Consistency: Partial. Review and notes correctly frame HOP as a non-catalytic TPR scaffold bridging HSP70↔HSP90 (core MF GO:0051879 Hsp90 binding; in_complex GO:0101031). But the review contains NO autophagy/CMA/microautophagy/lysosome content at all (confirmed in both YAML and notes), whereas PN asserts three ALP roles. This is a real coverage gap, not a contradiction.
PN story / NEW pressure: PN projects CMA substrate-selection (GO:0061684, GO:0061740) and late endosomal microautophagy (GO:0061738) — all verified real, all new_to_goa (GOA confirms no autophagy rows). HOP/HSPA8 participation in eMI and CMA substrate handoff is literature-supported (Nat Rev MCB CMA review). ADD is defensible for these as non-core BPs if full text supports HOP specifically.
Mapping strategy:GO:0031072 projection is BROADER than the review's GO:0051879 (Hsp90 binding is_a heat shock protein binding, OLS-verified) but PN self-flags it entailed_by_goa_closure → redundant, no action. The novel value is the three ALP terms.
Evidence alignment: PN cites the Nat Rev MCB CMA review; review references are UniProt/HSP90-cycle papers (e.g. PMID:27353360). No overlap on the autophagy literature.
Verdict: Consistent on the chaperone core but review under-covers the ALP/CMA story PN documents. Recommended edits: consider adding GO:0061684 / GO:0061740 / GO:0061738 as KEEP_AS_NON_CORE pending full-text verification of HOP-specific evidence [YAML]; cite the CMA review [REF]. Do not add GO:0031072 (broader, already entailed) [MAP].