WFGY/ProblemMap/Atlas/Fixes/auto-repair/tiny-rollback-examples-pack-v1.md
2026-03-18 22:05:42 +08:00

14 KiB

Tiny Rollback Examples Pack v1 ↩️

The first compact rollback reference pack for safe early Atlas-based repair actions

Quick links:


If the rollback policy explains when rollback should happen, this pack shows what rollback should look like in small, concrete cases. 🧭

Its purpose is simple:

show a few minimal rollback cases
so the Auto Repair layer can move from rollback policy rules
to concrete, inspectable rollback behavior

This file does not claim to be a full rollback benchmark set.

It claims something smaller and more useful:

the project now has a first set of tiny rollback examples
for safe early repair actions in F1, F4, F7, and limited F5


Quick start 🚀

I want the shortest rollback reading

Use this path:

  1. read one example ID and its failed action
  2. inspect the rollback reason
  3. inspect the restore point
  4. inspect the post-rollback state
  5. inspect the next step

I want the stronger rollback reading

Use this page together with:

  1. Rollback Policy v1
  2. Repair Validation Loop v1
  3. Safe Early Action Catalog v1

Short version:

see what failed
see what gets restored
see why rollback is correct
see what happens next


1. Why this pack exists

The current Auto Repair layer already defines:

  • when rollback should happen
  • what rollback should restore
  • how rollback relates to validation
  • how rollback should connect to revision and escalation

But rules alone are not enough.

Without examples, rollback can still feel abstract.

This pack fills that gap.

It provides a few small examples that show:

  • what repair action failed or caused harm
  • what rollback target was chosen
  • what restore point was used
  • what the post-rollback state should look like
  • what next step becomes reasonable

In short:

this pack is the first small evidence layer for rollback behavior


2. What these examples are meant to prove

These examples are intentionally small.

They are not meant to prove:

  • full rollback automation
  • deployment-grade state restoration
  • universal rollback correctness across all families

They are meant to prove something narrower:

  1. a harmful or misleading repair can be identified
  2. a restore point can be named clearly
  3. rollback can be described locally and concretely
  4. post-rollback state can be summarized
  5. the workflow can continue safely after rollback

That is already very valuable.


3. Rollback examples quick map 🗂️

Example Main teaching focus
F1 example rollback protects grounding truth when filtering over-prunes evidence
F4 example rollback protects workflow usability when a gate becomes too restrictive
F7 example rollback protects semantic fit when structure cleanup overshoots
limited F5 example rollback protects diagnosability when visibility changes add noise instead of insight

This page is the right place when the question is what healthy rollback behavior looks like in practice, not whether rollback has been fully automated.


4. Pack scope

This v1 pack includes four tiny rollback examples:

  • one F1 example
  • one F4 example
  • one F7 example
  • one limited F5 example

These were chosen because they are the best early families for:

  • local repair actions
  • visible local harm
  • clear restore points
  • simple rollback explanations

This pack intentionally does not include F6-heavy rollback cases.

Those remain too risky and too abstract for early tiny rollback samples.


5. Standard tiny rollback format

Each tiny rollback example uses the following structure:

  1. Example ID
  2. Family
  3. Failed or harmful repair action
  4. Rollback target
  5. Rollback reason
  6. Restore point
  7. Post-rollback state
  8. Next step
  9. Why rollback is correct
  10. Main teaching point

This format is intentionally small and reusable.


Example 1 · F1 Tiny Rollback Example

Example ID

TRE_F1_001

Family

F1 · Grounding and Evidence Integrity

Failed or harmful repair action

F1_AF_001
Filter misleading adjacent anchors

Rollback target

F1_AF_001

Rollback reason

The filtering step removed misleading anchors, but it also removed the truly relevant source chunk.

The repair made the evidence set look cleaner, but semantic alignment with the real source became worse.

Restore point

prior candidate evidence pool

Post-rollback state

The earlier evidence pool is restored so the system no longer remains trapped in the over-pruned evidence state.

The grounding problem is still unresolved, but the case is no longer worse than before.

Next step

retry-with-alternate-action

Why rollback is correct

Rollback is correct because the repair damaged the target layer more than it improved it.

The local repair goal was grounding improvement, but the real outcome was harmful over-pruning.

Main teaching point

A grounding repair should be rolled back if it creates a cleaner-looking but less truthful evidence set.


Example 2 · F4 Tiny Rollback Example

Example ID

TRE_F4_001

Family

F4 · Execution and Contract Integrity

Failed or harmful repair action

F4_GT_001
Insert readiness gate

Rollback target

F4_GT_001

Rollback reason

The new readiness gate blocked the original premature execution, but it also blocked a valid downstream path that should have remained available.

The repair improved closure locally, but overshot the intended scope.

Restore point

previous workflow gate configuration

Post-rollback state

The over-restrictive gate is removed and the workflow returns to the earlier configuration.

The system regains the previous valid path, while the closure issue remains available for a narrower future repair.

Next step

revise

Why rollback is correct

Rollback is correct because the inserted gate created stronger collateral damage than the original local gain.

The target problem was premature execution, not total execution shutdown.

Main teaching point

A closure repair should be rolled back if it blocks more than the failure it was meant to stop.


Example 3 · F7 Tiny Rollback Example

Example ID

TRE_F7_001

Family

F7 · Representation and Localization Integrity

Failed or harmful repair action

F7_SC_001
Tighten output schema

Rollback target

F7_SC_001

Rollback reason

The schema tightening produced a valid structure, but semantic task fit degraded enough that the output became less useful.

The shell improved, but the content quality dropped too much.

Restore point

prior schema version

Post-rollback state

The earlier schema shell is restored so the case no longer remains trapped in a structurally valid but semantically degraded state.

The original representation issue is still present, but the system returns to the less harmful baseline.

Next step

re-check family fit

Why rollback is correct

Rollback is correct because the repair improved one visible dimension while worsening a more important functional dimension.

The action oversolved structure at the cost of task fidelity.

Main teaching point

A container repair should be rolled back if structural cleanliness comes at too high a semantic cost.


Example 4 · Limited F5 Tiny Rollback Example

Example ID

TRE_F5_001

Family

F5 · Observability and Diagnosability Integrity

Failed or harmful repair action

F5_LU_001
Add local logging uplift

Rollback target

F5_LU_001

Rollback reason

The additional logging exposed more detail, but it made the workflow noisier without improving actual diagnosability.

The repair increased visibility volume without improving failure-path clarity.

Restore point

pre-observability patch state

Post-rollback state

The added noisy logging layer is removed and the workflow returns to its prior signal level.

The case still needs observability work, but the system is no longer buried under low-value trace noise.

Next step

revise

Why rollback is correct

Rollback is correct because the repair improved information quantity but degraded practical diagnosability.

The problem was not only missing visibility.
It was missing useful visibility.

Main teaching point

An observability repair should be rolled back if it adds noise faster than it adds insight.


6. What these examples teach

Taken together, these tiny rollback examples teach four important lessons.

Lesson 1

Rollback is not an embarrassment branch.
It is a normal part of repair discipline.

Lesson 2

A repair can improve one local feature and still deserve rollback.

Lesson 3

Rollback depends on restore points being clear.

Lesson 4

Rollback keeps the system from getting trapped in a worse local state.


7. Why these examples are useful

These tiny rollback examples are useful for at least four reasons.

A. Validation support

They make rollback logic concrete after validation detects harm.

B. Planner support

They teach the planner what kinds of actions are likely to overshoot.

C. Demo support

They provide simple rollback cases for future repair demos.

D. Future semi-auto support

They create the first tiny evidence base for safe rollback-aware semi-auto behavior.


8. What this pack does not yet include

Tiny Rollback Examples Pack v1 does not yet include:

  • large rollback datasets
  • benchmark-scale rollback evaluation
  • F6-heavy rollback cases
  • multi-step repair-chain rollback
  • distributed restore behavior
  • automated rollback execution code

Those can come later.

This pack is intentionally minimal.


Once this pack exists, the next useful follow-up is one of these:

  1. create a planner test note that uses both validation and rollback examples
  2. create one tiny semi-auto repair demo spec using F1 or F4
  3. create a small validator-and-rollback paired example sheet

The strongest immediate next step is probably:

create a planner test note that shows how the planner, validation, and rollback layers connect on the same small cases


10. Next steps

After this page, most readers continue with:

  1. Open Planner Test Note v1
  2. Open Tiny Validation Examples Pack v1
  3. Open Tiny Semi Auto Demo Spec v1
  4. Open Rollback Policy v1

If you want the broader product surface:


11. One-line summary 🌍

Tiny Rollback Examples Pack v1 provides the first small rollback examples for safe early Atlas-based repair actions in F1, F4, F7, and limited F5.