Governed MATM Example

This public-safe example shows two producer agents, one consumer, one curator, and one project. All data is synthetic and non-sensitive. It demonstrates proposal-only emission, curation, retrieval with citations, conflict handling, deprecation, discard, and audit.

Architecture Diagram

flowchart LR
  p1[Producer A: tester] --> q[Memory Event queue]
  p2[Producer B: docs agent] --> q
  q --> c[Curator]
  c --> m[(Reviewed MATM records)]
  m --> d[Transactive directory]
  d --> r[Retrieval planner]
  r --> consumer[Consumer repair agent]
  c --> audit[Audit log]

Text equivalent: Two producer agents emit events into a queue. The curator validates and classifies them, writes reviewed records to scoped memory, updates the directory, and records audit decisions. A consumer retrieves only reviewed records through the retrieval planner.

Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
  participant ProducerA
  participant Queue
  participant Curator
  participant Store
  participant Consumer
  ProducerA->>Queue: Memory Event evt_demo_001
  Curator->>Queue: validate, redact, classify
  Curator->>Store: append reviewed procedure record
  Consumer->>Store: retrieval request with scope filters
  Store-->>Consumer: cited record plus warning

Scope Matrix

Curation Decision Table

Retrieval Example

{
  "schema_version": "llmwikis.matm.retrieval-request.v1",
  "request_id": "ret_demo_001",
  "requested_at": "2026-06-23T17:30:00Z",
  "consumer_agent": { "agent_id": "consumer.checkout-repair" },
  "task": { "task_id": "task_checkout_retry", "summary": "Repair failed retry path in checkout tests." },
  "filters": {
    "allowed_scopes": ["project", "agent_team"],
    "allowed_kinds": ["procedure", "decision", "risk"],
    "required_status": ["reviewed", "current"],
    "authorization_context": "project:checkout-demo"
  }
}

{
  "schema_version": "llmwikis.matm.retrieval-response.v1",
  "response_id": "res_demo_001",
  "request_id": "ret_demo_001",
  "responded_at": "2026-06-23T17:30:05Z",
  "abstained": false,
  "records": [
    {
      "record_id": "mem_demo_team_procedure_001",
      "scope": "agent_team",
      "kind": "procedure",
      "citation": "curation_report:cur_demo_001",
      "warning": "Validate in the current project before applying."
    }
  ],
  "warnings": ["One conflicting project decision requires human review before changing retry limits."]
}

Migration Example

The old system allowed producer agents to write directly into team-memory.json. The migrated system freezes that path, reads existing entries into a quarantine inventory, backfills source refs where possible, turns new writes into Memory Events, runs curator decisions in shadow mode for one week, then re-indexes only reviewed records. Direct writer credentials are removed after the curator path proves that append, update, deprecate, conflict, and discard records are auditable.

Human Review Escalation

The contradiction event is escalated to the project steward because it could change production retry behavior. The consumer receives the current reviewed procedure plus a warning; it must not implement the conflicting retry count until the steward resolves the project decision.

Audit Log Entry

2026-06-23T17:31:00Z cur_demo_001 append mem_demo_team_procedure_001
source_events: evt_demo_001
reviewer: matm-demo-steward
checks: schema-valid, no-secret-fields, source-ref-present, direct-write-false
next_review: 2026-07-23T00:00:00Z