2026-03-06. I am working on branch service, cost routing, MCP tools, and command-line thought operations.
At this point, the change gives an agent a deliberate way to capture, retrieve, and continue work instead of treating context as a disposable conversation artifact. The immediate objective is to define the intake and retention rules: what enters the system, what is recorded about it, and what remains outside the claim being made.
Why this matters
The implementation is deliberately operational: the service is not a claim that every saved thought is useful; it establishes the operational surface where memory can be examined, routed, and improved. This is why the work includes tool contracts, stored records, and repeatable operations rather than a single broad description of “AI memory.” Each layer needs a job that can be inspected.
The implementation does not replace the judgment required to describe a business, a document set, or a working team. It provides a repeatable path for retaining the evidence that judgment uses. A technical decision is useful only when a later reader can see its scope, its constraints, and the result it was intended to support.
What I will test next
The next work will test the intake-and-retrieval path in actual practice: whether the records can be retrieved at the right time, whether their provenance remains clear, and whether the system makes a real task easier without overstating what it knows. That distinction will guide the outcome posts that follow.
Historical basis: This entry is dated to the 2026-03-06 repository milestone, commits 1bf9aea. It is based on the contemporaneous implementation records and their documented scope.