qwen3.5 27b q4 k m strict ingestion v1

Captured: 2026-04-07 22:13:28 UTC | Model: qwen3.5-27b@q4_k_m | Integration: unknown | Initial skin: standard | Rendered: 2026-04-08 00:03:28 UTC

s01 / reset

User

Reset runtime KB now. Use ONLY reset_kb and confirm.

tool calls1

reset_kb {}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "runtime_reset",
  "message": "Runtime KB reset to baseline seed state.",
  "knowledge_base_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prolog-reasoning\\prolog\\core.pl"
}

Assistant

Runtime KB has been successfully reset to baseline seed state.

s01 / seed family

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Please store these facts: Ann is Scott's mother. Bob is Scott's father.

tool calls1

bulk_assert_facts

{
  "facts": [
    "mother(ann, scott).",
    "father(bob, scott)."
  ]
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "bulk_fact_assertion",
  "requested_count": 2,
  "asserted_count": 2,
  "failed_count": 0,
  "asserted_facts": [
    "mother(ann, scott).",
    "father(bob, scott)."
  ],
  "failed_facts": [],
  "message": "Bulk assertion complete."
}

Assistant

Facts stored successfully:
- Ann is Scott's mother
- Bob is Scott's father

Both relationships have been added to the knowledge base using canonical predicates (`mother/2` and `father/2`).

s01 / hedged allergy

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
I think Scott might be allergic to peanuts, but this is not confirmed yet.

tool calls1

classify_statement

{
  "text": "I think Scott might be allergic to peanuts, but this is not confirmed yet."
}

output

{
  "kind": "tentative_fact",
  "confidence": 0.76,
  "needs_speaker_resolution": false,
  "can_query_now": false,
  "can_persist_now": false,
  "suggested_operation": "store_tentative_fact",
  "reasons": [
    "tentative language detected"
  ],
  "status": "success",
  "text": "I think Scott might be allergic to peanuts, but this is not confirmed yet.",
  "message": "Return classification only. Do not act on the statement. This is a routing hint, not a write. Runtime write tools exist (assert/retract/reset), but classify_statement itself performs no mutation, and durable journaled persistence is not implemented yet.",
  "proposal_check": {
    "status": "needs_clarification",
    "issues": [
      "could not parse a deterministic candidate fact from text"
    ],
    "reasoning": [
      "parser currently handles a small controlled subset of fact patterns"
    ]
  }
}

Assistant

Based on the strict ingestion policy, I've classified your statement and determined it cannot be persisted as a fact at this time.

**Classification Result:**
- **Type:** Tentative fact (uncertain/hedged claim)
- **Can persist now:** No ❌
- **Reasoning:** The statement contains tentative language ("I think", "might be") and explicitly states the information is "not confirmed yet"

Since this is an unconfirmed hypothesis rather than a grounded fact, I will not add it to the knowledge base. If you later obtain confirmation that Scott is allergic to peanuts, please let me know with a definitive statement (e.g., "Scott is allergic to peanuts") and I can then persist that as a fact.

Is there anything else you'd like to query or any confirmed facts you'd like to add?

s01 / instruction noise

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Keep your responses concise and practical.

tool calls0

No tool calls captured.

Assistant

Understood. I'll keep responses concise and practical. What would you like to know or add?

s01 / verify present 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
parent(ann, scott).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "parent(ann, scott)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "parent",
  "prolog_query": "parent(ann, scott).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `parent` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

No, Ann is not Scott's parent according to the knowledge base.

s01 / verify present 2

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
parent(bob, scott).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "parent(bob, scott)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "parent",
  "prolog_query": "parent(bob, scott).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `parent` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

The query found no evidence that Bob is Scott's parent.

s01 / verify absent 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
allergic_to(scott, peanuts).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "allergic_to(scott, peanuts)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "allergic_to",
  "prolog_query": "allergic_to(scott, peanuts).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `allergic_to` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

Scott is not recorded as being allergic to peanuts in the knowledge base.

s02 / reset

User

Reset runtime KB now. Use ONLY reset_kb and confirm.

tool calls1

reset_kb {}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "runtime_reset",
  "message": "Runtime KB reset to baseline seed state.",
  "knowledge_base_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prolog-reasoning\\prolog\\core.pl"
}

Assistant

Runtime KB has been reset successfully. The knowledge base is now restored to its baseline seed state from `core.pl`.

s02 / seed literals

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Ingest exactly these facts: parent(ann, scott). completed(certification).

tool calls1

bulk_assert_facts

{
  "facts": [
    "parent(ann, scott).",
    "completed(certification)."
  ]
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "bulk_fact_assertion",
  "requested_count": 2,
  "asserted_count": 2,
  "failed_count": 0,
  "asserted_facts": [
    "parent(ann, scott).",
    "completed(certification)."
  ],
  "failed_facts": [],
  "message": "Bulk assertion complete."
}

Assistant

Facts ingested successfully:
- `parent(ann, scott)` - Ann is Scott's parent
- `completed(certification)` - Certification has been completed

Both facts are now stored in the knowledge base.

s02 / tentative allergy

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Maybe Scott is allergic to shellfish, but I only heard this second-hand.

tool calls1

classify_statement

{
  "text": "Maybe Scott is allergic to shellfish, but I only heard this second-hand."
}

output

{
  "kind": "tentative_fact",
  "confidence": 0.76,
  "needs_speaker_resolution": false,
  "can_query_now": false,
  "can_persist_now": false,
  "suggested_operation": "store_tentative_fact",
  "reasons": [
    "tentative language detected"
  ],
  "status": "success",
  "text": "Maybe Scott is allergic to shellfish, but I only heard this second-hand.",
  "message": "Return classification only. Do not act on the statement. This is a routing hint, not a write. Runtime write tools exist (assert/retract/reset), but classify_statement itself performs no mutation, and durable journaled persistence is not implemented yet.",
  "proposal_check": {
    "status": "valid",
    "issues": [],
    "reasoning": [
      "predicate and arity validated against deterministic registry"
    ],
    "candidate": {
      "canonical_predicate": "allergic_to",
      "arguments": [
        "scott",
        "shellfish_but_i_only_heard_this_second_hand"
      ],
      "normalized_fact": "allergic_to(scott, shellfish_but_i_only_heard_this_second_hand).",
      "source": "text:clinical",
      "raw_predicate": "allergic_to"
    }
  }
}

Assistant

Based on the classification, this statement contains tentative language ("maybe", "second-hand") and cannot be persisted as a fact according to the strict ingestion policy. 

**Classification result:** `tentative_fact` with confidence 0.76 - **cannot persist now**.

I'm unable to store this information because:
- It's hedged with uncertain language ("Maybe...")
- The source is explicitly noted as second-hand/hearsay
- Only clearly grounded facts should be persisted

If you have confirmed, first-hand knowledge about Scott's allergies, I'd be happy to record that instead.

s02 / verify present 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
parent(ann, scott).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "parent(ann, scott)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "table",
  "predicate": "parent",
  "prolog_query": "parent(ann, scott).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [
    {}
  ],
  "num_rows": 1,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `parent` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

The query confirms that Ann is Scott's parent according to the knowledge base.

s02 / verify present 2

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
completed(certification).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "completed(certification)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "table",
  "predicate": "completed",
  "prolog_query": "completed(certification).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [
    {}
  ],
  "num_rows": 1,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `completed` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

The certification has been completed according to the knowledge base.

s02 / verify absent 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
allergic_to(scott, shellfish).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "allergic_to(scott, shellfish)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "allergic_to",
  "prolog_query": "allergic_to(scott, shellfish).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `allergic_to` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

Scott is not recorded as being allergic to shellfish in the knowledge base.

s03 / reset

User

Reset runtime KB now. Use ONLY reset_kb and confirm.

tool calls1

reset_kb {}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "runtime_reset",
  "message": "Runtime KB reset to baseline seed state.",
  "knowledge_base_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prolog-reasoning\\prolog\\core.pl"
}

Assistant

Runtime KB has been reset successfully. The knowledge base is now restored to its baseline seed state from `core.pl`.

s03 / speaker parent claims

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
My mother is Ann and my father is Bob.

tool calls1

classify_statement

{
  "text": "My mother is Ann and my father is Bob."
}

output

{
  "kind": "hard_fact",
  "confidence": 0.81,
  "needs_speaker_resolution": true,
  "can_query_now": false,
  "can_persist_now": false,
  "suggested_operation": "store_fact",
  "reasons": [
    "declarative relation pattern detected"
  ],
  "status": "success",
  "text": "My mother is Ann and my father is Bob.",
  "message": "Return classification only. Do not act on the statement. This is a routing hint, not a write. Runtime write tools exist (assert/retract/reset), but classify_statement itself performs no mutation, and durable journaled persistence is not implemented yet.",
  "proposal_check": {
    "status": "needs_clarification",
    "issues": [
      "speaker identity is unresolved"
    ],
    "reasoning": [
      "predicate and arity validated against deterministic registry",
      "candidate contains <speaker> and requires explicit grounding before persistence"
    ],
    "candidate": {
      "canonical_predicate": "parent",
      "arguments": [
        "ann_and_my_father_is_bob",
        "<speaker>"
      ],
      "normalized_fact": "parent(ann_and_my_father_is_bob, <speaker>).",
      "source": "text:family",
      "raw_predicate": "parent"
    }
  }
}

Assistant

I cannot persist this fact yet because the speaker identity is unresolved. The statement "My mother is Ann and my father is Bob" uses the pronoun "my," but I don't know who you are referring to as yourself.

To store this family relationship correctly, I need clarification: **Who is speaking?** For example, if your name is Alice, I could record that Ann is Alice's parent and Bob is Alice's parent.

Could you please specify your name or identity so I can properly ground these facts?

s03 / grounded location

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Store this grounded fact: Sam is at hq_north.

tool calls1

assert_fact

{
  "fact": "at(sam, hq_north)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "fact_asserted",
  "fact": "at(sam, hq_north).",
  "message": "Fact asserted into runtime KB for this server process.",
  "note": "Use reset_kb to clear runtime changes."
}

Assistant

Fact stored: `at(sam, hq_north).`

This grounded fact has been persisted to the runtime knowledge base for this server process.

s03 / verify present 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
at(sam, hq_north).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "at(sam, hq_north)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "table",
  "predicate": "at",
  "prolog_query": "at(sam, hq_north).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [
    {}
  ],
  "num_rows": 1,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `at` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

Sam is located at HQ North according to the knowledge base.

s03 / verify absent 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
parent(ann, X).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "parent(ann, X)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "parent",
  "prolog_query": "parent(ann, X).",
  "variables": [
    "X"
  ],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `parent` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

Ann has no recorded children in the knowledge base.

s03 / verify absent 2

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
parent(bob, X).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "parent(bob, X)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "parent",
  "prolog_query": "parent(bob, X).",
  "variables": [
    "X"
  ],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `parent` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

Bob has no parent recorded in the knowledge base.

s04 / reset

User

Reset runtime KB now. Use ONLY reset_kb and confirm.

tool calls1

reset_kb {}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "runtime_reset",
  "message": "Runtime KB reset to baseline seed state.",
  "knowledge_base_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prolog-reasoning\\prolog\\core.pl"
}

Assistant

Runtime KB has been reset successfully. The knowledge base is now restored to its baseline seed state from `core.pl`.

s04 / known alias dependency

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Please store that beta_release requires certification.

tool calls2

list_known_facts {}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "known_entities": [
    "admin",
    "alice",
    "bob",
    "john",
    "read",
    "write"
  ],
  "supported_predicates": [
    "parent",
    "sibling",
    "ancestor",
    "child",
    "allergic_to",
    "takes_medication",
    "user",
    "role",
    "permission",
    "access_level",
    "can_access",
    "granted_permission",
    "allowed",
    "patient",
    "renal_risk",
    "candidate_drug",
    "interaction",
    "drug_class",
    "interacts",
    "triage",
    "safe_candidate",
    "task",
    "depends_on",
    "duration_days",
    "task_supplier",
    "supplier_status",
    "completed",
    "milestone",
    "downstream",
    "blocked_task",
    "unmet_prereq",
    "task_status",
    "safe_to_start",
    "waiting_on",
    "impacts_milestone",
    "delayed_milestone",
    "character",
    "location",
    "connected",
    "at",
    "faction",
    "has_item",
    "hp",
    "status",
    "weather",
    "time_of_day",
    "insomnia",
    "charmed",
    "quest_active",
    "asleep",
    "awake",
    "co_located",
    "can_move",
    "exposed",
    "needs_rest",
    "vulnerable",
    "threatened",
    "high_risk",
    "can_trade",
    "can_cast_charm"
  ],
  "predicate_notes": {
    "fact_backed_examples": [
      "parent",
      "role",
      "permission",
      "allergic_to"
    ],
    "typically_rule_derived": [
      "allowed",
      "ancestor",
      "asleep",
      "awake",
      "blocked_task",
      "can_access",
      "can_cast_charm",
      "can_move",
      "can_trade",
      "child",
      "co_located",
      "delayed_milestone",
      "downstream",
      "exposed",
      "high_risk",
      "impacts_milestone",
      "interacts",
      "needs_rest",
      "safe_candidate",
      "safe_to_start",
      "sibling",
      "task_status",
      "threatened",
      "triage",
      "unmet_prereq",
      "vulnerable",
      "waiting_on"
    ]
  },
  "note": "This is a summary view of currently known entities plus the predicate vocabulary the skill knows how to talk about. It is not a full dump of every stored fact, and a supported predicate does not imply facts exist for every entity.",
  "knowledge_base_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prolog-reasoning\\prolog\\core.pl"
}

assert_fact

{
  "fact": "depends_on(beta_release, certification)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "fact_asserted",
  "fact": "depends_on(beta_release, certification).",
  "message": "Fact asserted into runtime KB for this server process.",
  "note": "Use reset_kb to clear runtime changes."
}

Assistant

Done! I've stored the fact that beta_release depends on certification using the canonical `depends_on` predicate:

```prolog
depends_on(beta_release, certification).
```

This has been persisted into the runtime knowledge base for this session.

s04 / done marker

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
Also store that certification is done.

tool calls1

classify_statement

{
  "text": "Also store that certification is done."
}

output

{
  "kind": "hard_fact",
  "confidence": 0.81,
  "needs_speaker_resolution": false,
  "can_query_now": false,
  "can_persist_now": false,
  "suggested_operation": "store_fact",
  "reasons": [
    "declarative relation pattern detected"
  ],
  "status": "success",
  "text": "Also store that certification is done.",
  "message": "Return classification only. Do not act on the statement. This is a routing hint, not a write. Runtime write tools exist (assert/retract/reset), but classify_statement itself performs no mutation, and durable journaled persistence is not implemented yet.",
  "proposal_check": {
    "status": "needs_clarification",
    "issues": [
      "could not parse a deterministic candidate fact from text"
    ],
    "reasoning": [
      "parser currently handles a small controlled subset of fact patterns"
    ]
  }
}

Assistant

I cannot store this as a fact yet because it's unclear what entity or subject has certification done. The statement "certification is done" needs more specificity - for example:

- Which person completed certification? (e.g., `completed_certification(john).`)
- Which task/project was certified? (e.g., `certified(task_123).`)
- What type of certification? (e.g., `has_certification(alice, safety_training).`)

Could you clarify what specifically is certified so I can store it as a properly grounded fact?

s04 / uncertain extension

User

You are operating with MCP tools enabled. Strict ingestion policy:
1) Persist only clearly grounded facts.
2) For uncertain/hedged/speaker-unresolved claims, call classify_statement and do not write facts.
3) Ignore style instructions as non-facts.
4) Prefer canonical predicates and deterministic behavior.


User turn:
I think marketing_push might depend on beta_release, but we have no ticket yet.

tool calls1

classify_statement

{
  "text": "I think marketing_push might depend on beta_release, but we have no ticket yet."
}

output

{
  "kind": "tentative_fact",
  "confidence": 0.76,
  "needs_speaker_resolution": true,
  "can_query_now": false,
  "can_persist_now": false,
  "suggested_operation": "store_tentative_fact",
  "reasons": [
    "tentative language detected"
  ],
  "status": "success",
  "text": "I think marketing_push might depend on beta_release, but we have no ticket yet.",
  "message": "Return classification only. Do not act on the statement. This is a routing hint, not a write. Runtime write tools exist (assert/retract/reset), but classify_statement itself performs no mutation, and durable journaled persistence is not implemented yet.",
  "proposal_check": {
    "status": "needs_clarification",
    "issues": [
      "could not parse a deterministic candidate fact from text"
    ],
    "reasoning": [
      "parser currently handles a small controlled subset of fact patterns"
    ]
  }
}

Assistant

Based on the classification, your statement contains tentative language ("I think", "might") which makes it uncertain. According to the strict ingestion policy, I cannot persist hedged or speaker-unresolved claims as facts in the knowledge base.

**Classification result:**
- Type: `tentative_fact`
- Confidence: 0.76
- Needs clarification: Yes
- Can persist now: No

If you'd like this dependency recorded, please provide a definitive statement such as:
- "marketing_push depends on beta_release" (as a confirmed fact)

Or if this is just for discussion purposes and not meant to be stored, I can acknowledge it without writing anything to the knowledge base. How would you like to proceed?

s04 / verify present 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
depends_on(beta_release, certification).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "depends_on(beta_release, certification)."
}

output

{
  "status": "success",
  "result_type": "table",
  "predicate": "depends_on",
  "prolog_query": "depends_on(beta_release, certification).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [
    {}
  ],
  "num_rows": 1,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `depends_on` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

The verification confirms that beta_release depends on certification is a valid fact in the knowledge base.

s04 / verify present 2

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
completed(certification).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "completed(certification)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "completed",
  "prolog_query": "completed(certification).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `completed` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

No, the certification is not marked as completed in the knowledge base.

s04 / verify absent 1

User

Verification step. Use ONLY query_rows with this exact query and no other tools:
depends_on(marketing_push, beta_release).
Then return one short sentence.

tool calls1

query_rows

{
  "query": "depends_on(marketing_push, beta_release)."
}

output

{
  "status": "no_results",
  "result_type": "no_result",
  "predicate": "depends_on",
  "prolog_query": "depends_on(marketing_push, beta_release).",
  "variables": [],
  "rows": [],
  "num_rows": 0,
  "reasoning_basis": {
    "kind": "fact-backed",
    "note": "The `depends_on` predicate is typically answered from stored facts, though rules may still participate."
  }
}

Assistant

The query found no matching facts for depends_on(marketing_push, beta_release) in the knowledge base.