V-560 classified the side query correctly and then dropped the request behind
it, saying "Прошлую просьбу отпускаю." The owner rejected that on sight: he
asked about the weather in the middle of setting a reminder, and being told the
reminder was let go reports a loss he did not ask for. It had not been lost —
there was simply nowhere to put it.
There is now. ClarifyStore grew a bounded stack in V-559 and nothing called
Push; this is the caller it was built for. A side query leaves the question
parked exactly as it is, the words are answered as themselves, and the question
comes back on the end of the same reply — one utterance, two acts.
The resumed question is not the first one again. "Когда?" works in the same
breath as "напомни позвонить маме" and does not work after a turn about Rome, so
the deck has a second form per slot that names the request: "На какое время
поставить напоминание?". No attempt is spent, because he answered the side query
and not the parked question, and charging a retry for a turn that was never an
answer is the V-554 shape.
clarifyDropped stays for new_request and cancel, where something really does
die. Two things can now die at once, so TakeExpired reports a count instead of a
bool and the expiry notice has a plural wording — "прошлую просьбу" when two
were lost would be a lie about the number.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
askClarify parked "Что сделать?" whatever was on the other end. With an empty
allowlist that question has no answer: she asks, fails, asks again and gives up,
three turns spent on a request she could have declined in the first one.
Empty allowlist now names the gap and parks nothing. A non-empty one still asks,
and names what she can run, capped at six, so the question is answerable.
Every clarify turn said one sentence per gap, and a re-ask repeated it word
for word. A question he already failed to answer is the worst one to ask
again unchanged: the second wording is what tells him which part she missed.
clarifytemplates.go holds three wordings per slot, picked by attempt rather
than at random — short first, then naming the gap, then spelling it out with
an example. Past the end she keeps the most explicit one instead of wrapping
back to the short question he has already not answered.
The intents with nothing identifiable to ask about (note, query, chat,
system) kept the stub's single "не совсем поняла — можешь переформулировать?",
which is the line he hears whenever she misses him completely. Four wordings
now, picked by a hash of the utterance so one question asked twice reads the
same and two different misses do not.
Still no model call on this path: the resident model would wander, and this
text has to be right every time. No schema_version either, unlike the nudge
templates — these are Go constants, so no file can drift out of step with the
code that reads it. The persona test already in clarify_test.go covers the
new lines.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
claude