I'm parked on you

Pick an option on each card and press Done; your answer goes straight back to the session. The raiser's pick is marked. "I'm not sure" is a real answer.

1

In plain terms. Should I build the fix for two prod message rows that skipped our normal write path, or hold for you to look first? The bookings they describe are real and confirmed in AppFolio -- this isn't a false-info problem, just a bypassed safety check that needs a careful code fix.

The full question, as raised

conformance-drift alert 2026-09-30: 2 nonconformant post-epoch Message rows on conv f37c24de-9cbb-40c9-b726-1e106e74cf46 (property western-slope-front-door, isTest:false, capabilityStage.leasing:'shadow'), both writerId='operator.manual-outbound-record' -- unregistered, string appears nowhere in the tracked repo (searched propflowai + ~900 recently-modified scripts/_*.ts across every worktree, no hit) -- an untracked ad-hoc script bypassed the ADR-0079 single-writer fence. Verified via direct classifyRow scan against propflow-prod (same predicate the sink enforces). Row 1 (msgId manual-SM09cdcb1a987c44681b462eb1e4951a2c, ts 22:37:45Z, real Twilio SID) reports Amy Dodson's tour confirmation accurately. Row 2 (msgId literally 'manual-undefined', no providerId, ts 03:19:36Z) claims two Friday tours booked -- verified BOTH are real: Tour af61d484 (2978 Emerald 1:00-1:30pm) and Tour 8886c9b5 (2980 Emerald 1:30-2:00pm), both confirmed, AppFolio-synced (showingId 575/576), Outlook-synced to the staff recipient, created ~90s before this message. PropFlow's own PromiseLedger independently flagged this exact quote as tour_row_mismatch/unfulfillable at the same timestamp, but the Tour data shows the claim IS true -- looks like a stale/retiring-mechanism artifact, not a real mismatch. The established fix pattern (_reconcile-conformance-rewrite.ts) does a full-item PutItem via the canonical writer, and row 1 carries Message.subtopic='tour_scheduling' which MessageSpec cannot express -- a naive rewrite would silently drop it. A safe fix needs a follow-up updateItemFields patch (same targeted-write mechanism applyTopicStampPlan already uses) to restore it post-rewrite. Holding both the registry/writer-code change and the actual prod row rewrite for a human -- unattended session, no standing grant on this class of prod write.

Build the tooling PR now, hold the prod rewrite for a separate go-aheadthe raiser's pick Hold everything -- don't touch code or data I'm not sure — go find out

Why, and what was tried

The session raising this recommends: Build the tooling PR now, hold the prod rewrite for a separate go-ahead
Content is verified accurate (real AppFolio bookings, calendar-synced) so there's no customer-trust fire to fight blind; the tooling gap is real and worth fixing properly rather than rushing a prod overwrite that could silently drop subtopic.
Tried first, unsuccessfully: Ran the sweep's own findConformanceDrift directly against propflow-prod to get real msgIds (the alert shipped with zero samples), pulled the full conversation plus the linked ProspectInquiry/Tour/PromiseLedger rows to verify row 2's claim instead of guessing, searched ~900 recently-touched scripts/_*.ts across every worktree on this box for the writerId string (none found, it's already gone), and read the actual saveNewMessages DynamoDB sink to confirm it's a full-item PutItem so the subtopic-loss risk is real, not theoretical, before proposing a fix.

d4f167de is parked on this.

Pick an option above, then press Done.