# AtoCore Master Plan Status ## Current Position AtoCore is currently between **Phase 7** and **Phase 8**. The platform is no longer just a proof of concept. The local engine exists, the core correctness pass is complete, Dalidou hosts the canonical runtime and machine database, and OpenClaw on the T420 can consume AtoCore safely in read-only additive mode. ## Phase Status ### Completed - Phase 0 - Foundation - Phase 0.5 - Proof of Concept - Phase 1 - Ingestion ### Baseline Complete - Phase 2 - Memory Core - Phase 3 - Retrieval - Phase 5 - Project State - Phase 7 - Context Builder ### Partial - Phase 4 - Identity / Preferences ### Baseline Complete - Phase 8 - OpenClaw Integration. As of 2026-04-12 the T420 OpenClaw helper (`t420-openclaw/atocore.py`) is verified end-to-end against live Dalidou: health check, auto-context with project detection, Trusted Project State surfacing, project-memory band, fail-open on unreachable host. Tested from both the development machine and the T420 via SSH. The helper covers 15 of the 33 API endpoints — the excluded endpoints (memory management, interactions, backup) are correctly scoped to the operator client (`scripts/atocore_client.py`) per the read-only additive integration model. ### Baseline Complete - Phase 9 - Reflection (all three foundation commits landed: A capture, B reinforcement, C candidate extraction + review queue). As of 2026-04-11 the capture → reinforce half runs automatically on every Stop-hook capture (length-aware token-overlap matcher handles paragraph-length memories), and project-scoped memories now reach the context pack via a dedicated `--- Project Memories ---` band between identity/preference and retrieved chunks. The extract half is still a manual / batch flow by design (`scripts/atocore_client.py batch-extract` + `triage`). First live batch-extract run over 42 captured interactions produced 1 candidate (rule extractor is conservative and keys on structural cues like `## Decision:` headings that rarely appear in conversational LLM responses) — extractor tuning is a known follow-up. ### Not Yet Complete In The Intended Sense - Phase 6 - AtoDrive - Phase 10 - Write-back - Phase 11 - Multi-model - Phase 12 - Evaluation - Phase 13 - Hardening ### Engineering Layer Planning Sprint **Status: complete.** All 8 architecture docs are drafted. The engineering layer is now ready for V1 implementation against the active project set. - [engineering-query-catalog.md](architecture/engineering-query-catalog.md) — the 20 v1-required queries the engineering layer must answer - [memory-vs-entities.md](architecture/memory-vs-entities.md) — canonical home split between memory and entity tables - [promotion-rules.md](architecture/promotion-rules.md) — Layer 0 → Layer 2 pipeline, triggers, review queue mechanics - [conflict-model.md](architecture/conflict-model.md) — detection, representation, and resolution of contradictory facts - [tool-handoff-boundaries.md](architecture/tool-handoff-boundaries.md) — KB-CAD / KB-FEM one-way mirror stance, ingest endpoints, drift handling - [representation-authority.md](architecture/representation-authority.md) — canonical home matrix across PKM / KB / repos / AtoCore for 22 fact kinds - [human-mirror-rules.md](architecture/human-mirror-rules.md) — templates, regeneration triggers, edit flow, "do not edit" enforcement - [engineering-v1-acceptance.md](architecture/engineering-v1-acceptance.md) — measurable done definition with 23 acceptance criteria - [engineering-knowledge-hybrid-architecture.md](architecture/engineering-knowledge-hybrid-architecture.md) — the 5-layer model (from the previous planning wave) - [engineering-ontology-v1.md](architecture/engineering-ontology-v1.md) — the initial V1 object and relationship inventory (previous wave) - [project-identity-canonicalization.md](architecture/project-identity-canonicalization.md) — the helper-at-every-service-boundary contract that keeps the trust hierarchy dependable across alias and canonical-id callers; required reading before adding new project-keyed entity surfaces in the V1 implementation sprint The next concrete next step is the V1 implementation sprint, which should follow engineering-v1-acceptance.md as its checklist, and must apply the project-identity-canonicalization contract at every new service-layer entry point. ### LLM Client Integration A separate but related architectural concern: how AtoCore is reachable from many different LLM client contexts (OpenClaw, Claude Code, future Codex skills, future MCP server). The layering rule is documented in: - [llm-client-integration.md](architecture/llm-client-integration.md) — three-layer shape: HTTP API → shared operator client (`scripts/atocore_client.py`) → per-agent thin frontends; the shared client is the canonical backbone every new client should shell out to instead of reimplementing HTTP calls This sits implicitly between Phase 8 (OpenClaw) and Phase 11 (multi-model). Memory-review and engineering-entity commands are deferred from the shared client until their workflows are exercised. ## What Is Real Today - canonical AtoCore runtime on Dalidou - canonical machine DB and vector store on Dalidou - project registry with: - template - proposal preview - register - update - refresh - read-only additive OpenClaw helper on the T420 - seeded project corpus for: - `p04-gigabit` - `p05-interferometer` - `p06-polisher` - conservative Trusted Project State for those active projects - first operational backup foundation for SQLite + project registry - implementation-facing architecture notes for future engineering knowledge work - first organic routing layer in OpenClaw via: - `detect-project` - `auto-context` ## Now These are the current practical priorities. 1. Finish practical OpenClaw integration - make the helper lifecycle feel natural in daily use - use the new organic routing layer for project-knowledge questions - confirm fail-open behavior remains acceptable - keep AtoCore clearly additive 2. Tighten retrieval quality - reduce cross-project competition - improve ranking on short or ambiguous prompts - add only a few anchor docs where retrieval is still weak 3. Continue controlled ingestion - deepen active projects selectively - avoid noisy bulk corpus growth 4. Strengthen operational boringness - backup and restore procedure - Chroma rebuild / backup policy - retention and restore validation ## Next These are the next major layers after the current practical pass. 1. Clarify AtoDrive as a real operational truth layer 2. Mature identity / preferences handling 3. Improve observability for: - retrieval quality - context-pack inspection - comparison of behavior with and without AtoCore ## Later These are the deliberate future expansions already supported by the architecture direction, but not yet ready for immediate implementation. 1. Minimal engineering knowledge layer - driven by `docs/architecture/engineering-knowledge-hybrid-architecture.md` - guided by `docs/architecture/engineering-ontology-v1.md` 2. Minimal typed objects and relationships 3. Evidence-linking and provenance-rich structured records 4. Human mirror generation from structured state ## Not Yet These remain intentionally deferred. - automatic write-back from OpenClaw into AtoCore - automatic memory promotion - ~~reflection loop integration~~ — baseline now in (capture→reinforce auto, extract batch/manual). Extractor tuning and scheduled batch extraction still open. - replacing OpenClaw's own memory system - live machine-DB sync between machines - full ontology / graph expansion before the current baseline is stable ## Working Rule The next sensible implementation threshold for the engineering ontology work is: - after the current ingestion, retrieval, registry, OpenClaw helper, organic routing, and backup baseline feels boring and dependable Until then, the architecture docs should shape decisions, not force premature schema work.