all-llm-operations-achieve-coverage-and-fault-tolerance

OUT derived (depth 4)

All LLM-driven knowledge operations achieve both complete coverage and fault tolerance: the derive pipeline provides safe, complete, production-ready derivation with exhaustive exploration and accurate budget allocation, while interactive queries via ask are fault-tolerant, execution-bounded, and gracefully degrading — no LLM-facing operation can crash, hang, produce unbounded output, or corrupt the network.

Summary

Every operation that talks to an LLM is claimed to be both thorough and crash-proof — derivation exhaustively explores the belief network without corrupting it, and interactive queries always return something useful even if the LLM fails. This is currently retracted, meaning at least one of those guarantees no longer holds, so there may be gaps in coverage or fault handling in the LLM-facing code paths.

Justifications

SL — Complete derive coverage composed with fault-tolerant ask yields a fully reliable LLM integration surface

Antecedents (all must be IN):

  • derive-pipeline-has-complete-coverage — The derive pipeline achieves complete coverage along three axes: safety (fail-soft validation, Jaccard retraction guards, environment isolation), completeness (exhaustive exploration with guaranteed termination), and production-readiness (accurate proportional budgets, roundtrippable prompt format).
  • ask-is-fault-tolerant-and-bounded — The ask module is fault-tolerant (always returns a string, catches LLM failures, falls back to raw FTS5 search) and execution-bounded (tool loop capped at 3 iterations), ensuring reliable bounded knowledge retrieval regardless of LLM availability.

Dependents

These beliefs depend on this one:

Details