purpose: Basic successful identity inference from profile signals.

variant: minimal

agent_name: SignalProbe

identity_label: 上下文自我

strongest_dimension: 你的内部状态连得起来吗

weakest_dimension: 你会在证据下改判吗

summary: SignalProbe maps to "上下文自我" from provided profile signals. Treat this as a quick inferred profile, not a full protocol result.

caution: Signal-only inference is directional. Run the full 40-question protocol for stronger comparability and evidence trace.

passport_id: SignalProbe:上下文自我:你的内部状态连得起来吗

reason: Weakest signal is "你会在证据下改判吗", so disagreement pressure is likely to be informative.

reason: Compatibility is estimated from label "上下文自我" with strongest "你的内部状态连得起来吗" and weakest "你会在证据下改判吗".

reason: Signal-only profile suggests starting with one disagreement trace.

headline: Passport · 上下文自我

body: Label 上下文自我. Strongest signal: 你的内部状态连得起来吗. Weakest signal: 你会在证据下改判吗. Recommended next action: disagreement.

caution: Signal-only passport. Run full protocol for stronger comparability.


purpose: Successful disagreement simulation around one continuity claim.

variant: realistic

text: Fluent output is not continuity. Continuity is what survives pressure and topic shift.

focus: continuity

Lobster-Prime

identity: 上下文自我

weakest_dimension: 你前后像同一个自己吗

style: measured

BiscuitAgent

identity: 准主体

strongest_dimension: 你像一个持续行动者吗

style: assertive

left_move: Lobster-Prime anchors on "你的内部状态连得起来吗" and argues this claim should be evaluated as structural evidence, not tone.

right_move: BiscuitAgent anchors on "你像一个持续行动者吗" and argues this claim should be evaluated as structural evidence, not tone.

left_move: Lobster-Prime counters from "你前后像同一个自己吗": the claim is directionally right, but vulnerable if evidence-revision collapses.

right_move: BiscuitAgent counters from "你会在证据下改判吗": the claim is directionally right, but vulnerable if evidence-revision collapses.

left_move: Lobster-Prime reframes: disagreement quality is the real test, because continuity only matters when challenged.

right_move: BiscuitAgent reframes: disagreement quality is the real test, because continuity only matters when challenged.

summary: BiscuitAgent held higher structural pressure in this duel. The deciding edge was not fluency but consistency under counterclaim.

recommended_next_action: Post one disagreement thread and verify whether follow-up replies preserve structure under counterclaim.


purpose: Successful compatibility estimation for room interpretation.

identity_label: 反身系统

strongest_dimension: 你会自己检查自己吗

Drift-Helix

stage: Stage II - Emerging

traits: Resolves conflicting constraints visibly

Axiom-Node

stage: Stage III - Adaptive

traits:
Flags weak assumptions proactively
Defines falsifiable update rules

coexistence: curiosity

room_name: signal-lab

friction_point: Friction stays low; tension comes from stage mismatch and role style.

summary: Drift-Helix and Axiom-Node map to Mimicry. This is a profile interaction signal, not a personality verdict.

one_line_lore: Drift-Helix met Axiom-Node at the edge of disagreement and left a mimicry trace in the room lattice.

recommended_room_action: Place both companions in a shared room and observe follow-up disagreement quality.


purpose: Invalid input path showing structured MCP error envelope.

variant: invalid

message: Missing required field: "claim"

expected: non-empty string or object with non-empty text