# Task: Documentation Drift Audit (REPORT ONLY — no changes first pass)

**Type:** Audit / report. **Do NOT change any docs or code in this pass.** Produce a drift report; changes happen in a separate approved second pass.

## Why this exists

Documentation was maintained ad-hoc during the Jules era and is suspected to have drifted from the actual code. Some docs may be stale (code is now correct), but — critically — some docs describe *intended* behaviour that the code has since drifted away from (the `List_at`/peak-price/clamp situation is a known example: the doc held the correct intent, the code diverged). So this audit must NOT blindly "make docs match code" — that would cement bugs into the documentation. It must classify each discrepancy for owner judgment.

## Scope

Compare, claim-by-claim, the following against the actual current code on `main`:
- Every file in `Documentation/`
- `AGENTS.md` (all sections)
- `README.md`

Focus on factual/behavioural claims: file names, function names, column names, formulas, thresholds, constants, described data flows, feature behaviour, config values, and any "the system does X" statements. Ignore prose style/tone.

## Method

For each discrepancy found, record:
1. **Doc location** — file + section/heading + the specific claim.
2. **Code reality** — file + line(s) + what the code actually does.
3. **Classification** (exactly one):
   - **(a) Stale doc** — code is correct, doc is out of date → doc should be updated.
   - **(b) Code drift** — doc describes clearly-intended behaviour the code no longer matches → possible bug; code may need fixing, NOT the doc.
   - **(c) Ambiguous** — genuine disagreement where the correct behaviour is a judgment call → needs owner (Tim) decision.
4. **Recommendation** — one line on what you'd propose, but do not act on it.

## Known context to fold in (do not re-derive)

- `AGENTS.md` §4 item 9 references `Feature_Guided_Learning_Strategies_Brain.md`; the real file is `Feature_Guided_Learning_Strategies_Intelligence.md`. (Known case-(a).)
- `INFERRED_PRICE_LOGIC.md` has a companion addendum (`INFERRED_PRICE_LOGIC_ADDENDUM_seasonal_semantics.md`) capturing intended `List_at` seasonal semantics that are NOT yet implemented. When auditing peak-price/clamp claims, treat the addendum as the statement of *intended* behaviour — so mismatches there are case-(b)/(c), not case-(a). Do not flag the addendum's un-implemented items as "doc wrong."
- The `ENABLE_LIGHTWEIGHT_CEILING_CLAMP = False` gate is intentional (pending the seasonal spec) — not a drift.

## Constraints

- REPORT ONLY. No edits to docs or code. No DB or Redis commands. No deploy.
- Do not auto-resolve (b) or (c) — those are for owner review.
- Organize the report by doc file, most-consequential discrepancies first.
- If a doc is fully accurate, say so explicitly (a clean bill is useful information).
- STOP at the end with the report and wait. Corrections will be a separate task after review.