src/scribe/mcp/tools/rulebooks.py

@@ -489,13 +489,20 @@ async def create_rule(
         order_index: Display order within the topic (default 0).
         force: Bypass the near-duplicate gate. By default, a title-identical rule
             already in this topic BLOCKS creation and returns its id so you update
-            it instead. Set true only for a genuinely distinct rule.
+            it instead. Set true only for a genuinely distinct rule. A rule or
+            preference that answers the same MOMENT under another title does
+            not block: the create goes through and the reply carries
+            `overlaps` and `overlap_note` — read the top one and decide.
     """
     uid = current_user_id()
     if not force:
         dup = await dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule(title, topic_id=topic_id)
         if dup is not None:
             return dedup_svc.duplicate_response(dup, "rule")
+    # Before the create, so the new rule cannot find itself (#4134).
+    overlaps = await dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules(
+        uid, title, statement, when_to_apply,
+    )
     rule = await rulebooks_svc.create_rule(
         topic_id=topic_id, user_id=uid,
         title=title, statement=statement, when_to_apply=when_to_apply,
@@ -503,7 +510,9 @@ async def create_rule(
         why=why, how_to_apply=how_to_apply, order_index=order_index,
         verify_with=verify_with, expires_when=expires_when,
     )
-    return await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data = await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data.update(dedup_svc.overlap_response(overlaps, "rule"))
+    return data
 
 
 async def create_project_rule(
@@ -582,7 +591,9 @@ async def create_project_rule(
         order_index: Display order within the project's rule list (default 0).
         force: Bypass the near-duplicate gate. By default, a title-identical rule
             already on this project BLOCKS creation and returns its id so you
-            update it instead. Set true only for a genuinely distinct rule.
+            update it instead. Set true only for a genuinely distinct rule. An
+            overlap by meaning never blocks; it arrives as `overlaps` and
+            `overlap_note` on the reply — see create_rule.
     """
     uid = current_user_id()
     derived_title = title.strip() or statement.strip().split(".")[0][:50]
@@ -590,6 +601,9 @@ async def create_project_rule(
         dup = await dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule(derived_title, project_id=project_id)
         if dup is not None:
             return dedup_svc.duplicate_response(dup, "rule")
+    overlaps = await dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules(
+        uid, derived_title, statement, when_to_apply, project_id=project_id,
+    )
     rule = await rulebooks_svc.create_project_rule(
         project_id=project_id, user_id=uid,
         title=derived_title, statement=statement, when_to_apply=when_to_apply,
@@ -597,7 +611,9 @@ async def create_project_rule(
         why=why, how_to_apply=how_to_apply, order_index=order_index,
         verify_with=verify_with, expires_when=expires_when,
     )
-    return await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data = await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data.update(dedup_svc.overlap_response(overlaps, "rule"))
+    return data
 
 
 async def update_rule(
@@ -784,7 +800,10 @@ async def create_preference(
             a preference could only be filed after the fact (#4249).
         force: Bypass the near-duplicate gate. For a genuinely distinct
             preference, not for one that is "mostly" different — a mostly
-            different preference is an update.
+            different preference is an update. A RULE that already answers
+            this moment comes back as `overlaps` / `overlap_note` on the reply
+            rather than blocking; if it says the same thing, the preference is
+            the weaker copy of it and should go.
     """
     uid = current_user_id()
     if not when_to_apply.strip():
@@ -803,13 +822,18 @@ async def create_preference(
         dup = await dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule(title, topic_id=topic_id)
         if dup is not None:
             return dedup_svc.duplicate_response(dup, "rule")
+    overlaps = await dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules(
+        uid, title, statement, when_to_apply,
+    )
     rule = await rulebooks_svc.create_rule(
         topic_id=topic_id, user_id=uid,
         title=title, statement=statement, when_to_apply=when_to_apply,
         kind="preference", arose_from_id=arose_from_id,
         why=why, how_to_apply=how_to_apply, order_index=order_index,
     )
-    return await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data = await rulebooks_svc.rule_detail(uid, rule, system_ids)
+    data.update(dedup_svc.overlap_response(overlaps, "preference"))
+    return data
 
 
 async def update_preference(

src/scribe/services/dedup.py

@@ -772,10 +772,17 @@ async def find_duplicate_rule(
     topic_id: int | None = None,
     project_id: int | None = None,
 ) -> DuplicateMatch | None:
-    """Title-based near-duplicate of a rule, scoped to the same topic (a rulebook
-    rule) or the same project (a project rule). Rules aren't a semantic-retrieval
-    surface, so a normalized-title match is the right (and only) signal. Fail-open
-    like find_duplicate_note."""
+    """Title-identical rule in the same topic (a rulebook rule) or the same
+    project (a project rule) — the one signal certain enough to BLOCK on.
+    Fail-open like find_duplicate_note.
+
+    This is not the only duplicate signal for rules. It said so until #4134 —
+    "rules aren't a semantic-retrieval surface" — which stopped being true
+    when rules were embedded (rule_document, semantic_search_rules), and a
+    title is the field LEAST likely to collide when someone is deliberately
+    writing a second record about the same moment. find_overlapping_rules is
+    the meaning half; it surfaces rather than blocks, for the reason recorded
+    above _RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR."""
     norm = " ".join((title or "").split()).lower()
     if not norm or (topic_id is None and project_id is None):
         return None
@@ -797,6 +804,128 @@ async def find_duplicate_rule(
     return None
 
 
+
+# --- rule / preference overlap (#4134) ----------------------------------------
+# Rules and preferences are one table and one ranking: every hook arm searches
+# them with no `kind` filter. So a preference that restates a rule is not a
+# harmless near-copy — when only the preference places, a session receives
+# binding guidance labelled "preference" and treats it as optional. The title
+# gate above cannot see it: a second record about the same moment is exactly
+# the case where someone chose a different title.
+#
+# WHY THIS SURFACES INSTEAD OF BLOCKING. Measured 2026-09-21 on bge-small-en-
+# v1.5, querying with the gate's own rule_document shape across 16 sampled
+# records (10 preferences, 6 rules) and reading the nearest OTHER record (#4134
+# has the ids):
+#
+#   a preference rewording an existing rule                          0.850
+#   nearest distinct neighbours, 16 samples                0.672 – 0.853
+#     "when to delegate" beside "never delegate writing"             0.853
+#     "work lands on the working branch" beside "nothing reaches
+#      the release branch unasked"                                   0.850
+#     "let each action finish" beside "poll CI yourself"             0.847
+#
+# The two bands overlap: records that are deliberately distinct about one
+# moment — a rule for what must happen beside a rule for what must not — sit
+# exactly where a true restatement does. No threshold separates them, so a
+# block would refuse legitimate records and teach force=true on every create.
+# What the embedding CAN say reliably is "these answer the same moment", and
+# whether they say the same THING is a reading, which is the author's. So the
+# create goes through and carries the records it overlaps, with what to do if
+# they are the same.
+#
+# 0.80 is the floor because the one measured true duplicate sat at 0.850 and a
+# floor at the edge of it would miss the next, slightly looser rewording;
+# 6 of the 16 distinct neighbours also clear it, which is the cost, paid in
+# one line on the create's reply rather than in a refused write. Retune with
+# the embedder, not the corpus.
+_RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR = 0.80
+_RULE_OVERLAP_LIMIT = 3
+
+
+@dataclass
+class RuleOverlap:
+    """An existing rule or preference that answers the same moment."""
+    id: int
+    title: str
+    kind: str          # "rule" | "preference"
+    project_id: int | None
+    similarity: float
+
+
+async def find_overlapping_rules(
+    user_id: int,
+    title: str,
+    statement: str,
+    when_to_apply: str,
+    *,
+    project_id: int | None = None,
+) -> list[RuleOverlap]:
+    """Existing rules AND preferences whose trigger reads as this one's.
+
+    Queried with rule_document — the exact shape the corpus is embedded as —
+    so the score compares like with like. Both kinds, because the harm is
+    across them (#4134).
+
+    Scope follows the new record's home. A project rule is compared with
+    global rules plus that project's own, the set it will rank against. A
+    global record (project_id None) applies everywhere, so it is compared with
+    every rule the caller owns: a global rule restating one project's rule is
+    the same overlap, arriving in that project.
+
+    Run BEFORE the create, so the new record cannot match itself. Never
+    raises: an overlap is advice, and a create must not depend on it.
+    """
+    doc_title, doc_body = embeddings_svc.rule_document(title, statement, when_to_apply)
+    query = "\n\n".join(p for p in (doc_title, doc_body) if p)
+    # The note gate's floor, for the same reason: a short document sits in a
+    # tight neighbourhood and resembles everything.
+    if len(query.strip()) < _MIN_BODY_FOR_SEMANTIC:
+        return []
+    try:
+        hits = await embeddings_svc.semantic_search_rules(
+            user_id, query, limit=_RULE_OVERLAP_LIMIT,
+            threshold=_RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR,
+            project_id=project_id, everywhere=project_id is None,
+        )
+    except Exception:
+        logger.debug("rule overlap check skipped", exc_info=True)
+        return []
+    return [
+        RuleOverlap(
+            id=rule.id, title=rule.title, kind=rule.kind or "rule",
+            project_id=rule.project_id, similarity=round(score, 3),
+        )
+        for score, rule in hits
+    ]
+
+
+def overlap_response(overlaps: list[RuleOverlap], new_kind: str) -> dict:
+    """The keys a rule/preference create adds to its reply when the record it
+    just wrote answers the same moment as an existing one. Empty when none."""
+    if not overlaps:
+        return {}
+    top = overlaps[0]
+    named = "; ".join(
+        f'{o.kind} {o.id} "{o.title}" ({o.similarity})' for o in overlaps
+    )
+    return {
+        "overlaps": [
+            {"id": o.id, "title": o.title, "kind": o.kind,
+             "project_id": o.project_id, "similarity": o.similarity}
+            for o in overlaps
+        ],
+        "overlap_note": (
+            f"Created — and it answers the same moment as: {named}. Read "
+            f"{top.kind} {top.id} now. If it says the same thing, fold what is "
+            f"new into it (update_{top.kind}) and delete this {new_kind}: two "
+            f"records ranked together split one instruction, and the weaker "
+            f"one can arrive alone. If they say different things about one "
+            f"moment, keep both — that is common and fine."
+        ),
+    }
+
+
 # --- the plan gate (milestone 415) -------------------------------------------
 # A session asked "what work is open?" that cannot see an existing plan makes a
 # second one: a new milestone beside the one that already covers the work, or

tests/conftest.py

@@ -147,3 +147,20 @@ def _no_rule_arm():
     with patch("scribe.services.plugin_context.semantic_search_rules",
                AsyncMock(return_value=[])):
         yield
+
+
+@pytest.fixture(autouse=True)
+def _no_rule_overlap():
+    """Stub the rule/preference create path's overlap check (#4134).
+
+    The same reason as _no_rule_arm, one door over: every create_rule /
+    create_project_rule / create_preference now asks semantic_search_rules
+    whether an existing record answers the same moment, so each existing
+    rule-tool unit test would load the embedding model through a call it never
+    meant to make. The check's own behaviour is tested in
+    tests/test_rule_overlap_gate.py, which binds the real function at import
+    time — before this patch runs — and stubs the search beneath it instead.
+    """
+    with patch("scribe.services.dedup.find_overlapping_rules",
+               AsyncMock(return_value=[])):
+        yield

tests/test_rule_overlap_gate.py

@@ -0,0 +1,273 @@
+"""Rule and preference creates surface the records they overlap (#4134).
+
+Rules and preferences share one table and one ranking, so a preference that
+restates a rule splits one instruction in two — and when only the preference
+places, binding guidance arrives labelled optional. The title gate could not
+see it: a second record about the same moment is exactly the one written
+under a different title.
+
+These tests pin three things:
+
+- WHAT is compared: the new record's rule_document (the shape the corpus is
+  embedded as), against BOTH kinds, in the scope the new record will rank in.
+- THAT it advises rather than blocks. The measurement above
+  dedup._RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR found distinct neighbours scoring as high as a
+  true restatement, so a block would refuse legitimate records.
+- WHERE it runs: all three create doors, before the create, so the new record
+  cannot match itself.
+
+`find_overlapping_rules` is bound here at import time, before conftest's
+autouse `_no_rule_overlap` replaces the module attribute, so the service tests
+exercise the real function and stub the search beneath it.
+"""
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import ast
+import inspect
+import pathlib
+from unittest.mock import AsyncMock, patch
+
+import pytest
+
+from scribe.services import dedup
+from scribe.services.dedup import (
+    RuleOverlap,
+    find_overlapping_rules,
+    overlap_response,
+)
+from tests.helpers import fake_rule
+from tests.helpers import plain_rule_detail as _plain_detail
+
+pytestmark = pytest.mark.usefixtures("_bind_user")
+
+SEARCH = "scribe.services.dedup.embeddings_svc.semantic_search_rules"
+TOOLS = "scribe.mcp.tools.rulebooks"
+
+# Long enough to clear _MIN_BODY_FOR_SEMANTIC in the rule_document shape.
+TRIGGER = (
+    "About to push a commit to dev and stop to ask whether pushing is allowed, "
+    "or ending a turn with a question about landing work that was already "
+    "committed on the branch the operator treats as home."
+)
+STATEMENT = "Push to dev after committing without asking first."
+
+
+# ── what is compared ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_the_query_is_the_embedded_document_shape():
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        await find_overlapping_rules(7, "Push without asking", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    query = search.call_args.args[1]
+    title, body = dedup.embeddings_svc.rule_document(
+        "Push without asking", STATEMENT, TRIGGER,
+    )
+    assert query == f"{title}\n\n{body}"
+    assert "When to apply:" in query
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_both_kinds_are_searched():
+    """The harm is ACROSS kinds; a kind filter would hide exactly it."""
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    assert search.call_args.kwargs.get("kind") is None
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_a_global_record_is_compared_with_every_rule_the_caller_owns():
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    kw = search.call_args.kwargs
+    assert kw["everywhere"] is True
+    assert kw["project_id"] is None
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_a_project_rule_is_compared_with_what_it_will_rank_against():
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER, project_id=5)
+    kw = search.call_args.kwargs
+    assert kw["project_id"] == 5
+    assert kw["everywhere"] is False
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_the_floor_is_the_measured_one():
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    assert search.call_args.kwargs["threshold"] == dedup._RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR
+
+
+def test_the_floor_sits_below_the_measured_restatement():
+    """A reworded duplicate of a real rule scored 0.850 (the measurement above
+    _RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR). A floor at or above that misses the case the check
+    exists for; this fails if someone raises it there by analogy with the
+    blocking gates' 0.90+."""
+    assert dedup._RULE_OVERLAP_FLOOR < 0.85
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_a_short_document_is_not_searched():
+    search = AsyncMock(return_value=[])
+    with patch(SEARCH, search):
+        out = await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", "s", "when")
+    assert out == []
+    search.assert_not_called()
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_a_failed_search_lets_the_create_through():
+    with patch(SEARCH, AsyncMock(side_effect=RuntimeError("no embedder"))):
+        out = await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    assert out == []
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_hits_carry_their_kind():
+    hits = [
+        (0.8504, fake_rule(id=1, title="`dev` is home", kind="rule")),
+        (0.81, fake_rule(id=9, title="Report pushes", kind="preference", project_id=3)),
+    ]
+    with patch(SEARCH, AsyncMock(return_value=hits)):
+        out = await find_overlapping_rules(7, "t", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    assert out == [
+        RuleOverlap(1, "`dev` is home", "rule", None, 0.85),
+        RuleOverlap(9, "Report pushes", "preference", 3, 0.81),
+    ]
+
+
+# ── what it says ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+
+def test_no_overlap_adds_nothing():
+    assert overlap_response([], "rule") == {}
+
+
+def test_the_note_names_the_record_to_read_and_both_outcomes():
+    out = overlap_response(
+        [RuleOverlap(1, "`dev` is home", "rule", None, 0.85)], "preference",
+    )
+    assert out["overlaps"] == [{
+        "id": 1, "title": "`dev` is home", "kind": "rule",
+        "project_id": None, "similarity": 0.85,
+    }]
+    note = out["overlap_note"]
+    assert "Created" in note                 # it did not block
+    assert "update_rule" in note             # the top match's own door
+    assert "delete this preference" in note  # the new record's kind
+    assert "keep both" in note               # distinct records are legitimate
+
+
+# ── where it runs ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+
+def _rule_one_overlaps():
+    return [RuleOverlap(1, "`dev` is home", "rule", None, 0.85)]
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_create_rule_checks_before_creating_and_reports():
+    order: list[str] = []
+    find = AsyncMock(side_effect=lambda *a, **k: order.append("find") or _rule_one_overlaps())
+    create = AsyncMock(side_effect=lambda **k: order.append("create") or fake_rule(id=50))
+    with patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule", AsyncMock(return_value=None)), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules", find), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.rulebooks_svc.create_rule", create), _plain_detail():
+        from scribe.mcp.tools.rulebooks import create_rule
+        out = await create_rule(
+            topic_id=10, title="Push without asking", statement=STATEMENT,
+            when_to_apply=TRIGGER,
+        )
+    assert order == ["find", "create"]
+    assert find.call_args.args == (7, "Push without asking", STATEMENT, TRIGGER)
+    assert out["id"] == 50
+    assert out["overlaps"][0]["id"] == 1
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_create_project_rule_checks_in_its_project():
+    find = AsyncMock(return_value=_rule_one_overlaps())
+    with patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule", AsyncMock(return_value=None)), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules", find), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.rulebooks_svc.create_project_rule",
+               AsyncMock(return_value=fake_rule(id=51, project_id=5, topic_id=None))), \
+         _plain_detail():
+        from scribe.mcp.tools.rulebooks import create_project_rule
+        out = await create_project_rule(
+            project_id=5, title="Push without asking", statement=STATEMENT,
+            when_to_apply=TRIGGER,
+        )
+    assert find.call_args.kwargs == {"project_id": 5}
+    assert "overlap_note" in out
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_create_preference_checks_and_names_itself_a_preference():
+    find = AsyncMock(return_value=_rule_one_overlaps())
+    with patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule", AsyncMock(return_value=None)), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules", find), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.rulebooks_svc.create_rule",
+               AsyncMock(return_value=fake_rule(id=52, kind="preference"))), \
+         _plain_detail():
+        from scribe.mcp.tools.rulebooks import create_preference
+        out = await create_preference(
+            topic_id=10, title="Push without asking", statement=STATEMENT,
+            when_to_apply=TRIGGER, arose_from_id=42,
+        )
+    find.assert_awaited_once()
+    assert "delete this preference" in out["overlap_note"]
+
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_a_create_with_no_overlap_reads_as_before():
+    with patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_duplicate_rule", AsyncMock(return_value=None)), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.dedup_svc.find_overlapping_rules", AsyncMock(return_value=[])), \
+         patch(f"{TOOLS}.rulebooks_svc.create_rule",
+               AsyncMock(return_value=fake_rule(id=53))), _plain_detail():
+        from scribe.mcp.tools.rulebooks import create_rule
+        out = await create_rule(
+            topic_id=10, title="t", statement=STATEMENT, when_to_apply=TRIGGER,
+        )
+    assert "overlaps" not in out and "overlap_note" not in out
+
+
+CREATE_DOORS = ("create_rule", "create_project_rule", "create_preference")
+
+
+def test_every_rule_create_door_asks():
+    """Structural, so a fourth create door fails here rather than shipping
+    with the title gate alone. Keyed on the doors that call
+    find_duplicate_rule: any door gated by title must also be checked by
+    meaning, because the title gate is the one that cannot see this."""
+    root = pathlib.Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1] / "src" / "scribe"
+    tree = ast.parse((root / "mcp" / "tools" / "rulebooks.py").read_text())
+    title_gated, overlap_checked = set(), set()
+    for fn in tree.body:
+        if not isinstance(fn, ast.AsyncFunctionDef):
+            continue
+        for node in ast.walk(fn):
+            if isinstance(node, ast.Attribute):
+                if node.attr == "find_duplicate_rule":
+                    title_gated.add(fn.name)
+                elif node.attr == "find_overlapping_rules":
+                    overlap_checked.add(fn.name)
+    assert title_gated >= set(CREATE_DOORS), "registry drifted from the module"
+    assert title_gated <= overlap_checked, (
+        f"title-gated but never checked by meaning: "
+        f"{sorted(title_gated - overlap_checked)}"
+    )
+
+
+def test_the_stale_premise_is_gone():
+    """find_duplicate_rule claimed rules were not a semantic-retrieval surface
+    — false since rules were embedded, and the reason this gap survived."""
+    doc = inspect.getdoc(dedup.find_duplicate_rule) or ""
+    assert "aren't a semantic-retrieval" not in doc
+    assert "find_overlapping_rules" in doc