Multi-route recommender systems combine retrieval, allocation, fusion, and ranking, making individual inclusions and exclusions difficult to audit. Route overlap can hide effects from one-at-a-time ablations, while freezing downstream stages produces counterfactuals inconsistent with serving behavior. We introduce FunnelAudit, an executable framework for incident-level responsibility auditing. An accountability contract specifies the disputed Top-K event, controls and owners, permitted reference actions, and replay semantics. FunnelAudit evaluates every permitted control configuration and applies graded actual responsibility to find the smallest outcome-preserving contingency that makes each control pivotal. Its certificate records the contingency and paired serving executions needed to verify the judgment. We instantiate the framework in two-stage, nine-route funnels using fixed union, weighted quota allocation, or weighted reciprocal-rank fusion, followed by SASRec ranking. Across 258,809 user-target incidents from three real interaction datasets, 4.24-16.24% admit a responsible control. Among responsible incident-control pairs, 92.55-99.64% require a nonempty contingency, so single-control ablation recovers only 0.36-7.45%. Policies differing in factual outcomes on only 0.31-2.39% of incidents yield 21.44-54.05% Jaccard distance between responsible-route sets on matched exclusions. Independent replay reproduces all 9,121,792 checked target-world outcomes; exhaustive search and a generic mixed-integer linear program agree with every sampled judgment. These findings demonstrate the importance of explicit serving semantics and checkable witnesses for recommender accountability.

翻译：暂无翻译