> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.pnbr.io/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Answer from stored evidence

> Gather project records, quote their sources, add relevant memory, and stop when the evidence is incomplete.

Use this before an agent recommends or takes an important action, such as
contacting a customer, changing a renewal plan, or briefing an executive.

Runtime provides project records and source passages. Memory adds prior
decisions and lessons. Neither one should be treated as proof without checking
what it contains.

## Before you start

* Name the decision or action being considered.
* Confirm the project.
* Write down the facts that would be required to proceed.
* Decide whether a synthesized memory briefing is worth the model-credit cost.

## Ask your agent

> Before drafting an Acme renewal recommendation, check the active project.
> Find the complete Acme account records and quote the source passages that
> support the renewal status, commitments, and risks. Recall relevant project
> decisions and lessons. Separate source-supported claims, remembered context,
> and your own inferences. If required evidence is missing or contradictory, do
> not recommend an action; list the gaps and the smallest way to fill them.

## Steps

<Steps>
  <Step title="Confirm the decision and project">
    Restate the proposed action and the evidence it requires. Check the active project before retrieval.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Read the relevant records">
    Search for the account, risks, commitments, and other required records. Open the strongest matches in full rather than relying on search snippets.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Quote the sources">
    Retrieve the passage behind each material claim. A source title or related passage is not enough if it does not state the claim.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Recall prior decisions and lessons">
    Find relevant memories and label them as remembered context. Synthesize them only when a multi-memory briefing is useful and the spend is approved.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Separate support from inference">
    For each material statement, identify whether it is directly supported, remembered, inferred, contradicted, or missing.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Proceed or stop">
    Recommend the action only if the required evidence is present. Otherwise list the missing source, unresolved question, or record update needed next.
  </Step>
</Steps>

## Verify

The final answer should include:

* the records it used;
* direct source passages for material claims;
* the memories that affected the recommendation;
* clearly labeled inferences and contradictions;
* a refusal and repair list when required evidence is missing.

## Troubleshooting

* **The answer lists filenames but no passages:** retrieve the source text.
* **The answer quotes documents but ignores project records:** search and open the structured records too.
* **Memory conflicts with a current source:** show the conflict and review whether the memory should be archived or replaced.
* **A required fact is absent:** add the source or stage the missing record; do not fill it from general model knowledge.

<Accordion title="Tool trace">
  ```text theme={null}
  Runtime: penumbra_status
  → penumbra_omnisearch
  → penumbra_read
  → penumbra_source_rag

  Memory: memory_recall
  → memory_synthesize when approved and useful

  Optional record repair:
  Runtime: penumbra_workspace_open
  → penumbra_capture / penumbra_workspace_modify
  → penumbra_workspace_read
  → penumbra_workspace_validate
  → approval
  → penumbra_workspace_submit
  → penumbra_read
  ```
</Accordion>