The difficult question is not whether two addresses can be connected. It is what that connection actually means.
Observation comes first
A transfer records a movement of funds. It does not, by itself, establish an identity, a relationship or an intention. Any attribution built from it needs to keep the original observation distinct from the interpretation.
Crossing from one chain to another makes that distinction more important. The evidence available on either side may have different gaps. A continuous-looking line on a screen should not imply continuous knowledge.
A path is an explanation to inspect
A useful trace should let a reader ask why each connection exists. Which parts were directly observed? Which depend on assumptions? Is there another plausible explanation for the same movement?
These questions shape the problem that Wallet Tracer explores. They are also a reminder that a graph is a way to present evidence, not a substitute for deciding what the evidence supports.
Leave the unresolved parts visible
The output can be useful without being final. Keeping uncertainty visible gives a reader a place to continue investigating and prevents a convenient summary from becoming a stronger claim than the underlying data.
This is a working note on the problem space. Detailed implementation findings and tracing examples will be added when they are ready to share.