diff --git a/checkpoint.json b/checkpoint.json
index 61f55916e..2b973d9cb 100644
--- a/checkpoint.json
+++ b/checkpoint.json
@@ -1,30 +1,37 @@
 {
-  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:32:47.132357Z",
-  "current_node": "setup",
+  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:34:29.016503Z",
+  "current_node": "solve",
   "completed_nodes": [
     "start",
-    "setup"
+    "setup",
+    "solve"
   ],
   "node_retries": {
     "start": 1,
+    "solve": 1,
     "setup": 1
   },
   "context_values": {
+    "last_response": "Implemented the fix in the Django checkout at:\n\n- `.task/django/django/core/checks/model_checks.py`\n- `.task/django/tests/check_framework/test_model_checks.py`\n\nWhat changed:\n- Kept `models.E028` for ",
+    "response.solve": "Implemented the fix in the Django checkout at:\n\n- `.task/django/django/core/checks/model_checks.py`\n- `.task/django/tests/check_framework/test_model_checks.py`\n\nWhat changed:\n- Kept `models.E028` for duplicate `db_table` names by default.\n- If `settings.DATABASE_ROUTERS` is non-empty, the check now emits a warning instead:\n  - `models.W035`\n  - with a hint telling users to verify routing to separate databases.\n\nThis matches the issue’s requested behavior and keeps the change minimal.\n\nValidation:\n- Installed the checkout: `python -m pip install -e .`\n- Ran targeted tests successfully:\n  - `python tests/runtests.py check_framework.test_model_checks`\n\nResult:\n- 18 tests passed.",
+    "last_stage": "solve",
     "internal.retry_count.start": 1,
     "thread.start.current_node": "setup",
     "internal.fidelity": "compact",
     "command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
-    "current_node": "setup",
-    "failure_class": "deterministic",
-    "current.preamble": "Goal: Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\n",
-    "internal.thread_id": "start",
-    "outcome": "fail",
+    "current_node": "solve",
+    "thread.setup.current_node": "solve",
+    "failure_class": "",
+    "current.preamble": "Goal: Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\n\n## Completed stages\n- **setup**: fail\n  - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 65e86948b80262574058a94ccaae3a9b59c3faea && python -m pip install -e .`\n  - Stdout:\n    ```\n    fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n    ```\n  - Stderr: (empty)\n\n## Context\n- failure_class: deterministic\n- failure_signature: setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
+    "internal.thread_id": "setup",
+    "outcome": "success",
     "internal.retry_count.setup": 1,
     "internal.run_id": "01KKTJ3NYSF3ATKMXR1RPWGM9T",
     "command.stderr": "",
+    "internal.retry_count.solve": 1,
     "graph.goal": "Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.",
     "internal.node_visit_count": 1,
-    "failure_signature": "setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.",
+    "failure_signature": "",
     "graph.rankdir": "LR"
   },
   "logs": [],
@@ -33,6 +40,24 @@
       "status": "success",
       "duration_ms": 0
     },
+    "solve": {
+      "status": "success",
+      "context_updates": {
+        "last_stage": "solve",
+        "last_response": "Implemented the fix in the Django checkout at:\n\n- `.task/django/django/core/checks/model_checks.py`\n- `.task/django/tests/check_framework/test_model_checks.py`\n\nWhat changed:\n- Kept `models.E028` for ",
+        "response.solve": "Implemented the fix in the Django checkout at:\n\n- `.task/django/django/core/checks/model_checks.py`\n- `.task/django/tests/check_framework/test_model_checks.py`\n\nWhat changed:\n- Kept `models.E028` for duplicate `db_table` names by default.\n- If `settings.DATABASE_ROUTERS` is non-empty, the check now emits a warning instead:\n  - `models.W035`\n  - with a hint telling users to verify routing to separate databases.\n\nThis matches the issue’s requested behavior and keeps the change minimal.\n\nValidation:\n- Installed the checkout: `python -m pip install -e .`\n- Ran targeted tests successfully:\n  - `python tests/runtests.py check_framework.test_model_checks`\n\nResult:\n- 18 tests passed."
+      },
+      "notes": "Stage completed: solve",
+      "usage": {
+        "model": "gpt-5.4",
+        "input_tokens": 326269,
+        "output_tokens": 4030,
+        "cache_read_tokens": 304256,
+        "reasoning_tokens": 1903,
+        "cost": 0.8761225
+      },
+      "duration_ms": 99688
+    },
     "setup": {
       "status": "fail",
       "context_updates": {
@@ -46,12 +71,13 @@
       "duration_ms": 46
     }
   },
-  "next_node_id": "solve",
+  "next_node_id": "extract_patch",
   "loop_failure_signatures": {
     "setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.": 1
   },
   "node_visits": {
     "start": 1,
+    "solve": 1,
     "setup": 1
   }
 }
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/nodes/solve/prompt.md b/nodes/solve/prompt.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..18647a3e1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/nodes/solve/prompt.md
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+Goal: Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.
+Description
+	
+Error message:
+table_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.
+We have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.
+We have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. 
+Is this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.
+
+
+
+## Additional Context
+
+Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.
+I agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.
+
+## Completed stages
+- **setup**: fail
+  - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 65e86948b80262574058a94ccaae3a9b59c3faea && python -m pip install -e .`
+  - Stdout:
+    ```
+    fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.
+    ```
+  - Stderr: (empty)
+
+## Context
+- failure_class: deterministic
+- failure_signature: setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.
+
+
+Fix this GitHub issue in the repository. Make the minimal code change needed.
+
+Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.
+Description
+	
+Error message:
+table_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.
+We have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.
+We have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. 
+Is this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.
+
+
+
+## Additional Context
+
+Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.
+I agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/nodes/solve/provider_used.json b/nodes/solve/provider_used.json
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..9f9e29e5d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/nodes/solve/provider_used.json
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+{
+  "mode": "agent",
+  "provider": "openai",
+  "model": "gpt-5.4"
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/nodes/solve/response.md b/nodes/solve/response.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..ffe61f68e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/nodes/solve/response.md
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+Implemented the fix in the Django checkout at:
+
+- `.task/django/django/core/checks/model_checks.py`
+- `.task/django/tests/check_framework/test_model_checks.py`
+
+What changed:
+- Kept `models.E028` for duplicate `db_table` names by default.
+- If `settings.DATABASE_ROUTERS` is non-empty, the check now emits a warning instead:
+  - `models.W035`
+  - with a hint telling users to verify routing to separate databases.
+
+This matches the issue’s requested behavior and keeps the change minimal.
+
+Validation:
+- Installed the checkout: `python -m pip install -e .`
+- Ran targeted tests successfully:
+  - `python tests/runtests.py check_framework.test_model_checks`
+
+Result:
+- 18 tests passed.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/nodes/solve/status.json b/nodes/solve/status.json
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..db863b08c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/nodes/solve/status.json
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+{
+  "status": "success",
+  "notes": "Stage completed: solve",
+  "failure_reason": null,
+  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:34:29.016335+00:00"
+}
\ No newline at end of file