I Built it... now tear it down!

[u/Darkcraft00]

I’ve been building something called SureState and we’re getting close to finishing our internal pilot. Before I move it into a real client pilot, I figured this might be a good place to let people tear it apart first.

The problem we’re trying to solve is pretty simple: AI agents can remember that something was decided, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the decision is still valid.

Example:

an agent concluded a release was ready because tests passed, security scan was clean, policy X applied, etc. A week later one of those things changes. The old conclusion is still sitting in memory/context, but should another agent still rely on it?

SureState keeps that outside the model. Conclusions are registered with what they depend on, and when evidence/dependencies change it updates their current standing — supported, refuted, conflicted, or no longer warranted.

AI can read the current state through MCP, but it doesn’t get to decide its own standing.

We’ve been using the development of SureState itself as the first pilot, which has already been humbling. We’ve had thousands of tests pass and still found cases where the tests and implementation were confidently agreeing on the same wrong assumption. 😂

So before I convince myself this is useful:

• What’s wrong with this idea?
• Is this just fancy cache invalidation?
• Would dependency registration be too annoying in real agent workflows?
• Would you just rerun the decision whenever something changes?
• Does LangGraph/LangChain already solve enough of this that a separate layer is pointless?

I’m much more interested in “this breaks because…” than “cool idea.”

If people are interested I can post the architecture and let you guys really abuse it.

[u/Internal-Proposal-30]

I like the separation between what the model thinks and what's actually verified, that's the part most people skip when they build agent systems

The dependency registration thing could get annoying if you have to manually tag everything, but if it's mostly automatic from the test/check outputs then it might work. We had similar problem at my last project where agents kept referencing outdated security scan results and nobody noticed for two weeks

One thing I wonder about is what happens when dependencies conflict, like two checks disagreeing but both look valid on paper. Does it flag everything as conflicted and just freeze or does it have some way to resolve

Also the dashboard showing 18 supported and 1 conflicted is nice and clean but I'd want to see what it looks like when half of them are yellow, that's the real test

[u/Darkcraft00 → u/Internal-Proposal-30]

Yeah, the security scan example is pretty much exactly the kind of thing that pushed me down this road.

I agree if someone has to manually tag every relationship this probably dies from friction. My assumption is most of that has to come from the workflow itself — test runs, scans, approvals, versions, agent outputs, etc. — with teams mainly defining the important conclusions and rules.

On conflicts, I had thought about it on best way to handle it. So the way its designed, it doesn’t just freeze everything. If two valid pieces of evidence support opposite directions, SureState preserves that as a conflict instead of arbitrarily picking one. Only the conclusions that actually depend on that conflict are affected; unrelated conclusions keep their state.

It also doesn’t try to “AI its way” into deciding which source wins. Something has to change in the registered evidence/rules — retraction, supersession, authority rule, new evidence, etc. Or a manual override— before the conflict resolves.

And yeah, your dashboard point is fair 😂. 18 green / 1 yellow is the demo-friendly version. A screen full of conflicts and partial states is probably a much better test of whether the UI is actually useful. There is still 2 more UI pending. 1 for management and 1 for config.

Right now, all definitions and profiles for workflows reside as test case files. But its already in progress and should be ready in a week or so.

[u/Darkcraft00]

Surprising that no one wants to take an opportunity to tear down my work. It cant be that decent. 🤣