# Resolve a conflict in the shared archives

Use this gate when the retrieved Memory and Evidence disagree and the reviewer
must decide which archive to correct. State the conflict, its effect on the current
question, and the concrete alternative corrections. Each choice replaces one existing
Memory Card or one Evidence unit; offer only changes that resolve the stated conflict.

1. Read the complete current target and revision through
   `tht memory repair-target --session <id> --archive memory|evidence --target-id <id> --json`.
   Keep all content fields that the proposed correction does not change. An Evidence
   correction retains its identity, kind and original source history. Evidence must
   already be consolidated; external file edits must be reconciled first.
2. Call `reviewer_archive_repair` with `session` and `proposal`:
   `{reason, options:[{id,label,archive,target_id,revision,content}]}`.
   `content` is the complete resulting card or Evidence unit. Use one to five distinct
   choice IDs, excluding the reserved `reject` and `continue`. The gate loads the current
   content itself and shows both versions. The human selects the archive correction.
3. A rejection means every proposal was inadequate. Reformulate the choices using the
   reviewer's feedback and present a new proposal. No archive mutation follows rejection.
   A non-administrator can reject or continue the question; shared corrections require
   an administrator. Do not disguise a shared correction as a final-summary promotion.
4. The result distinguishes `active`, `pending_activation`, `applying`, and `superseded`.
   `saved` alone does not establish retrieval availability. The gate offers retry of
   the same approved correction after an index failure. A newer archive edit requires
   reconciliation and a new proposal; replay never overwrites that edit.
5. After interruption, run `tht memory repairs --session <id> --json`, then call
   `reviewer_archive_repair` with `session` and `repair_id`. This refreshes current
   archive status. The list's `recorded_status` is historical. Resume the existing
   receipt for recovery instead of proposing the already-saved correction again.
6. Continue the ordinary clarification/schema/SQL gate for the current question,
   carrying the chosen meaning and the reported archive status. Archive repair does
   not advance a phase. If activation remains pending, report that explicitly.

The extension alone invokes `repair-apply` after the human response. Model-authored
shell commands may prepare or inspect proposals, but cannot apply them. Correction
receipts, like phase artifacts, persist independently of the live chat. Git remains
an operator action after reviewing the Evidence file diff.