[aryanorastar]

Customer failure and resulting behavior

A reviewed FAQ can tell a customer to contact support now. Removing that external redirect can then erase the next actor and leave only a generic reply-here footer, without a real handoff.

The existing redirect owner now returns cleaned text plus text-free current-contact metadata from the same removed clause. Shared escalation policy preserves a recognized current support action before FAQ/confidence exemptions; the existing fenced case and actual staff-delivery workflow own receipt wording and honest failure fallback. Refs #83; this is a partial workflow repair, not a source-applicability fix.

Deliberately bounded scope

A complete English grammar binds the action to Omi support and a small set of complete current-purpose forms. Other recipients, address mentions, unrestricted purposes/suffixes and unknown wording grant no routing authority. Literal/code spans and unfinished conditional/heading/list scope are retained through segmentation; closed quoted/formatted facts do not hide later independent instructions. Existing string helper output remains unchanged.

No model field, prompt, provider stage, data store, private capability or optional enablement. Generation, reviewer/selection and actual index-handler source match current main. This does not prove arbitrary contradictions resolved, hardware scope known, or comprehensive multilingual/conditional-language understanding.

Verification

• Observed baseline: actual handler gives zero staff cards for an unresolved current contact request; honest failed-delivery path also fails. Useful-detail/optional-contact control passes.
• Current local full 1,268/1,268, no-model 8/8, progress guards 4/4 pass.
• Independent runtime review: 8 actual-handler controls and 168 legacy cleaned-text parity cases pass against main. It reproduced conditional, quote and wrong-recipient false handoffs; fixes and positive quoted/formatted-fact controls are included. No findings were waived.
• Actual handler verifies one delivered card, retained uncertainty/source, no competing email/generic footer, duplicate-input suppression and honest failed staff delivery. Secret/custody warnings, completed attempts and prior redirect controls remain.
• Exact-head Node20/24 and real PostgreSQL CI 40807186982 PASS at66aa6f4. Independent final code/docs review passes at unchanged runtime0a8d014; the later commit fixes only table formatting. Keep draft for the remaining quality/evidence disposition and Aryan’s review under the draft-only instruction; no new generated score or paid run is claimed.

A zero-network compatibility projection also checks96 fixed historical final-stage inputs against currentmaincffb46b and this draft: all routing decisions/cleaned text remain identical, with no lost prior person requirement. That cohort already routes its contact-bearing outputs to people, so it does not exercise or measure this newly reproduced trigger. Generation/prompt/review/selection/index source identity is verified. This is compatibility evidence, not regenerated model quality or a new pass-rate claim.

Release and remaining work

Keep this PR draft. #91 merged a461f86, but its c42efc65 rollout failed the hardware-applicability smoke and was rolled back to a9c9508/a6ef6b22. #90 merged cffb46b and is not deployed. Neither this change nor the passage of24 hours clears that release hold. The third Discord smoke stays held; #83 still needs trustworthy source-applicability enforcement and unsupported-conflict handling.

The master plan records64/100 implementation coverage and56/100 delivery completion, not accuracy; no score increase. No merge, deployment, paid evaluation or memory/context/fix-inbox enablement follows from this draft.