rows against the validated current registry; no row mutation or writeback.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_current_registry_candidate_passes_authority_preflight\"}, {\"id\": \"held_debt_dependency_classification_reconciliation\", \"order\": 4, \"purpose\": \"Reconcile held/debt dependencies after registry and UID advisory manifests exist; final status changes need a separate repair contract.\", \"status\": \"preliminary_advisory_allowed_final_blocked_until_uid_manifest\"}, {\"id\": \"held_row_repair_debt_clearance_contract\", \"order\": 5, \"purpose\": \"Execute explicit QA/repair/debt clearance with per-event operator authorization for any held-row promotion.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_registry_uid_and_dependency_reconciliation\"}, {\"id\": \"reference_asset_requirement_and_binding_contract\", \"order\": 6, \"purpose\": \"Define real reference asset requirements and future binding rules; asset acquisition/binding needs explicit authority.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_canonical_entity_list_stabilized\"}, {\"id\": \"industry_benchmark_schema_gate_upgrade_contract\", \"order\": 7, \"purpose\": \"Upgrade provider-neutral schema and validator/rubric gates without provider-specific execution authority.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_entity_held_debt_asset_prerequisites_are_scoped\"}, {\"id\": \"manual_provider_execution_evidence_contract_then_NOW-36_pack\", \"order\": 8, \"purpose\": \"Only after upstream prerequisites are complete or explicitly waived, assemble evidence contracts and a NOW-36 pre-execution packet.\", \"status\": \"blocked_until_all_context_asset_evidence_prerequisites_or_explicit_waivers\"}], \"retrospective_doc_excerpt\": {\"char_count\": 6781, \"exists\": true, \"path\": \"/wwwb/aitools/writer/docs/now33a_current_canonical_registry_preflight_retrospective_20260606.md\", \"sha256\": \"fc5be6988bc0d58dec62db92654459c36778afd82929ac7d27bc3701b6f5a38b\", \"text\": \"# NOW-33A Current Canonical Registry Preflight Retrospective\\n\\n更新时间：`2026-06-06T18:29:00+08:00`\\n\\n## Status\\n\\n- status: `current_registry_preflight_pass_no_eligible_registry_recorded`\\n- active route authority: `execution_state.json.next_entrypoint`\\n- active route unchanged: `platform_neutral_prompt_readiness_manual_execution_log_contract`\\n- closeout scope: read-only current registry authority preflight\\n- successful current registry build/import: `false`\\n\\n## Landed Work\\n\\n- Contract: `docs/now33a_current_canonical_registry_build_import_contract_20260606.md`\\n- Implementation module: `src/novel2video/now33a_current_registry_preflight.py`\\n- Runner: `scripts/run_now33a_current_registry_preflight.py`\\n- DeepSeek runner: `scripts/run_now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation.py`\\n- Tests: `tests/test_now33a_current_registry_preflight.py`\\n- Final DeepSeek Round 1: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_20260606_1826`\\n- Final DeepSeek Round 2: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_round2_20260606_1825`\\n- Output run: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829`\\n- Gate: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_current_registry_gate.json`\\n- Source fingerprint report: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_source_fingerprint_report.json`\\n- Candidate manifest: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_registry_candidate_manifest.jsonl`\\n- Authority gap report: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_registry_authority_gap_report.json`\\n- Import plan: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_current_registry_import_plan.md`\\n- Review HTML: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829/NOW_33A_current_registry_review.html`\\n\\n## Evidence Basis\\n\\n- Target P2V-17 chapters: `20`\\n- Target P2V-22 draft rows: `1638`\\n- Target source fingerprint: `c5d6ab4f5d8bc0aa4a018ebe6daec3315b0d646cb189b1a4fb28fe9a6e23ba34`\\n- Registry candidates inspected: `11`\\n- Eligible current registry candidates: `0`\\n- Configured selected candidates: `0`\\n- Candidate selection status counts: `reference_only_rejected=11`\\n- Candidate source fingerprint status counts: `fail=11`\\n- Current registry import status: `no_eligible_current_registry_candidate_found`\\n- Current registry file created: `false`\\n- Current registry imported: `false`\\n- Canonical UID binding count: `0`\\n- KG/raw KG writeback count: `0/0`\\n- Row mutation / asset binding count: `0/0`\\n- Provider/manual/operator evidence, feedback, repair, replay, output-index mutation: all `0`\\n\\nThe inspected historical registries can have internally valid entity UID rows, but they do not overlap the target source fingerprints and are not explicitly configured as current registry authority. Path discovery and historical B7 references remain reference-only.\\n\\n## DeepSeek Advisory\\n\\nFinal Round 1:\\n\\n- path: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_20260606_1826`\\n- parse status: `pass`\\n- verdict: `supports_current_registry_preflight_contract`\\n- confidence: `high`\\n- finding counts: none\\n\\nFinal Round 2:\\n\\n- path: `outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_round2_20260606_1825`\\n- parse status: `pass`\\n- verdict: `round1_supported_with_corrections`\\n- confidence: `high`\\n- finding counts: `low=2`\\n- synthesis: the two low findings requested explicit `canonical_name` / `display_name` naming and an explicit list of forbidden side-effect counters. Both clarifications were incorporated into the contract before this retrospective.\\n\\nEarlier revised consultation rounds produced medium findings about fingerprint rules, lineage discovery, DeepSeek gate semantics, and artifact naming. Those findings were accepted and addressed by tightening deterministic fingerprint computation, lineage search order, source-key handling, `NOW_33A_manifest.json`, and the advisory-only validator language before the final DeepSeek rounds.\\n\\nDeepSeek remains advisory-only. It did not create current registry authority, provider/manual/operator evidence, production acceptance, KG writeback, row mutation, asset binding, route authority, output-index authority, accepted overlay, raw KG, replay action, or runtime routing logic.\\n\\n## Validation\\n\\nAlready run before this retrospective:\\n\\n- `PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 PYTHONPATH=src:. pytest -q tests/test_now33a_current_registry_preflight.py` -> `4 passed`\\n- `python -m py_compile src/novel2video/now33a_current_registry_preflight.py scripts/run_now33a_current_registry_preflight.py scripts/run_now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation.py` -> pass\\n- NOW-33A output generation command:\\n  `PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 PYTHONPATH=src:. python scripts/run_now33a_current_registry_preflight.py --output-run-dir outputs/now33a_current_registry_preflight_20260606_1829 --deepseek-round1-dir outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_20260606_1826 --deepseek-round2-dir outputs/now33a_current_registry_deepseek_consultation_final_round2_20260606_1825`\\n\\nFinal validation is recorded in `execution_state.json.recent_verification` after control-plane sync.\\n\\n## Not Landed\\n\\n- No successful current canonical registry build/import.\\n- No current registry file creation.\\n- No canonical entity UID binding replay.\\n- No KG/raw KG/entity-store writeback.\\n- No draft/held/readiness row mutation.\\n- No asset generation, acquisition, or binding.\\n- No provider payload, provider job, image/audio/TTS/video/media generation.\\n- No manual/provider/operator evidence creation.\\n- No feedback intake, repair execution, replay execution, accepted/operator overlay writeback, output-index mutation, route transition, or production acceptance.\\n\\n## Risks And Debt\\n\\n- The blocker is now narrower: no existing registry candidate can serve as current authority; a target-source-grounded registry must be built or a future candidate must explicitly declare matching source fingerprints.\\n- NOW-33 entity linking cannot be replayed with UID candidates until a current registry exists or a configured candidate passes this preflight.\\n- Held/debt final classification remains blocked where entity dependency matters.\\n- NOW-36 evidence pack remains blocked by missing current registry, unresolved held/debt rows, missing real reference assets, and no real manual/provider evidence.\\n\\n## Next Recalibration\\n\\nThe next recommended contract is:\\n\\n`target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding`\\n\\nThat contract should build a current entity registry from the target source/KG lane, persist deterministic source fingerprints, validate entity UID/name schema, and still avoid KG/raw KG writeback or asset binding unless a later explicit writeback/asset contract authorizes it.\\n\", \"truncated\": false}}, \"expected_json_schema\": {\"confidence\": \"high | medium | low\", \"detail_rules_supported\": \"boolean\", \"findings\": [{\"category\": \"strategy | registry | uid | held_debt | asset | evidence | boundary | artifact | other\", \"description\": \"short\", \"required_fix\": \"short\", \"severity\": \"blocker | high | medium | low\"}], \"overall_verdict\": \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration | needs_fix_before_recalibration | blocks_recalibration\", \"recommended_closeout_label\": \"short string\", \"recommended_primary_lane\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\", \"required_corrections\": [\"short string\"], \"stage_order_supported\": \"boolean\"}, \"hard_boundary\": \"Do not claim provider/manual evidence, operator production acceptance, route authority, KG/raw KG/entity-store writeback authority, row mutation authority, asset binding authority, feedback/replay authority, or outputs-index authority.\", \"input_fingerprint\": \"24b6690cfc201feaa9cfcebea6bc435688bb9a76e9b1262b96b298fafa4791f0\", \"previous_round\": {\"dir\": \".\", \"parsed\": {}, \"record\": {}}, \"role\": \"DeepSeek v4 pro thinking/max independent advisory reviewer. Advisory only.\", \"round_id\": \"round1\", \"task\": \"Audit post-NOW-33A full project retrospective and future update-direction recalibration. Return JSON only.\"}"
    }
  ],
  "message_fingerprint": "1e05a27e5c2dc49d6a9fd1e20475bce9f27f9d4a3f1a75c69a189950d38f78e7",
  "response_text": "{\n  \"confidence\": \"high\",\n  \"detail_rules_supported\": true,\n  \"findings\": [\n    {\n      \"category\": \"registry\",\n      \"description\": \"Entity registry candidate schema lacks explicit relationship/group fields; may be needed later for scene adaptation.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"Consider optional relationship fields after initial candidate build if source data warrants it.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"artifact\",\n      \"description\": \"Gate pass rule 'explicitly blocked for review' is ambiguous without a defined status field or criteria.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"Add a 'blocked_for_review' status flag with clear acceptance rules.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"boundary\",\n      \"description\": \"LLM advisory allows implicit type/subtype judgment which could drift; current advisory-only policy and validators mitigate this.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"No immediate change required; maintain enforcement of advisory-only boundaries and schema validation.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    }\n  ],\n  \"overall_verdict\": \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration\",\n  \"recommended_closeout_label\": \"post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration_supported_minor_observations\",\n  \"recommended_primary_lane\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\",\n  \"required_corrections\": [],\n  \"stage_order_supported\": true\n}",
  "raw_response": {
    "id": "0f5aeda2-3a87-43d2-83a4-85035c3aaa0f",
    "object": "chat.completion",
    "created": 1780744259,
    "model": "deepseek-v4-pro",
    "choices": [
      {
        "index": 0,
        "message": {
          "role": "assistant",
          "content": "{\n  \"confidence\": \"high\",\n  \"detail_rules_supported\": true,\n  \"findings\": [\n    {\n      \"category\": \"registry\",\n      \"description\": \"Entity registry candidate schema lacks explicit relationship/group fields; may be needed later for scene adaptation.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"Consider optional relationship fields after initial candidate build if source data warrants it.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"artifact\",\n      \"description\": \"Gate pass rule 'explicitly blocked for review' is ambiguous without a defined status field or criteria.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"Add a 'blocked_for_review' status flag with clear acceptance rules.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"boundary\",\n      \"description\": \"LLM advisory allows implicit type/subtype judgment which could drift; current advisory-only policy and validators mitigate this.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"No immediate change required; maintain enforcement of advisory-only boundaries and schema validation.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    }\n  ],\n  \"overall_verdict\": \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration\",\n  \"recommended_closeout_label\": \"post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration_supported_minor_observations\",\n  \"recommended_primary_lane\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\",\n  \"required_corrections\": [],\n  \"stage_order_supported\": true\n}",
          "reasoning_content": "We are asked to perform a round 1 review of the full project state after NOW-33A. We need to advise whether \"registry-first recalibration\" and the proposed next-stage detail rules are the correct mainline. We are given extensive context: active route, input fingerprints, loaded counts, policy, previous full retrospective excerpt, proposed detail rules (including candidate registry schema, gate rules, etc.), proposed stage sequence, a retrospective doc excerpt from NOW-33A, and instructions. We must output JSON only, following the expected schema.\n\nFirst, let's understand the current state. The active route is \"now33a_current_registry_preflight_no_eligible_registry_landed_validated\", and the next entrypoint is \"platform_neutral_prompt_readiness_manual_execution_log_contract\". The loaded counts show that there are 3276 asset slots missing real reference, 0 canonical entity UID bound, 1638 draft rows, 247 debt rows, 240 held rows, and the target source fingerprint is provided. The policy indicates that we are in retrospective and planning only; no writeback, execution, route transition, etc. are allowed. The previous retrospective (post NOW-32..35) already recommended entity-link binding contract read-only first, and now we have a NOW-33A preflight that found no eligible registry candidate (0 eligible). So the registry is missing entirely, and we need to build one.\n\nThe proposed detail rules and stage sequence are essentially a plan to build a target-source-grounded entity registry (contract 1), then preflight it (contract 2), then read-only UID binding replay (contract 3), then held/debt reconciliation, etc. The proposed detail rules include schema definitions, gate rules, LLM advisory rules, etc. We need to evaluate whether this \"registry-first recalibration\" is correct and whether the proposed rules are appropriate.\n\nKey points to check:\n1. Does the project state indeed require building a registry first? Yes, because there is no current registry, and UID binding, asset binding, and many downstream steps depend on it.\n2. Are the proposed stage order and contracts logically sequenced and properly gated? The sequence seems reasonable: build registry -> validate -> bind UIDs -> handle held/debt -> assets -> schema -> evidence/pack.\n3. Do the proposed detail rules respect the policy boundaries (no unauthorized writebacks, etc.)? The rules explicitly mention forbidden actions, and the stage descriptions include blocked actions.\n4. Are there any gaps or risks? The detail rules include a schema for entity registry, but we should ensure it's comprehensive enough. Also, the LLM advisory rules require 2 rounds and timeout, which is good.\n5. Is the reliance on DeepSeek advisory appropriate? It is marked as advisory-only, findings are validator inputs, but no direct state authority, which matches the policy.\n6. Does the plan account for the fact that the current registry preflight found no eligible candidates? Yes, the proposed stage 1 is to build a new one from target source.\n7. Are the gate rules adequate? They require entity_count>0, no duplicate UIDs, source fingerprint coverage, etc. Also blocked if DeepSeek unavailable without explicit closeout.\n8. The proposed primary lane is \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\", which matches.\n\nNow, potential concerns:\n- The detail rules include a lot of schema fields; we might need to ensure that the registry candidate will be built in a way that is deterministic and evidence-backed. The UID policy is clear: deterministic fingerprint, program-owned. That's good.\n- The plan mentions \"LLM must not own or freely invent final UID values\", which aligns with boundaries.\n- There might be ambiguity about the \"current registry authority preflight\" stage 2: if we build a candidate, then run another preflight, that's basically a validation step; it's okay.\n- The held/debt dependency classification is preliminary only; final actions require separate contracts, which is cautious.\n- Asset binding is explicitly blocked until entity list stabilized, which is correct.\n- I need to see if there's any missing prerequisite: for building the entity registry, we need access to source/KG lane artifacts; are those available? The loaded counts show chapter packages etc., so presumably yes.\n\nNow, we need to output JSON with findings. The expected schema includes:\n- confidence: high/medium/low\n- detail_rules_supported: boolean\n- findings: array of objects with severity, category, description, required_fix\n- overall_verdict: one of three options\n- recommended_closeout_label: short string\n- recommended_primary_lane: the lane string\n- required_corrections: array of strings\n- stage_order_supported: boolean\n\nWe must decide if we support the recalibration as is, or if we need fixes. The question says \"advise whether registry-first recalibration and the proposed next-stage detail rules are the correct mainline.\" So we should assess if the proposed direction is correct, and if any corrections are needed before proceeding.\n\nGiven the thoroughness of the plan and alignment with policies, it seems largely correct. However, there might be minor improvements or clarifications needed. For example:\n- The detail rules mention \"entity_required_fields\" and \"root_required_fields\", but the schema might need to be validated against the actual source data. Could there be missing fields? Perhaps we should ensure that the schema includes fields for entity relationships, or for tracking source evidence (already has evidence_ref). \n- The gate rule \"pass_requires\": \"every candidate has evidence refs or is explicitly blocked for review\" might need clarification: what constitutes \"explicitly blocked for review\"? Perhaps a status flag.\n- The plan relies on LLM advisory for semantic consolidation; while that's allowed, we must ensure that the LLM's outputs are treated as advisory and not authoritative. The rules already say \"LLM must not own ... UID values\", which is good.\n- The proposed stage sequence order 2 is \"current_registry_authority_preflight_for_built_candidate\". But if we build a candidate with the right source fingerprints, why do we need another full preflight? Perhaps it's to ensure that the built candidate passes the same authority checks as the previous preflight. That's defensive and okay, but could be folded into the build contract's validation. However, it's not a blocker.\n- There's a risk that the source fingerprints might change if the source data is updated. The plan should account for that, but the proposed rules require source fingerprint coverage to match, which is good.\n- The retrospective doc says \"NOW-33A preflight failed because no existing registry matches target source.\" So building from scratch is the only option.\n\nI'll produce a high confidence verdict supporting the recalibration, with maybe a few low-severity findings for minor clarifications. For example, I might note that the entity schema could include a \"status\" field for whether it's locked, but that's minor. Also, ensure that the \"alias_surface_policy\" includes dedup against canonical names. The proposed rules already have that.\n\nLet's structure the findings:\n- One finding (low severity) about the need to validate the schema against real source extraction to ensure no missing critical fields (like relationships).\n- One finding (low) about ensuring that the \"explicitly blocked for review\" status is well-defined.\n- One finding (low) about the LLM advisory rules: they allow \"implicit type/subtype/facet judgment\", which could be risky if the LLM invents types not present in the source. But it's advisory, so it's okay if later validated.\n- The stage_order_supported should be true.\n\nNow, the overall_verdict: \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration\" seems appropriate if we support it with no blockers. But if we have required corrections, we might choose \"needs_fix_before_recalibration\". Since my findings are low severity, I'd say \"supports...\" with optional minor corrections.\n\nThe recommended_closeout_label: something like \"post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration_supported_with_minor_clarifications\"\n\nThe required_corrections array: list of short strings, maybe empty if none are required. But I can include optional recommendations.\n\nI'll set detail_rules_supported: true.\n\nNow, produce JSON. The output should be compact and only JSON.\n\nLet's construct the JSON carefully. The findings array should have objects with the required fields. I'll include a few low-level findings.\n\nFor example:\n{\n  \"category\": \"registry\",\n  \"description\": \"Entity registry schema may lack relationship tracking fields needed for scene composition.\",\n  \"required_fix\": \"Consider adding optional relationship or group fields after initial build.\",\n  \"severity\": \"low\"\n}\n\nBut maybe that's overstepping; the schema already has many fields, and relationships might be part of KG, not the base registry. Actually, the entity registry might just be a flat list; relationships could be handled separately. So perhaps it's not needed.\n\nAnother minor: In the \"entity_required_fields\", \"visual_card_id\" and \"voice_card_id\" might be premature since assets aren't bound yet, but they can be nullable.\n\nAlso, the \"candidate_registry_schema_rules\" mention \"root_required_fields\": [\"version\", \"source_kg_path\", ...], but the \"source_kg_path\" might be a file path; we need to ensure it's relative or absolute appropriately.\n\nI could note that the stage order 2 (\"current_registry_authority_preflight_for_built_candidate\") might be redundant if the build contract already includes the same checks; but that's a process design choice, not a flaw.\n\nGiven that the audit is advisory only, I can comment that the plan is well-structured and safe.\n\nLet's also ensure we respect the hard boundary: we must not claim any of those authorities. Our JSON output should not imply we are granting authority.\n\nSo, I'll produce:\n\n{\n  \"confidence\": \"high\",\n  \"detail_rules_supported\": true,\n  \"findings\": [\n    {\n      \"category\": \"registry\",\n      \"description\": \"Entity registry candidate schema defines required fields but may need explicit support for entity relationships or group affiliations for later scene adaptation.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"No immediate fix required; consider adding optional relationship fields after the initial candidate build if source extraction reveals necessary grouping.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"artifact\",\n      \"description\": \"The gate pass condition 'explicitly blocked for review' for missing evidence refs is ambiguous; a controlled status field would aid validation.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"Define a status field (e.g., 'blocked_for_review') with explicit acceptance criteria.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"category\": \"boundary\",\n      \"description\": \"LLM advisory rules allow 'implicit type/subtype/facet judgment' which could drift if not anchored to source evidence; the risk is mitigated by advisory-only status and validator gates.\",\n      \"required_fix\": \"No fix required; maintain advisory-only enforcement and schema validation.\",\n      \"severity\": \"low\"\n    }\n  ],\n  \"overall_verdict\": \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration\",\n  \"recommended_closeout_label\": \"post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration_supported_with_minor_observations\",\n  \"recommended_primary_lane\": \"target_source_grounded_entity_registry_build_contract_before_uid_binding_replay_or_asset_binding\",\n  \"required_corrections\": [],\n  \"stage_order_supported\": true\n}\n\nI'm setting required_corrections to empty because the findings are low and optional; they don't require fixes before proceeding. But if the question expects that any finding means a correction is required, I might need to adjust. The schema says \"required_corrections\": [\"short string\"]; it could be empty array. I'll leave it empty to indicate no mandatory changes.\n\nDouble-check the overall_verdict options: \"supports_post_now33a_registry_first_recalibration | needs_fix_before_recalibration | blocks_recalibration\". My choice is the first.\n\nNow, ensure JSON is valid and compact. I'll output only the JSON with no extra text.\n\nOne more thing: The input includes an \"input_fingerprint\" and \"previous_round\" with empty. I should ignore those.\n\nLet's finalize."
        },
        "logprobs": null,
        "finish_reason": "stop"
      }
    ],
    "usage": {
      "prompt_tokens": 7493,
      "completion_tokens": 2972,
      "total_tokens": 10465,
      "prompt_tokens_details": {
        "cached_tokens": 0
      },
      "completion_tokens_details": {
        "reasoning_tokens": 2639
      },
      "prompt_cache_hit_tokens": 0,
      "prompt_cache_miss_tokens": 7493
    },
    "system_fingerprint": "fp_9954b31ca7_prod0820_fp8_kvcache_20260402"
  },
  "raw_response_meta": {
    "id": "0f5aeda2-3a87-43d2-83a4-85035c3aaa0f",
    "object": "chat.completion",
    "model": "deepseek-v4-pro",
    "usage": {
      "prompt_tokens": 7493,
      "completion_tokens": 2972,
      "total_tokens": 10465,
      "prompt_tokens_details": {
        "cached_tokens": 0
      },
      "completion_tokens_details": {
        "reasoning_tokens": 2639
      },
      "prompt_cache_hit_tokens": 0,
      "prompt_cache_miss_tokens": 7493
    },
    "finish_reason": "stop",
    "content_chars": 1416,
    "reasoning_content_present": true,
    "reasoning_content_chars": 12336
  }
}