Review

2026-02-20 18:15 - Checkpoint

Verdict: Minor Deviation Trigger: Phase boundary

Aligned:

• T-001, T-002, T-003, and T-004 outputs align with phase scope and acceptance artifacts.
• Workbook anomalies were preserved in YAML to keep source-truth fidelity.
• Progress logging is append-only and updated per completed task.

Deviations:

• T-004 status was pending while acceptance items and Progress showed completion -> resolved by updating task status to completed.

Patterns:

• Execution quality is strong on year-specific source details.
• Minor process drift occurred in task metadata synchronization.

Recommendations:

• Continue preserving source naming anomalies in YAML config files.
• Keep task status updates synchronized with acceptance checkboxes and progress entries.

2026-02-20 18:24 - Checkpoint

Verdict: Minor Deviation Trigger: Session end

Aligned:

• Completed artifacts and progress logs are consistent for T-001 through T-005 and T-007.
• Source config implementation follows plan constraints by preserving source naming anomalies.

Deviations:

• Task metadata drift was detected (T-007 status and T-006 status were out of sync with acceptance state) -> resolved in Tasks.md before checkpoint close.

Patterns:

• Execution output quality is strong.
• Status/checklist synchronization needs tighter discipline during rapid task updates.

Recommendations:

• Immediately update status lines whenever acceptance checkboxes are changed.
• Re-run a quick Tasks/Progress consistency pass at each checkpoint.

2026-02-20 19:06 - Checkpoint

Verdict: Minor Deviation Trigger: Session end

Aligned:

• All 13 tasks are implemented with matching artifacts across source config files, sync package code, CLI wiring, and verification commands.
• End-to-end verification confirms expected raw tables and required key columns in atlas.db.

Deviations:

• Metadata drift (T-006 status mismatch and stale None yet wording) was detected during final review -> resolved before close.
• read_xlsx header_row parameter was not available in the selected DuckDB Node binding; implemented a range-based fallback using configured header row values.

Patterns:

• Strong implementation fidelity and validation discipline.
• Most drift occurred in plan metadata synchronization, not code output.

Recommendations:

• Keep using a metadata consistency pass before each checkpoint close.
• If strict header_row support is required later, evaluate binding/version upgrades and remove the current range workaround.