$ ./ekos/target/debug/ekos query find "LlmProvider" --mode lexical
50 result(s) for 'LlmProvider':
  35d66bca-9810-586e-ab21-06379463afaf  LlmProvider
  e25e2683-0aaa-5c31-be81-60bb65c2b911  llm_provider_check
  a83c0280-990b-556c-b375-0073c876d6af  build_llm_provider
  824776cf-1030-5c02-acf6-961e14b329e1  select_llm_provider
  4e00ba45-3f6a-5701-9ffa-2c01779f5c75  super::recover::build_llm_provider
  ad5ff481-0a53-5d17-ad67-4ea5abc38211  select_llm_provider_for_description
  e9f6c656-18e6-51d4-a612-415a39136d77  select_llm_provider_for_prose

$ ./ekos/target/debug/ekos query object a83c0280-990b-556c-b375-0073c876d6af
Object: build_llm_provider (RustSymbol)
  ID:   a83c0280-990b-556c-b375-0073c876d6af
  Properties:
    symbol_kind: "function"
    source_span: {"end_line":1175,"start_line":1117}
    signature: "pub fn build_llm_provider(config: &EkosConfig, artifact_dir: &Path) -> Arc<dyn LlmProvider>"
    description: "Choose LLM provider (RFC 0021, RFC 0046): ..."

# RFC 0141's own motivating example: "build_llm_provider ... appeared nowhere in the top ten"
# before the signature fix. It now ranks #3 for a bare "LlmProvider" query -- the fix works.

$ ./ekos/target/debug/ekos ask --explain "What function builds the LlmProvider used by ekos ask, \
    choosing between Anthropic, OpenAI, and Ollama?"

-- plan --
query type: Structural
routing confidence: 1.00
plan:
  Compose
    Graph Dependents from #35d66bca-9810-586e-ab21-06379463afaf (2 hops)
    Fact #35d66bca-9810-586e-ab21-06379463afaf.*

-- evidence --
1. LlmProvider.name = LlmProvider [ekos/crates/recovery/src/llm.rs:69]
2. LlmProvider.kind = RustSymbol [ekos/crates/recovery/src/llm.rs:69]
3. LlmProvider.description = Provider-agnostic interface for LLM completions. ...
4. LlmProvider.source_span = {"end_line":113,"start_line":69} [ekos/crates/recovery/src/llm.rs:69]
5. LlmProvider.symbol_kind = trait [ekos/crates/recovery/src/llm.rs:69]

Insufficient evidence.
I looked for a claim that describes the function responsible for building the LlmProvider.

The provided claims do not mention the specific function responsible for choosing between
Anthropic, OpenAI, and Ollama. They only describe the properties of the LlmProvider itself.
Therefore, I cannot provide an answer to this question based on the available evidence.
warning: LLM response did not include a valid cited_evidence block

# code-002 asks the exact question RFC 0141's signature fix targets, and the fix works --
# demonstrated above, independent of this scenario. But "LlmProvider" resolves as an exact-name
# entity match with confidence 1.00, so the REASON planner routes to a direct dependents-graph +
# fact dump on the *trait itself* -- 2 hops of Dependents, then every fact -- and never calls
# Search at all. build_llm_provider (the function, id a83c0280...) never appears in either the
# Graph traversal or the Fact dump, so it never reaches the model regardless of how good lexical
# ranking now is. The refusal above is honest and correct given what it was shown -- this is a
# retrieval-*routing* gap (the planner should fall back to Search when a resolved entity's own
# facts/dependents don't answer the question), not the retrieval-*ranking* gap RFC 0141 fixed.