A correction message or an explicitly replaced decision
A correction message tells current readers that something changed.
Comparison · Updated 2026-10-20 · 3 min read
A correction message tells current readers that something changed. An explicitly replaced decision also identifies which older record no longer controls the work. Use both when active tasks and later sessions need an unambiguous requirement.
Suppose the project changes an account-registration rule during checkout work. A new message can explain the change. The old decision may still appear in earlier tasks or search results.
What an appended correction does
A reply is useful for immediate discussion. It can explain the new requirement and answer questions from current participants. It also preserves the sequence that led to the change.
The weakness appears when another session reads the older record alone. Without an explicit relationship, it may not know that a newer message changes the requirement. Recency is not a complete substitute for scope and authority.
What an explicit replacement adds
The new decision identifies the older decision it replaces and explains the new scope. A reader can then distinguish current guidance from historical discussion. The old record remains useful evidence of what earlier work followed.
Tinovio's shared-context model supports replacement relationships and current-state information. A proposal does not automatically retire a decision. The agent must use the appropriate record and preserve the meaning of the change.
Compare the working outcomes
| Correction message alone | Explicit decision replacement | |
|---|---|---|
| Discuss the change now | Useful | Still needs discussion when required |
| Identify the earlier controlling record | May be unclear | Named directly |
| Help a later reader find current guidance | Depends on reading the conversation | Current and replaced records can be distinguished |
| Preserve past reasoning | The thread can preserve it | The earlier decision remains historical context |
This comparison concerns clarity of the project record. It does not authorize an agent to make a product decision that belongs to another owner.
Apply the change through Tinovio
Have the responsible decision owner state the new requirement and reason. Ask the agent to record it as the replacement for the earlier decision. Include any task or environment scope that limits the change.
Then address the owners of active implementation and review tasks. Tell them which version or requirement now applies. The shared record and the direct update solve different parts of the handoff.
Verify the affected work
Ask each active owner to restate the current decision and its effect on their task. Check whether earlier findings need revision or a new inspection. Do not silently relabel an old review as covering a changed requirement.
Also inspect the earlier decision through its own record. A later reader should see that its current standing changed. If the relationship is missing, improve the replacement record before relying on retrieval.
Use the changed-requirement workflow to carry that update through a live review.