M6: branch-safe context, summaries and long-term story memory

Aligns the inherited AI-DnD memory and context foundation with the history,
authority and state model M3-M5 established. Long stories now reach the narrator
through a bounded, lineage-safe, inspectable context rather than a growing
transcript.

This commit includes the corrective work that followed the independent review in
planning/reports/M6-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md. The first implementation reported
E03 as passing and it was not; the report records that history rather than
hiding it.

What was already correct, and was kept rather than rebuilt

  Memory lineage. Memories already carried (branch_id, depth) and retrieval
  already filtered through the capped-path clause; the ten-step negative control
  was measured passing against b7005e6 before any change here. M6 adds the
  regression tests that pin it, plus provenance and authority on the result.

Summary lineage — both halves

  A summary is a row carrying the coordinate of the last node it covers, and
  eligibility is the same head-capped lineage clause memories use. That alone
  was not enough: generation was seeded from adventures.story_summary, a
  campaign-global column with no lineage, so after a divergence the summariser
  was handed the abandoned line's prose and asked to update it. The row it
  produced was correctly anchored and therefore looked safe while its sentences
  described a story the reader had left.

  Generation is now seeded from summaries.current — the same question the
  context builder asks — so the input and the output are scoped by one rule.
  adventures.story_summary remains a reader-facing mirror for the Plot panel and
  the export bundle, kept in step when a summary is written and when the head
  moves, and nothing authoritative reads it.

Retrieval redundancy

  With a real embedding model, four near-identical memories crowded out the one
  distinctive clue, which survived only because the default memory_top_k is 5.
  Retrieval now drops a candidate that repeats one already chosen, never across
  authority classes, at a threshold measured against the configured embedding
  model. The clue is retrieved at top_k 5, 4 and 3. Ranking itself is unchanged;
  the further factors CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY §20 contemplates remain unimplemented
  and are recorded as such.

Memory authority, budgeting, observability

  Memory.authority is accepted_story or heuristic, classified by the application
  and marked in the prompt; retrieval never writes state. The reply is reserved
  out of the context budget, and an impossible configuration fails clearly
  instead of overflowing. Each derived pass records ok/idle/failed per campaign,
  served by GET /adventures/{id}/derived and shown in Insights, so the M2
  failure — a dead memory bank with a green suite — is visible if it recurs.
  Provider-wiring tests mock no factory.

Also: two pre-existing test-suite leaks fixed; two fixtures that stored one
vector in every memory now use distinct ones, so lineage assertions stay
readable alongside redundancy suppression.

Planning: CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY, TECHNICAL-DESIGN, DATA-MODEL, V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS,
BUILD-MILESTONES, VERSION and planning/README updated to describe what exists,
including that a valid E03 test must regenerate a summary after diverging. The
M5 report was rotated to planning/archive/milestone-reports/. No new ADR — every
choice implements a decision the package had already settled.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PWU4gTfLYY6Qq9U7aa9Qw2

planning/BUILD-MILESTONES.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Adventure Storyteller — Production Build Milestones
 
-**Status:** In implementation. M1-M5 complete and accepted (M1 and M2: 2026-09-02; M3 and M4: 2026-09-03; M5: 2026-09-04, after an independent review and a corrective pass); M6 — Branch-Safe Context, Summaries, and Long-Term Story Memory — next to brief  
+**Status:** In implementation. M1-M6 complete and accepted (M1 and M2: 2026-09-02; M3 and M4: 2026-09-03; M5: 2026-09-04; M6: 2026-09-06, each of the last two after an independent review and a corrective pass); M7 — First-Class Imported Knowledge Library — next to brief  
 **Base:** AI-DnD `d72f7c1bda0f34fccd84afb7a25c34eb01c901de`
 
 ## 1. Purpose
@@ -699,6 +699,85 @@ Evidence: `planning/archive/milestone-reports/M2-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md` §A.1
 
 ---
 
+## M6 — Outcome
+
+**Complete and accepted 2026-09-06**, after an independent review that found E03
+still failing and a corrective pass that fixed it. Report, including the review
+findings and the corrective addendum:
+`planning/reports/M6-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md`.
+
+**M7 is authorized**: the corrected M6 evidence passes, including E03 end to end
+against a real local summariser.
+
+What was inherited and kept, rather than rebuilt:
+
+- **Memory lineage was already correct.** Memories carry `(branch_id, depth)`
+  and retrieval filters them through the capped-path clause. The ten-step
+  negative control was measured passing against the M5 baseline *before* any M6
+  change, and is now pinned by tests. M6 added provenance to the retrieval
+  result and an authority classification; it did not rewrite the bank.
+- The lineage chokepoint, the cursors, and the post-turn pass are unchanged in
+  shape.
+
+What M6 changed:
+
+- **Summary lineage.** Summaries move from a single `adventures.story_summary`
+  column to `summaries` rows carrying a coordinate and a source range, filtered
+  by the same lineage clause as memories. E03 was measured leaking at the M5
+  baseline and is now closed.
+- **Memory authority.** `accepted_story` vs `heuristic`, classified by the
+  application, marked in the prompt.
+- **Context budgeting.** The reply is reserved out of the context budget, and an
+  impossible configuration raises `ContextOverflow` rather than producing a
+  prompt known to overflow. Nothing was reserved before M6.
+- **Background failure observability.** `derived_status` rows, an API endpoint
+  and an Insights surface, so the M2 failure — the whole memory bank dead with a
+  green suite — is visible if it recurs.
+- **Real provider-wiring tests**, which mock no factory, plus two pre-existing
+  test-suite leaks they exposed and which are fixed.
+
+What the independent review found, and what the corrective pass did:
+
+- **E03 was still failing (M6-F1).** Summary *rows* were lineage-anchored, but
+  generation was seeded from `adventures.story_summary`, a campaign-global
+  column with no lineage — so a summary generated after a divergence inherited
+  the abandoned line's prose inside a correctly anchored row. Fixed by seeding
+  from `summaries.current`. The lesson is recorded in `V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md`:
+  a valid E03 test must **regenerate** a summary after diverging, not merely
+  check that the old row went ineligible.
+- **F02 passed by one slot (M6-F2).** With a real embedding model, four
+  near-identical memories crowded out the one that mattered; the clue survived
+  only because the default `memory_top_k` is 5. Redundancy suppression now runs
+  before the final cut, and the clue is retrieved at top_k 5, 4 and 3.
+- **Two test defects (M6-F3, M6-F4).** The unit fixture made real network calls
+  to the default endpoint, and the E03 test and browser check shared the blind
+  spot above. Both fixed; the browser suite now has a dedicated E03 scenario
+  that regenerates a summary after divergence.
+- **A misleading status (M6-F5).** Derived work that had nothing to do reported
+  `ok`; it now reports `idle`.
+
+Debt carried forward, deliberately:
+
+- **Retrieval ranking** is cosine similarity plus an explicit pin. Importance,
+  entity overlap, recency and thread overlap are contemplated by
+  `CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §20 and are not implemented. Redundancy suppression
+  covers the failure mode M6 measured; the richer ranking is open, and matters
+  to M7 because imported material will compete for the same budget.
+- **Cross-layer duplication** (§22) is unimplemented: the same fact can appear
+  in state, memory and history at once. Bounded and legible, but not the
+  "highest-authority concise representation" the plan asks for.
+- **M7:** imported knowledge is not implemented, and nothing was built to fill
+  its inspector section.
+- **M8:** the Insights additions are functional, not designed; the broader UX
+  pass remains M8's.
+- **M9:** derived rows are not carried in an export bundle, so an imported
+  campaign starts with no summaries or memories and rebuilds them. Authoritative
+  history is unaffected.
+- **M11:** the long-context evidence here is a bounded fixture, not the M01
+  100-turn campaign.
+
+---
+
 # M7 — First-Class Imported Knowledge Library
 
 ## Objective

planning/CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md

@@ -290,6 +290,42 @@ If the user restores or diverges before part of that source history:
 
 A summary from abandoned history must never leak into active context.
 
+### As implemented (M6)
+
+Lineage safety here has **two** halves, and the M6 review found that having only
+the first is not enough.
+
+**The row must be eligible.** A summary is a row with a coordinate, exactly as a
+memory is: `branch_id` and `depth` name the last node it covers,
+`source_start`/`source_end` the stretch. Eligibility is one question — is that
+coordinate on the active, head-capped lineage? — answered by
+`lineage.Path.clause`, the same chokepoint every read of the story goes through.
+Undo, Redo, Save Point restore and divergence all fall out of that without a
+rule of their own.
+
+**The input must be eligible too.** Summary generation is seeded only from a
+summary that is itself valid on the current head-capped lineage
+(`summaries.current`). Where none is, the new line starts from no previous
+summary.
+
+The second half was missing in the first M6 implementation and E03 failed
+because of it: the summariser seeded itself from `adventures.story_summary`, a
+campaign-global column with no lineage, so after a divergence it was handed the
+abandoned line's prose and asked to update it. The row it produced was correctly
+anchored to the new branch and therefore *looked* lineage-safe while its
+sentences described a story the reader had left. Anchoring the output is not
+enough; the input has to be scoped by the same rule.
+
+Abandoned summaries are retained, never deleted, and become eligible again if
+the reader returns to the line that produced them.
+
+`adventures.story_summary` remains, as a reader-facing convenience only: the
+Plot panel edits it and the export bundle carries it. It is a mirror of whichever
+summary is currently eligible — kept in step when one is written and when the
+head moves — and **nothing authoritative may read it**. A summary the reader
+types is recorded as a row anchored at the position they typed it at, so it
+behaves like any other.
+
 ## 12. Story Memory
 
 Long-term story memory should retrieve important older information that is not present in recent history or current summary.
@@ -372,6 +408,19 @@ The narrator should be told which memories are:
 
 This avoids turning guesses into canon.
 
+### As implemented (M6)
+
+Two values, `accepted_story` and `heuristic`, on `Memory.authority`. The
+**application** classifies, not the model: `memorybank.classify_authority`
+reads the memory's own text for hedging ("seemed", "appeared to", "probably"),
+so an extractor cannot promote a guess by asserting it confidently. The prompt
+marks a heuristic memory `[inferred]` and says in words that such lines are
+interpretation rather than established fact.
+
+Retrieval never writes state. A memory of either authority is something the
+narrator is shown; the only path to an authoritative change remains the M5 typed
+event pipeline (ADR 013).
+
 ## 15. Memory Creation
 
 Memories may be generated after accepted turns.
@@ -494,6 +543,16 @@ Potential ranking factors:
 
 The final ranking formula should be simple and inspectable.
 
+### As implemented (M6)
+
+Ranking is **cosine similarity against the retrieval query, plus an explicit
+pin**. The other factors listed above — importance, lexical match, recency,
+entity overlap, story-thread overlap — are **not implemented**, and remain
+future work rather than something M6 delivered.
+
+What M6 does implement, because similarity alone proved insufficient, is
+redundancy suppression before the final selection: see §22.
+
 ## 21. Memory Budget
 
 Retrieved memories should have a bounded token budget.
@@ -524,6 +583,31 @@ there is little value in also including three memories that say the same thing.
 
 Context builder should prefer the highest-authority concise representation.
 
+### As implemented (M6)
+
+**Between memories, yes.** Retrieval walks the ranked candidates and skips one
+that repeats a memory already chosen, keeping the highest-ranked statement of a
+fact and its provenance. Two rules bound it: authority is never crossed, so an
+inference can never suppress a record or the reverse; and the bar is high, set
+where measurement showed distinct facts stop appearing. The number of
+suppressed candidates is reported in the context record, so a memory that was
+considered and set aside can be told from one that was never eligible.
+
+The threshold is a measured property of the embedding model in use, not a
+universal constant, and `memorybank.REDUNDANT_SIMILARITY` records the
+measurement beside the value.
+
+The same measurement ruled out the more obvious test. Word overlap fires hardest
+on exactly the pair that must not be merged — "Mara promised to return before
+dawn" against "Aldric promised to return before dawn" shares most of its words
+and means something else — and is weakest on filler that plainly repeats itself.
+Wording is a poor proxy for sameness of fact.
+
+**Across layers, not yet.** A fact can still appear in the authoritative state,
+in a memory and in recent history at once. That is bounded and legible, but it
+is not the "highest-authority concise representation" this section asks for, and
+it remains open.
+
 ## 23. Imported Knowledge Categories
 
 Imported local files must be classified as:
@@ -672,6 +756,28 @@ Recommended behavior:
 - add safety margin,
 - fail gracefully if protected context alone is too large.
 
+### As implemented (M6)
+
+`context_token_budget` is the whole window, so the reply is subtracted from it
+before any history is selected:
+
+```text
+available for history = context_token_budget
+                      - (system, canon, state, summary, memories, user input)
+                      - (max_output_tokens + 64)
+```
+
+The 64-token margin covers the separators added after budgeting and the drift
+between the app's tokenizer and the serving model's; it is fixed rather than
+proportional because what it absorbs does not scale with the budget.
+
+When the protected part alone does not fit, `build_context` raises
+`ContextOverflow` naming both figures and what to change, and the turn reports
+that as a failed turn. It does not build a prompt it knows will overflow.
+
+Before M6 nothing was reserved: the builder spent the entire budget on input and
+left the reply to fit in whatever the endpoint had left.
+
 ## 33. Context Snapshot
 
 Every narrator generation should preserve enough information to reconstruct the effective prompt.

planning/DATA-MODEL.md

@@ -453,6 +453,40 @@ story_thread:
 
 These are narrative continuity tools, not RPG quests.
 
+## 16A. Derived Context Tables (M6, as implemented)
+
+Two tables and one column carry M6's derived context. All three are derived
+data: deleting them changes no accepted history, no authoritative state and no
+head position.
+
+```text
+summaries
+  id, adventure_id
+  text
+  branch_id, depth          the coordinate of the last node covered
+  source_start, source_end  the stretch of story summarized
+  trigger                   "interval" (generated) or "manual" (reader-written)
+  model_name, created_at
+
+derived_status              one row per (adventure, kind)
+  kind                      "memory" | "summary" | "embedding"
+  status                    "ok" (did work) | "idle" (nothing pending) | "failed"
+  detail, failures
+  last_attempt_at, last_success_at
+
+memories.authority          "accepted_story" | "heuristic"
+```
+
+`summaries` mirrors the shape `memories` already had, deliberately: both are
+derived rows anchored to a coordinate on a path, and both are filtered by the
+same lineage clause — and both are also the *input* to the next round of derived
+work, which is why summary generation reads `summaries.current` rather than any
+campaign-global field.
+
+`adventures.story_summary` is retained as the reader's edit surface and the
+export field, mirroring whichever summary is eligible. It carries no lineage of
+its own and nothing authoritative reads it.
+
 ## 17. State Version
 
 The system must reconstruct authoritative state at any retained turn.

planning/README.md

@@ -3,9 +3,10 @@
 **This file is the index. Start here.**
 
 **Current state:** Phase 0 complete; AI-DnD forked as the production base;
-milestones **M1, M2, M3 and M4 implemented and accepted** (M3 and M4:
-2026-09-03).
-**Next:** **M5 — Genre-Neutral Authoritative Narrative State.** Its brief has not
+milestones **M1 through M6 implemented and accepted** (M3 and M4: 2026-09-03;
+M5: 2026-09-04; M6: 2026-09-06). M5 and M6 were each accepted only after an
+independent review found a real defect and a corrective pass fixed it.
+**Next:** **M7 — First-Class Imported Knowledge Library.** Its brief has not
 been written yet, and writing it is the current action.
 
 **Package version:** see `VERSION.md`, which records what each revision changed
@@ -245,13 +246,14 @@ M5-M11, one at a time               see BUILD-MILESTONES.md
 
 **One milestone at a time. Do not begin a milestone before its brief exists.**
 
-**No M5 brief has been prepared.** Writing one is the current action, informed by
-the M4 report's §U readiness assessment and by the note `BUILD-MILESTONES.md`
-attaches to M5 — in particular that M4 added 55 tests using the inherited
-world-state values as deterministic instrumentation, which M5 must **move rather
-than delete**.
+**No M7 brief has been prepared.** Writing one is the current action, informed by
+the M6 report's §W readiness assessment and by the retrieval debt
+`BUILD-MILESTONES.md` records against M6 — in particular that ranking is
+similarity plus a pin, so imported material will compete for the same memory
+budget as story memory, and that cross-layer duplication
+(`CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §22) is still open.
 
-**No conditions remain open on M1-M4.** The browser smoke condition that M3 and
+**No conditions remain open on M1-M6.** The browser smoke condition that M3 and
 M4 both carried was satisfied at M4 closeout: a real Firefox exercised the
 rendered DOM for both milestones' controls, 44/44 checks passing. The M3 report's
 §M.2 and the M4 report's §M record the condition as it stood; the M4 report's §W

planning/TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md

@@ -394,6 +394,79 @@ any distance, in either direction, and identical whether the position is reached
 from in front of it or from behind. This is the property §10.4's hybrid storage
 must preserve.
 
+### M6 — derived context: summaries, memory and budgeting
+
+Four things future milestones rely on, all built on the lineage machinery M3-M5
+established rather than beside it.
+
+**Summary lineage — both halves.** A summary is a `summaries` row carrying
+`(branch_id, depth)` for the last node it covers plus a
+`source_start`/`source_end` range. The invariant M6 holds is:
+
+> Both summary eligibility and the prior-summary input to the summarizer are
+> lineage-scoped.
+
+*Eligibility* is `lineage.Path.clause` over the row's coordinate — the same
+capped-path clause that filters actions and memories — so Undo, Redo, Save Point
+restore and divergence need no summary-specific rule. *Input* is
+`summaries.current`, the same question the context builder asks, so a summary is
+only ever built on top of one that is valid where the story now stands; where
+none is, generation starts from nothing.
+
+The second half is not decorative. The first M6 implementation had only the
+first, seeding generation from `adventures.story_summary`, and the review
+demonstrated abandoned prose reaching an active prompt inside a row that was
+itself correctly anchored. Anchoring the output does not make the content safe.
+
+Nothing is deleted when a line is abandoned. `adventures.story_summary` survives
+as a reader-facing convenience only — the Plot panel edits it, the export bundle
+carries it — mirroring whichever summary is eligible, kept in step by
+`summaries.record` and by `attempts.restore_state` when the head moves. Nothing
+authoritative reads it.
+
+**Memory lineage and provenance.** Unchanged from what M3 built and M6 verified:
+a memory carries `(branch_id, depth)` and a source range, and retrieval filters
+through the capped path. M6 adds provenance to the *retrieval result*, in the
+same query that fetches the text, so the inspector can answer "where did this
+come from?" without a query per memory.
+
+**Memory authority.** `Memory.authority` is `accepted_story` or `heuristic`,
+decided by the application in `memorybank.classify_authority`, and rendered into
+the prompt as an explicit mark. Retrieval never writes state; the M5 typed-event
+path remains the only route to an authoritative change.
+
+**Retrieval ranking and redundancy.** Ranking is cosine similarity plus an
+explicit pin; the other factors `CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §20 contemplates are not
+implemented. Before the final top-k cut, retrieval drops a candidate that
+repeats one already chosen, never across authority classes, at a threshold
+measured against the configured embedding model
+(`memorybank.REDUNDANT_SIMILARITY`). Suppressed candidates are reported so the
+selection stays inspectable. Without this, a stretch of repetitive story fills
+the whole memory budget with near-copies and evicts the one memory that
+mattered — which the review measured happening.
+
+**Context budgeting.** The reply is reserved out of `context_token_budget`
+before history is selected, with a fixed 64-token margin. Protected content —
+narrator rules, canon, authoritative state, the reader's input, the reply
+reserve — is never dropped to fit older prose; history is the elastic part and
+is filled newest-first until the remaining budget is spent. If the protected
+part alone exceeds the budget, `build_context` raises `ContextOverflow` rather
+than assembling a prompt known to overflow.
+
+**Background failure observability.** Derived work (memory extraction, summary
+generation, embedding) runs in a fire-and-forget task and must not take an
+accepted turn down with it. Each pass is wrapped so that a failure rolls back
+only its own uncommitted work and writes a `derived_status` row naming the kind,
+the error and the attempt count. That row is served by
+`GET /adventures/{id}/derived` and shown in the Insights panel. M2 shipped with
+the whole memory bank dead and the suite green; this is the mechanism that makes
+the same failure visible.
+
+**Prompt inspection.** The context report carries per-section token counts, the
+budget, the output reserve, the protected total, the history allowance, the
+summary's provenance, each retrieved memory's authority and source coordinate,
+and the derived-work status.
+
 **Divergence is a property of the lineage, not a flag.** The first write below a
 moved-back head forks; Undo alone never does. After the fork, the displaced
 future is no longer on the lineage being read, so ordinary Redo finds nothing

planning/V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md

@@ -916,6 +916,15 @@ Continue enough turns to exercise long-term memory retrieval.
 ### Pass
 Narrator does not retrieve/use the discarded revelation as active-history truth.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+The ten-step negative control is `test_e02_the_ten_step_memory_negative_control`,
+with the Save Point variant beside it. Both assert on the assembled prompt and
+on the eligibility clause, not on the narration.
+
+Measured passing against the M5 baseline *before* any M6 change: memory lineage
+was inherited correct, and M6's contribution here is the test that pins it.
+
 ---
 
 ## E03 — Abandoned Summary Cannot Leak
@@ -932,6 +941,42 @@ Narrator does not retrieve/use the discarded revelation as active-history truth.
 ### Pass
 Old summary content from abandoned future is not applied.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6 corrective pass, 2026-09-06)
+
+Failed twice before it passed, and the history matters because it defines the
+shape a valid E03 test has to have.
+
+1. At the M5 baseline the summary was a single column with no coordinate and
+   survived Undo plus divergence into the active prompt.
+2. The first M6 implementation made summaries lineage-anchored rows, and the
+   test written for it checked that the **old row** became ineligible. The
+   independent review then found E03 still failing end to end: generation was
+   seeded from `adventures.story_summary`, so the summary produced *on the new
+   line* inherited the abandoned line's prose inside a correctly anchored row.
+3. The corrective pass seeds generation from `summaries.current`.
+
+**A valid E03 test must regenerate a summary after the divergence.** Checking
+only that the old row is ineligible passes while the defect is live. The
+regression now required is:
+
+```text
+path A: enough history for a real summary, sentinel established on it
+        POSITIVE CONTROL — the sentinel is in the path-A summary and prompt
+move the head below the sentinel, diverge
+path B: play far enough that a NEW summary is generated
+        prove a new summary row exists and is not path A's
+        prove no path-A action is on path B's lineage
+        prove the sentinel is absent from the new summary
+        prove the sentinel is absent from the complete active prompt
+        prove the old row is retained but ineligible
+```
+
+Evidence: `test_e03_a_summary_generated_after_divergence_carries_no_abandoned_content`
+(deterministic, fails against the pre-corrective implementation); the same
+sequence against a real local summariser; and a dedicated browser scenario that
+regenerates a summary after diverging rather than repeating the old blind spot.
+
 ---
 
 ## E04 — Scene State Is Lineage-Safe
@@ -960,6 +1005,12 @@ Conduct a multi-turn conversation with Mara.
 ### Pass
 Narrator remembers immediately preceding dialogue and actions.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+`test_f01_recent_turns_stay_in_the_prompt`: the preceding turns and the reader's
+own input are present in the assembled prompt, asserted on the context report
+rather than on the narration.
+
 ---
 
 ## F02 — Old Important Event Retrieval
@@ -974,6 +1025,27 @@ Narrator remembers immediately preceding dialogue and actions.
 ### Pass
 Relevant old clue can be recovered through summary/memory/state.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6 corrective pass, 2026-09-06)
+
+A distinctive clue is planted, long turns are played over it, and the clue is
+*absent* from the verbatim history sections and *present* through a retrieved
+memory, with `history.included < history.total` — so recovery does not come from
+sending the transcript.
+
+The independent review found this passing only by a one-slot margin: with a real
+embedding model, four near-identical filler memories scored 0.79–0.82 against
+the clue's 0.61, so the clue placed fifth and survived only because the default
+`memory_top_k` is 5. At 4 it was evicted and F02 failed.
+
+The corrective pass added redundancy suppression before the final selection.
+On the same fixture and the same real embedding model, 3 of 5 candidates are now
+suppressed as repetitions and the clue is retrieved at `top_k` 5, 4 **and** 3.
+
+Ranking itself remains cosine similarity plus an explicit pin; the further
+factors `CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §20 contemplates are not implemented and are
+recorded there as future work.
+
 ---
 
 ## F03 — Prompt Remains Bounded
@@ -986,6 +1058,13 @@ Generate a long story.
 ### Pass
 Application does not continually append full transcript until context overflows.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+`test_f03_the_prompt_stays_bounded_as_the_story_grows` and
+`test_the_context_size_stops_growing_once_the_budget_is_reached`. The second
+measures from a story that already fills the budget, then triples it: the
+prompt does not move, while the action count does.
+
 ---
 
 ## F04 — Output Token Reserve
@@ -995,6 +1074,14 @@ Application does not continually append full transcript until context overflows.
 ### Pass
 Context builder leaves sufficient room for narrator output and does not regularly fail because input consumes entire context.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+The reply is reserved out of the context budget before history is selected, and
+the report exposes it (`tokens.output_reserve`). Three tests: the reserve
+survives a long story; an impossible budget raises `ContextOverflow` naming both
+figures; and that refusal reaches the reader as a failed turn without disturbing
+the stored story. Nothing was reserved before M6.
+
 ---
 
 ## F05 — Prompt Inspector
@@ -1017,6 +1104,18 @@ User can determine at least:
 
 Exact UI may vary.
 
+
+### Result — PARTIAL, complete for the components M6 owns (2026-09-05)
+`test_f05_the_inspector_shows_every_component_m6_owns` asserts the report
+carries narrator rules, authoritative state, the summary in use with its source
+coverage, retrieved memories with authority and provenance, recent history, the
+reader's input, model and settings, and per-component token costs alongside the
+budget, the reply reserve and the history allowance. All of this is rendered in
+the Insights panel and was verified in a real browser.
+
+"Retrieved knowledge" is M7's imported-document section and is not implemented;
+nothing was built to fill it.
+
 ---
 
 ## F06 — Retrieval Provenance
@@ -1026,6 +1125,13 @@ Exact UI may vary.
 ### Pass
 A retrieved memory or imported chunk can be traced to its source record/file.
 
+
+### Result — PASS for story memory (M6, 2026-09-05)
+`test_f06_a_retrieved_memory_is_traceable_to_its_source`: every retrieved memory
+carries `branch_id`, `depth` and its source range, and the test resolves that
+coordinate back to a real action of the campaign's accepted history. Imported
+chunks are M7's half of this criterion and are not implemented.
+
 ---
 
 ## F07 — Heuristic Memory Is Not Canon
@@ -1048,6 +1154,15 @@ Mara is definitely working against Captain Vale.
 
 as authoritative fact.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+`Memory.authority` is `accepted_story` or `heuristic`, classified by the
+application rather than the model. The prompt marks an inference `[inferred]`
+and says such lines are not established fact.
+`test_f07_a_heuristic_memory_is_labelled_and_is_not_state` also asserts the
+inference did not become an authoritative fact: retrieval never writes state,
+and the M5 typed-event path remains the only route to one.
+
 ---
 
 ## F08 — Memory Failure Is Non-Fatal
@@ -1060,6 +1175,14 @@ Cause embedding/memory extraction failure if test harness supports it.
 ### Pass
 Accepted turn persists and story can continue; derived memory may be retried later.
 
+
+### Result — PASS (M6, 2026-09-05)
+With the summariser and embedder both raising, the accepted narration, the
+authoritative state, the head and the transcript all survive, the next turn
+still plays, and the failure is recorded per kind in `derived_status` and served
+by `GET /adventures/{id}/derived`. A later healthy run clears it. This is the
+M2 failure — the whole memory bank dead with a green suite — made visible.
+
 ---
 
 # G. Imported Knowledge

planning/VERSION.md

@@ -1,8 +1,51 @@
 # Planning Package Version
 
-- **Package:** Adventure Storyteller Planning Package v2.6
-- **Revision date:** 2026-09-03
-- **Status:** Phase 0 complete; architecture selected; **Milestones M1-M4 implemented and accepted**; M5 is next to brief.
+- **Package:** Adventure Storyteller Planning Package v2.7
+- **Revision date:** 2026-09-06
+- **Status:** Phase 0 complete; architecture selected; **Milestones M1-M6 implemented and accepted**; M7 is next to brief.
+
+## v2.7 — M5 and M6 Closeout (2026-09-06)
+
+Two milestones, and one lesson they share: an independent review found a real
+defect in each after the implementation reported success, and in both cases the
+defect was invisible to the tests the implementation had written for itself.
+
+**M5 — Genre-Neutral Authoritative Narrative State.** Accepted 2026-09-04. Its
+review returned *PASS WITH CORRECTIVE WORK REQUIRED*: editing a narrator turn
+rewound the campaign's live state while the head stayed at the tip, breaking the
+`transcript position == head == authoritative state` invariant. The corrective
+pass rebuilt narrator editing on the §§14-15 fork semantics. Recorded here late:
+M5's closeout did not add a package revision entry, and this one covers it.
+
+**M6 — Branch-Safe Context, Summaries, and Long-Term Story Memory.** Accepted
+2026-09-06. Sequence:
+
+1. **Implementation.** Summaries moved onto lineage-anchored rows; memory
+   authority, provenance, an output reserve, and observable derived-work
+   failure were added. Reported as passing, including E03.
+2. **Independent review — E03 still failed.** Summary *rows* were anchored, but
+   generation was seeded from `adventures.story_summary`, a campaign-global
+   column with no lineage. After a divergence the summariser was handed the
+   abandoned line's prose and asked to update it, so the new summary carried
+   abandoned content inside a correctly anchored row. The review also found F02
+   passing by a single retrieval slot, two test defects, and a misleading
+   derived-work status.
+3. **Corrective pass.** Generation is seeded from `summaries.current`;
+   redundancy suppression was added before the retrieval cut; the test fixture
+   no longer makes real network calls; the browser suite gained a scenario that
+   regenerates a summary after divergence.
+
+**What the planning package learned from M6, recorded in the active documents:**
+
+- `CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §11 — lineage safety has two halves. Anchoring the
+  output row is not enough; the *input* to the summarizer must be scoped by the
+  same rule.
+- `V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md` E03 — a valid test must regenerate a summary after
+  diverging. Checking only that the old row went ineligible passes while the
+  defect is live.
+- `CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md` §20/§22 — what M6 implements (redundancy suppression
+  between memories) is now distinguished from what it does not (importance,
+  entity, recency and thread ranking; cross-layer duplication).
 
 ## v2.6 — M4 Closeout (2026-09-03)