# ASK Runtime Wiring — The Missing Boundary (Stop-and-Document) **Date:** 2026-06-10 **Branch:** `feat/ask-runtime-wire` **Issue:** #680 (final `chat/runtime.py` wiring) **Status:** STOPPED before wiring. No `chat/runtime.py` edit was made. ## 1. Why this is a stop-and-document, not a wiring PR The task to wire `chat.ask_runtime.maybe_apply_served_ask` into `chat/runtime.py` carried an explicit pre-condition: > If no lawful `ContemplationResult` or provider exists at the boundary, do not > invent one. Stop and document the exact missing boundary. That pre-condition is **met**. A `QUESTION_NEEDED` `ContemplationResult` cannot be obtained at the runtime fallback boundary without either (a) calling the off-serving contemplation producer — which the task's hard constraints forbid — or (b) fabricating a result, which the "do not invent one" clause forbids. So the wiring is stopped here and the gap is documented for review. ## 2. The boundary that wiring would target The smallest legal fallback boundary in the serving turn is the **universal-disclosure fallback**: the point where the turn has decided it cannot ground the input and falls back to the "I don't know" disclosure. That is exactly the *missing-information* condition a served ASK is meant to convert into a question. - Surface constant: `chat/runtime.py:172` `_UNKNOWN_DOMAIN_SURFACE = "I don't know — insufficient grounding for that yet."` - Main-path fallback assignment: `chat/runtime.py:2582` (`response_surface = _UNKNOWN_DOMAIN_SURFACE`), `selected_source = "universal_disclosure"` at `:2586`. - Cold/stub-path fallback assignment: `chat/runtime.py:2060`, `:2295`. - Final surface finalize (post-governance) before the `TurnEvent` is built: `shape_surface(...)` at `chat/runtime.py:2746`, `TurnEvent(...)` at `:2753`. A wiring would call, at that fallback (post-`shape_surface`, pre-`TurnEvent`): ```python response_surface = maybe_apply_served_ask(self.config, response_surface, provider=) ``` Under default config (`ask_serving_enabled` absent/False) this is a pure no-op — `acquire_served_ask_candidate` never calls the provider while the gate is dark. The unresolved part is **``**: what lawfully produces the candidate. ## 3. Producer / consumer topology (why no lawful provider exists) ```mermaid graph LR subgraph OFF-SERVING (growth organ) CT["generate.contemplation.contemplate
(pass_manager.py)"] -->|ContemplationResult
terminal=QUESTION_NEEDED
question_path=teaching/questions/*| ART[(teaching/questions/ artifact)] RUN["core/contemplation/runner.py::run_contemplation
(offline loop)"] --> CT end subgraph SERVING TURN (chat/runtime.py) TURN["ChatRuntime.chat()"] --> FB["_UNKNOWN_DOMAIN_SURFACE fallback"] FB -. "needs a ContemplationResult here" .-> GAP{{"no in-turn producer
and no carried artifact handle"}} end ADAPTER["chat.ask_runtime.maybe_apply_served_ask
→ acquire_served_ask_candidate
→ evaluate_served_ask"] GAP -. consumes .-> ADAPTER ART -. "not carried into the turn" .-> GAP ``` **The consumer side is fully built and merged:** - `core/epistemic_disclosure/ask_serving.py::evaluate_served_ask` — validates the Q1-D `DeliveredQuestion` artifact off a `ContemplationResult` and returns a `ServedAskDecision` (#677). - `core/epistemic_disclosure/ask_acquisition.py::acquire_served_ask_candidate` — gate-first seam that accepts either a `contemplation_result` or a `ContemplationProvider` callable (#678). - `chat/ask_runtime.py::maybe_apply_served_ask` — runtime-facing helper that returns the served surface or the unchanged fallback (#681). **The producer side is off-serving by construction:** - The only code that produces a `ContemplationResult` with `terminal == QUESTION_NEEDED` and a `question_path` is `generate/contemplation/pass_manager.py` (`contemplate(...)`, ASK delivery at `_handle_ask_delivery`, lines ~103–121). - Its package docstring (`generate/contemplation/__init__.py`) declares it explicitly off-serving: > "Contemplation v0 (N6) — a single bounded read -> classify -> terminal -> > maybe-emit pass. Off-serving growth organ ... **No loops, no daemon, no L10 > runtime, no self-modification.**" - Its only non-test caller is the offline loop `core/contemplation/runner.py::run_contemplation` — not the serving turn. **No plumbing connects the two.** Confirmed by source sweep: - `chat/runtime.py` has **zero** references to `pass_manager`, `ComprehensionAttempt`, `ContemplationResult`, `QUESTION_NEEDED`, `Terminal`, `question_path`, `proposal_path`, `deliver_ask`, or `DeliveredQuestion`. (Its `contemplation`/`discourse_contemplation` symbols are the unrelated `teaching.contemplation` discovery/plan path, producing `ContemplationFinding`, not a `QUESTION_NEEDED` `ContemplationResult`.) - The only ASK reference anywhere under `chat/` is `chat/ask_runtime.py` itself. - `tests/test_ask_serving_integration.py` states the position in its own header: > "These tests intentionally avoid `chat.runtime`. This slice is adapter-only: > [it does not] wire runtime acquisition of `ContemplationResult`." ## 4. Why neither escape is lawful under the constraints | Way to get a candidate at the boundary | Verdict | | --- | --- | | Runtime calls `generate.contemplation.contemplate` / `pass_manager` per turn | **Forbidden** — "Do not call pass_manager directly from runtime"; also it is an off-serving organ ("no L10 runtime"), so calling it in the serving turn contradicts its design. | | Runtime calls `deliver_ask` / `render_question` to build a question in-turn | **Forbidden** — "Do not import/call render_question"; also re-renders prose the serving layer must only consume. | | Add an instance hook (`self._served_ask_provider = None`) that only a test populates with a `DummyResult` | **Inventing one.** No production code path would ever set it. The required test "runtime returns artifact text" would then prove only that a back-door hook is reachable from a fabricated double — *decoration, not proof* (CLAUDE.md, "Schema-Defined Proof Obligations"). | | Read an already-written `teaching/questions/` artifact from the turn | **No lawful handle.** `evaluate_served_ask` consumes a `ContemplationResult` object (it reads `question_path` off it); nothing keys an off-serving artifact to the current turn, and scanning the sink would be new, unspecified acquisition logic — not "wiring an existing helper." | Because every route is either forbidden or an invention, the required test *"gate enabled + valid QUESTION_NEEDED artifact: runtime path returns artifact question text"* **cannot be satisfied honestly through the serving turn today.** That is the precise blocker. ## 5. What is genuinely missing (the lawful next slice) A real, load-bearing boundary needs an **in-turn acquisition path that does not call the off-serving producer**. Options, for review: 1. **Carried-handle acquisition (recommended).** Define a serving-safe lookup that, given the turn's already-computed limitation/assessment, resolves a pre-delivered `teaching/questions/` artifact into a `ContemplationResult`-shaped handle — *reading* an existing off-serving artifact, never producing one. This gives `maybe_apply_served_ask` a lawful `provider` whose source exists in production. It is a new acquisition seam (its own reviewed PR), not a one-line runtime hook. 2. **Explicit producer→serving plumbing.** A separate slice that runs the off-serving contemplation pass out-of-band and persists a turn-addressable handle the serving turn can resolve. Larger; needs its own ADR and trust boundary (it bridges the off-serving organ to serving). Either way, the runtime wiring is a *follow-on* to one of these — not this PR. ## 6. What was (and was not) changed here - **Changed:** this document only. - **Not changed:** `chat/runtime.py`, the public `chat(...)` signature, `ChatResponse`, `TurnEvent`, telemetry schema, `Q1B_ASK_CARVE_OUT`, `proposal_allowed`, VERIFIED serving, `CLAIMS.md`, metrics. No call to `pass_manager` or `render_question` was added. - **Base state:** branch is cut from `main@32f8c2ff`; the focused ASK suite was green (434/434) earlier this session at that commit, and no edits were made to any code under test.