diff --git a/.planning/README.md b/.planning/README.md
index 0dccbfc..17d9924 100644
--- a/.planning/README.md
+++ b/.planning/README.md
@@ -132,6 +132,7 @@ The plan aligns to:
 75. [Phase 81 - CodingPod Refactorer API Exposure](https://github.com/mikehostetler/jido_code/blob/main/.planning/phase-81-coding-pod-refactorer-api-exposure.md): expose the existing lazy `Refactorer` specialist through a first-class `AgentWorkspace.refactor_work/3,4` API while preserving CodingPod isolation, task-board visibility, workflow provenance, and deterministic product-owned specialist routing.
 76. [Phase 82 - Conversation Runtime Supervisor Stability](https://github.com/mikehostetler/jido_code/blob/main/.planning/phase-82-conversation-runtime-supervisor-stability.md): stabilize the conversation runtime child-work supervision contract so combined conversation suites are deterministic and queued work activation does not crash when the child supervisor is unavailable.
 77. [Phase 83 - Refactorer Conversation Routing Adoption](https://github.com/mikehostetler/jido_code/blob/main/.planning/phase-83-refactorer-conversation-routing-adoption.md): adopt the exposed Refactorer into deterministic conversation workflow routing so explicit behavior-preserving refactor requests reach `AgentWorkspace.refactor_work/3,4` without changing full-workflow orchestration.
+78. [Phase 84 - Context Memory Test Isolation And Suite Stability](https://github.com/mikehostetler/jido_code/blob/main/.planning/phase-84-context-memory-test-isolation-and-suite-stability.md): make prompt-context memory tests hermetic enough that conversation runtime, workflow routing, and context-memory suites can run together without ETS cleanup races.
 
 Chronology note: Phase 55 now owns the previously landed `55.6.*` memory
 ontology and governed-reference verification so the planning sequence once
@@ -162,6 +163,11 @@ Phase 79 hardens lifecycle, provider behavior, and contributor guidance while
 preserving the provenance-first and explicit-adoption split for long-term
 memory.
 
+Context-memory suite-stability note: Phase 84 follows the Phase 83 refactor
+routing rollout by isolating prompt-memory test store lifecycle so mixed
+conversation runtime, workflow routing, and context-memory suites can run
+together without order-sensitive ETS cleanup failures.
+
 Source-code graph live-refresh note: Phase 80 adds save-triggered refresh on
 top of the existing explicit analyze, load, refresh, status, query, and recovery
 lifecycle. Repo-scoped monitoring owns source-change observation while
diff --git a/.planning/phase-84-context-memory-test-isolation-and-suite-stability.md b/.planning/phase-84-context-memory-test-isolation-and-suite-stability.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ea4c35c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.planning/phase-84-context-memory-test-isolation-and-suite-stability.md
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+# Phase 84 - Context Memory Test Isolation And Suite Stability
+
+<!-- covers: architecture.conversation_orchestration.conversation_runtime_uses_bounded_llm_boundary -->
+<!-- covers: architecture.conversation_orchestration.long_term_conversation_recall_is_provenance_first -->
+<!-- covers: architecture.memory_graph_product_adoption.conversation_derived_context_uses_bounded_projections -->
+
+Back to index: [README](https://github.com/mikehostetler/jido_code/blob/main/.planning/README.md)
+
+## Relevant Shared APIs / Interfaces
+- `lib/jido_code/conversations/context_memory.ex`
+- `lib/jido_code/conversations/runtime.ex`
+- `lib/jido_code/conversations/driver.ex`
+- `lib/jido_code/conversations/coordinator.ex`
+- `test/jido_code/conversations/context_memory_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/phase_fifty_two_integration_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/phase_eighty_three_integration_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/conversations_driver_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/conversations_coordinator_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/conversations_test.exs`
+- `test/jido_code/conversations_pubsub_test.exs`
+- `docs/developer/06-conversation-orchestration.md`
+- `docs/developer/10-development-workflow-and-quality-gates.md`
+
+## Relevant Assumptions / Defaults
+- The intended Phase 82 historical conversation batch passes after the supervisor hardening work.
+- Phase 52 and Phase 83 routing integration tests pass as their own verification group.
+- An exploratory over-broad mixed command that combines context-memory tests with later routing integration tests can still expose an ETS cleanup race in `test/jido_code/conversations/context_memory_test.exs`.
+- The observed failure shape is `ArgumentError` from `:ets.delete/1` when the configured test table identifier no longer refers to an existing ETS table during `on_exit` cleanup.
+- Prompt memory remains short-term prompt context only; this phase should improve test isolation and suite reliability without changing prompt-memory product semantics.
+- The fix should not rely on test file ordering, sleeps, or ambient process lifetime assumptions.
+
+[ ] 84 Phase 84 - Context Memory Test Isolation And Suite Stability
+  Make prompt-context memory tests hermetic enough that conversation runtime, workflow routing, and context-memory suites can run together without ETS cleanup races, while preserving the product boundary between short-term prompt memory, conversation provenance, and durable memory.
+
+  [ ] 84.1 Section - Failure Reproduction And Test-Lifecycle Diagnosis
+    Capture the mixed-suite failure as a bounded test isolation problem before changing memory runtime behavior.
+
+    [ ] 84.1.1 Task - Reproduce and minimize the context-memory cleanup race
+      Identify the smallest deterministic command that proves the ETS table lifecycle can be invalidated by mixed conversation and routing test execution.
+
+      [ ] 84.1.1.1 Subtask - Record the over-broad mixed test command, seed behavior, failure stack, and involved test modules.
+      [ ] 84.1.1.2 Subtask - Confirm `test/jido_code/conversations/context_memory_test.exs` passes alone and the intended Phase 82 conversation batch still passes.
+      [ ] 84.1.1.3 Subtask - Determine whether the failure comes from shared ETS table names, repeated `on_exit` cleanup, application env restoration, provider startup, or cross-test process ownership.
+
+    [ ] 84.1.2 Task - Trace prompt-memory test ownership boundaries
+      Make test lifecycle ownership explicit enough that the fix lands in the test harness or adapter boundary instead of masking a product behavior.
+
+      [ ] 84.1.2.1 Subtask - Trace how `ContextMemoryTest` configures `:conversation_context_memory`, store table names, store options, and provider state.
+      [ ] 84.1.2.2 Subtask - Trace how runtime and routing integration tests retrieve or write prompt memory during asynchronous child-work execution.
+      [ ] 84.1.2.3 Subtask - Document which resources are global application config, which are per-test fixtures, and which are runtime-owned state.
+
+  [ ] 84.2 Section - Hermetic Context-Memory Test Store Contract
+    Replace shared test-store assumptions with an explicit per-test lifecycle that survives mixed suite execution.
+
+    [ ] 84.2.1 Task - Isolate context-memory store resources per test
+      Ensure every prompt-memory test owns its configured store without colliding with later or earlier test cleanup.
+
+      [ ] 84.2.1.1 Subtask - Use unique ETS table identifiers or a supervised fixture-owned store for each context-memory test.
+      [ ] 84.2.1.2 Subtask - Restore `:conversation_context_memory` application config in a way that cannot point later tests at a deleted table.
+      [ ] 84.2.1.3 Subtask - Make cleanup idempotent when a table was already removed, never created, or replaced by another fixture.
+
+    [ ] 84.2.2 Task - Keep prompt-memory adapter behavior unchanged for production callers
+      Fix the test lifecycle without widening product semantics or making prompt memory ambient product truth.
+
+      [ ] 84.2.2.1 Subtask - Keep `ContextMemory.retrieve/2`, `remember/2`, and namespace behavior unchanged for disabled, degraded, and ready states.
+      [ ] 84.2.2.2 Subtask - Avoid adding test-only branches to runtime prompt assembly or durable-memory adoption paths.
+      [ ] 84.2.2.3 Subtask - Preserve prompt-memory fallback behavior when provider configuration is missing, disabled, invalid, or unavailable.
+
+  [ ] 84.3 Section - Contributor Guidance And Quality-Gate Convergence
+    Make the stable mixed-suite contract discoverable so future conversation-memory changes do not reintroduce order dependence.
+
+    [ ] 84.3.1 Task - Update prompt-memory verification guidance
+      Align developer docs with the new stable verification boundary for context-memory tests and conversation routing tests.
+
+      [ ] 84.3.1.1 Subtask - Add the minimized mixed-suite command to `docs/developer/10-development-workflow-and-quality-gates.md`.
+      [ ] 84.3.1.2 Subtask - Explain when contributors should run context-memory-only tests, the historical conversation batch, and mixed routing/runtime tests.
+      [ ] 84.3.1.3 Subtask - Keep guidance clear that prompt memory is a bounded runtime enhancement, not durable repository memory or transcript storage.
+
+    [ ] 84.3.2 Task - Update planning and implementation notes
+      Preserve the diagnosis and final verification commands as current truth for later prompt-memory work.
+
+      [ ] 84.3.2.1 Subtask - Record the root cause and final fixture contract in this phase document.
+      [ ] 84.3.2.2 Subtask - Update `.planning/README.md` with the Phase 84 entry and chronology note.
+      [ ] 84.3.2.3 Subtask - Cross-reference Phase 79, Phase 82, and Phase 83 where their verification boundaries overlap this suite-stability work.
+
+  [ ] 84.4 Section - Integration Tests
+    End the phase with regression coverage that proves context-memory tests can run with conversation runtime and refactor-routing suites without order-sensitive ETS failures.
+
+    [ ] 84.4.1 Task - Add focused context-memory isolation coverage
+      Exercise the exact fixture behavior that failed so the test harness remains safe under repeated setup and cleanup.
+
+      [ ] 84.4.1.1 Subtask - Add coverage proving repeated context-memory setup and teardown does not raise when the ETS table is missing or already removed.
+      [ ] 84.4.1.2 Subtask - Add coverage proving two context-memory fixtures cannot accidentally share and delete each other's active store.
+      [ ] 84.4.1.3 Subtask - Add coverage proving disabled and degraded prompt-memory projections still return bounded non-fatal results after fixture cleanup.
+
+    [ ] 84.4.2 Task - Run mixed conversation and routing verification
+      Verify the original over-broad command and the narrower intended gates are both stable after the isolation fix.
+
+      [ ] 84.4.2.1 Subtask - Run `mix test test/jido_code/conversations/context_memory_test.exs --max-cases 1 --max-failures 1`.
+      [ ] 84.4.2.2 Subtask - Run the historical Phase 82 conversation batch with seed `871949`.
+      [ ] 84.4.2.3 Subtask - Run the Phase 52 and Phase 83 routing integration tests with context-memory tests in the same command.
+      [ ] 84.4.2.4 Subtask - Run `mix memory.verify` or any narrower prompt-memory verification command required by the final touched boundaries.