# 🌐 SYSTEM ANALYSIS: INC-001 (Silent Loss)

**Protocol:** `systems-thinking-engine`
**Target:** Silent Data Loss in SupervisorProxy Mutations
**Date:** 2026-01-30

## 1. 🎯 Phase 1: Boundary Mapping (The Scope)
*Before dissecting the bug, we define the ecosystem.*

*   **Container:** `Theus Transaction Boundary` (The interface between Python User Logic and Rust State Engine).
*   **Actors:**
    *   **User Intent:** "Modify this list."
    *   **SupervisorProxy (The Gateway):** The Python wrapper meant to intercept intent.
    *   **Shadow Copy (The Decoy):** The temporary Rust/Python object created for the transaction.
    *   **C-Extensions:** The underlying implementation of `list` and `dict` methods (`append`, `add`).
*   **Boundary Friction:** The gap between Python's High-Level API and C-Level Memory manipulation.

## 2. 🔄 Phase 2: Dynamic Analysis (Links & Loops)
*Mapping the invisible flows and broken feedback.*

*   **The Broken Feedback Loop (The Silence):**
    1.  User acts: `items.append('x')`.
    2.  System responds: Memory updates successfully (Shadow is mutated). 
    3.  **GAP:** No signal is sent to `Transaction`. The proxy is bypassed because `.append()` is an internal C-call, not a Python attribute setter.
    4.  Outcome: Transaction commits emptiness.
    
*   **The Reinforcing Loop (Confusion):**
    *   Developer writes code -> Code runs without error -> Developer assumes success -> Builds more logic on top -> **Data Rot accumulates**.
    *   This is a "Drifting Goals" archetype: The state gradually drifts away from reality without triggering alarms.

*   **Delay:**
    *   **Detection Delay:** Infinite. Since no error is raised, the bug is only found when someone reads the database later and finds it empty.

## 3. 🏗️ Phase 3: Structural Excavation (The Root)
*Why was this inevitable?*

*   **Events (What we saw):** Data not saving.
*   **Patterns (Recurrence):** Happens on List, Set, Dict - anything Mutable.
*   **Structure (The Source):**
    *   **Flawed Mental Model:** The design assumed **"Mutation = Assignment"** (`x = y`).
    *   **Reality:** In Python, **"Mutation != Assignment"**. Mutation is often internal state change (`x.change()`).
    *   **The Trap:** Building a "Supervisor" that watches the *variable handle* instead of the *object memory*.

## 4. 🚀 Phase 4: Leverage & Simulation (The Solution)
*Finding the Pivot Point.*

*   **Failed Leverage (Force):** Forcing users to call `.set()` or `.save()`.
    *   *Result:* High friction, breaks "Pythonic" intuition, users fight the system.

*   **High Leverage (Inference):** **Differential Shadow Merging**.
    *   *Concept:* If we can't watch every move (Mutation), we check the scorecard at the end (Diffing).
    *   *Dynamics Change:*
        *   Old: "Push" model (Proxy pushes changes to Log).
        *   New: "Pull" model (Transaction pulls changes from Shadows at `__exit__`).
    *   *2nd Order Effect:* Performance cost at commit time (Deep Compare). accepted because safe > fast for DBs.

*   **Simulation:**
    *   *Scenario:* User nests 5 lists deep and appends to leaf.
    *   *Result:* `infer_shadow_deltas` walks the path_map -> Finds leaf shadow -> Compares -> Logs Delta. **System Self-Corrects.**

---
**Verdict:** The fix is not just a patch; it's a shift in the system's "Listening Model" from Event-Based (on setattr) to State-Based (on exit).
