resolve-drift

Resolve Drift

Check whether reference pages remain useful and whether claims about current behavior match living implementation evidence. Reconcile stale or redundant knowledge without turning historical intent into a mandate.

This is the semantic pass. It is intentionally more expensive than lint.

Inputs

Read indexed pages from .lore/reference/index.md or .lore/reference/index.html.

For each page, read evidence metadata:

• Markdown: fg-evidence frontmatter
• HTML: fg-evidence-code, fg-evidence-tests, and fg-evidence-symbols meta tags

Treat fg-sources as provenance, not authority or proof of currency. If evidence is missing, either:

• run update-evidence first, or
• audit manually and report that the page needs evidence

Audit Method

For each page:

1. Extract concrete claims from the prose.
2. Read the listed code and test evidence.
3. Search nearby code with rg when the evidence is incomplete.
4. For claims about current behavior, validate against code/tests and current user direction. Historical rationale may be useful even when code cannot prove it; label it as history, not as an instruction. Decide whether each claim is:
   • current
   • stale prose
   • stale evidence
   • implementation drift from documented intent (report as a fact, not automatic noncompliance)
   • useful historical rationale that cannot be proven from code
   • redundant or no longer useful reference material

Only flag contradictions when code/tests and page make incompatible claims about the same subject. A conflict with an old plan, note, or artifact alone is not drift or a blocker. Current user direction prevails; call out a concrete safety or compatibility consequence when relevant. Do not treat different levels of detail as drift.

Parallel Review

For large wikis, split indexed pages into independent batches and use sub-agents when the user has allowed agent delegation. Each batch should return findings in this format:

Page:
Claim:
Evidence:
Verdict:
Suggested resolution: