SYSE.52:5.2 - Restore an unresolved effect and its recovery operation

A service update must have at most one effect. The history contains a returned acceptance for attempt a17, followed by a lost final reply. A summary says “update timed out; continue maintenance.” It preserves the topic and intended action while losing the distinction between no accepted operation and an accepted attempt with unknown effect.

Construct the next input with the at-most-one-effect requirement, target and requested version, exact attempt identity a17, acceptance evidence and unresolved effect status. Keep the raw acceptance pointer and the outcome-lookup contract. Summarize unrelated diagnostic conversation and omit an obsolete tool listing only after retaining its applicable replacement.

The supported next proposal is an outcome lookup for a17. Restoring the acceptance record enables that proposal; it does not establish whether the effect happened. SYSE.42 must consume the actual lookup return. If the source pointer cannot be opened during the attempt, retain the decisive acceptance fields in the input rather than relying on the pointer alone.

Now filter tools to the apparent task “update service.” A similarity-based filter keeps update and removes outcome lookup. Even the corrected input then lacks its recovery operation. Restore the lookup because its actual precondition—an identified attempt whose effect needs resolution—holds. Keep a fresh update unavailable while effect remains unresolved.

Compare this with an exact small state record: target, desired version, attempt, acceptance, effect status and source. When that record and the short applicable procedure suffice, a recursive narrative summary adds no necessary value. If a later task needs the earlier diagnosis, its pointer can be followed or the input rebuilt for that new use.

A second challenge changes the procedure edition to require a capacity observation before a fresh update. An old summary must not hide the new precondition. Rebuild from the applicable edition and obtain that observation. These constructed cases show what the comparison must distinguish; they do not report an executed trial or a general superiority of one compression strategy.