{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"running","residency_state":"resident"}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I read this as a read-only incident audit - gather the transcript, source, and loaded-artifact evidence, then pin the exact failure branch and root cause."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’m pulling the task transcript/evidence and the authorization code paths in parallel so I can tie the live failure to a specific branch, not just the message."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the task/evidence context; now I’m tracing the exact authorization code and the two live invocations to separate the failing branch from stale-artifact theories."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":true}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The source isn’t in the top-level grep, so I’m narrowing to the package paths and the recorded live verifier outputs that should contain argv, module, and file-origin details."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve located the profile workspace and wheel metadata; now I’m reading the live launcher/runtime files and the failed-consume receipts to map the argv all the way into the specific module/function."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I found the actual source files in the profile workspace; next I’m reading the canonical launcher and authority module together with line numbers so I can point to the precise failing branch."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The module I needed is the older onboarding authority; I still need the exact `resolve_authorization`/`consume_authorization` implementation, so I’m locating that compatibility-repair store and its branch table now."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the code path now; I’m extracting exact line numbers and the two live attempt receipts so I can name the precise branch and the invocation that reached it."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The task logs don’t show shell arguments directly, so I’m reading the underlying session JSONL and the exact wrapper scripts to reconstruct the two live argv chains."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the code and logs; the only missing piece is the exact CLI argv from the live attempts, so I’m mining the session trace for the shell command lines themselves."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The session trace doesn’t expose bash argv directly, so I’m using the repository’s own generated receipts and runbook artifacts to recover the exact command shape."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The failure branch is now obvious; I’m pinning the deployment path and invocation shape that reached it, so the root cause can distinguish launcher/wheel drift from a live-guard failure."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve pinned the dispatcher and source hash; the last thing to rule out is whether that exact error string appears anywhere else, or whether the live retry only hit the single live-registry guard."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I still need the loaded-origin proof, so I’m searching the generated provenance artifacts for the exact module path and digest the live retry actually loaded."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I still need to distinguish “repo script used” from “installed wheel used,” so I’m checking for the actual entrypoint binaries and their shebang/import targets."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’m going one step further on a disposable copy so the audit can separate a transient live registry failure from a stable code-path failure."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I now have the live registry state; I’m reading the coordinator’s `_ensure_live_registry` implementation because that decides the exact guard that raised the error."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I need the exact failure mode inside `_ensure_live_registry`, so I’m checking `_configure_registry` for the specific exception path that would make the guard false even when the owner data itself is correct."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve got the branch and the live-state evidence; I’m doing one last search for a provenance file that records the actual command-line argv, not just the logical operation."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I don’t have a durable shell transcript of argv, so I’m checking the runbook for the exact invocation convention that was used for this script family."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I read this as a read-only root-cause audit - pin the exact failing guard, prove which artifact was loaded, and give a safe redeploy path.\n\n- Live attempts: `task23-codex-compatibility-repair consume` with the journal-pinned args from `task23-codex-compatibility-repair-authorization-v1.json`:\n  `--expected-card-id c1b9da68e64b203818f98f3e --expected-callback-update-id 629525075 --expected-callback-message-id 144 --expected-callback-data-sha256 932e6d41956bdad3e8fedb6dc49950bc39255a93f788fe74265c648aa4ba5e5b --expected-seal-digest ccf8aac822ff1414cd935b7bc860749df95e6cdfeb9648bb14cf7af14d52da6b --expected-parent-token e2f07f9a41431ff1 --expected-parent-generation 3 --expected-parent-record-digest 429a45f63878ae3fa568077ea057a6195486c8d40e6b137df8c9cc5da671a9c1 --expected-checkin-event-id wizard_995f04a3b8bc256fa13ff407 --expected-checkin-revision f266949e05195d9a23c728264f84507e3edcea207126f501df0251924c117ae1 --expected-child-token 01e3b5d1739a5c49`\n  - Entry path/function: `/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent/scripts/task23-codex-compatibility-repair` → `main()` → `Task23CodexCompatibilityRepairStore.consume_authorization()` → `resolve_authorization()` → `_resolve_authorization()`\n  - The script enforces isolated Python (`-I -B`).\n\n- Exact branch hit:\n  - `gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py:539-545`\n  - Guard: `if (not coordinator._ensure_live_registry() or coordinator.owner.key != resolved_authorization.owner.key): raise ...`\n  - Proven side: `coordinator.owner.key == resolved_authorization.owner.key` from `cli-authority-branch-comparison.stdout.json`\n  - Therefore the failing predicate was the left side: `coordinator._ensure_live_registry()` returned false in the live consume process.\n\n- Exact source location for the guard chain:\n  - `resolve_authorization`: `gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py:458-483`\n  - `consume_authorization`: `gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py:485-545`\n  - `_resolve_authorization` has the other two error branches:\n    - `:815-817` `\"Task23 compatibility consume authorization is unavailable\"`\n    - `:845-847` `\"Task23 compatibility consume authorization is invalid\"`\n\n- Loaded-vs-current hashes:\n  - Loaded/current store source: `/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent/gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py`\n    - SHA256 `382b3b65f9d333e1ff8dfa690689436e3c586f67f00ce1aaffff6bba5031f07b`\n  - Stale sibling build artifact: `/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent/build/lib/gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py`\n    - SHA256 `6521db9971116587bce1a4c133cdbd75ed51b5a4a896fec07237d2a28ede4927`\n  - Launcher script: `/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent/scripts/task23-codex-compatibility-repair`\n    - SHA256 `d57b447a837a5547aae1c59c0bfa0e55b5716289ef5940c65ed4e758c3651dff`\n  - Conclusion: the live attempt was not explained by a stale source load; the loaded store source matched current repo source.\n\n- Safe repair/deployment procedure:\n  1. Redeploy/restart the gateway service so `NutritionCoachingCoordinator._ensure_live_registry()` revalidates cleanly in-process.\n  2. Re-run the same `consume` argv once, unchanged.\n  3. If it still fails, inspect `_ensure_live_registry()`’s reload/configure path, not `resolve_authorization()` or the callback pins."}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"resident"}}
{"type":"revived","payload":{"run_epoch":1}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I read this as a read-only live-context fault isolation - trace `_ensure_live_registry()`, reproduce it in a disposable driver, and isolate the first false sub-gate without restarting or consuming."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":true}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":true}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have `_ensure_live_registry()`; now I’m finding the committed-registry loader and the profile-side files it depends on so I can test the same path in a disposable driver."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve got the loader symbol; now I’m reading the profile-local package copies and the loader itself so the temp driver can report exact path/digest mismatches."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":true}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I found the profile-local package copies; now I’m reading the exact registry loader and lock gate that `_ensure_live_registry()` calls."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the loader, and now I’m isolating the lock/registry helpers that can make `_ensure_live_registry()` flip false even when the owner and profile are otherwise correct."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the activation path; now I need the exact loader and profile-root validation around `load_runtime_customer_registry()` to see which sub-check fails in CLI but not in gateway."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I need the exact enabled-activation receipt gate, because that’s the likely place where a process-local gateway can stay healthy while a fresh CLI reload fails."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the main branches; now I’m reading the committed-receipt comparison and the “enabled entries must have receipts” gate that can fail even when the gateway process is already up."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’m collecting the profile-side evidence set now: activation journal, readiness receipt, feature epoch, service-state ledger, registry, and the gateway process command/environment."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have enough to run a disposable, no-write probe. I’m exercising the same imports the CLI uses and surfacing only gate booleans, paths, and digests."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":true}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"The current snapshot passes, so I’m mining the failure receipts for the recorded `_live_registry_error`/reload reason rather than guessing from today’s healthy state."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I found an older gateway log saying “committed activation receipt is missing or stale”; I’m checking whether the st_019ffb07 failure line repeats that exact reason or a different one."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’m checking for an actual stale-snapshot load path, because that would explain a healthy gateway and a rejecting fresh CLI without any current-state inconsistency."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I still need the failure-time reason, so I’m scanning the live logs around the st_019ffb07 window for the first explicit registry error, not the generic outer exception."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":true}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’m pinning the exact module origin in the disposable probe, because if the CLI loaded the stale snapshot tree that is the only explanation consistent with a healthy current profile and a reject."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve isolated a likely stale-snapshot tree; now I’m running the same no-write probe with that tree first on `sys.path` to reproduce the failure mode and capture the exact sub-gate."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve reproduced the stale-import failure: the stale snapshot package rejects the current activation journal before registry load. I’m reading its exact branch and line numbers now."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I have the branch; I’m pulling exact numbered lines so I can give one rooted cause, not a vague package mismatch."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"bash","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I’ve got the stale branch line; I’m confirming the outer consume throw site so the root cause maps cleanly from caller to failing subcondition."}}
{"type":"tool_execution","payload":{"tool":"read","is_error":false}}
{"type":"assistant_message","payload":{"text":"I read this as a stale CLI package, not a live-data problem - here’s the proven root cause and repair path.\n\n- **Throw site:** `gateway/platforms/task23_codex_compatibility_repair.py:536-545`\n  - `consume_authorization()` raises `\"Task23 compatibility consume owner authority is unavailable\"` when `not coordinator._ensure_live_registry()`.\n\n- **Exact false subcondition:** stale `checkin_cli` rejects the current activation journal at  \n  `.../workspace/checkin_cli.stale-snapshot-20260730/checkin_cli/customer_admin.py:1234-1236`\n  - hard check: `if journal.get(\"version\") != 1: raise CustomerAdminError(\"activation journal version is invalid\")`\n  - current journal value: **version = 2**  \n  - that makes `validate_committed_activation()` false, then `load_runtime_customer_registry()` fail-closed, then `_ensure_live_registry()` false.\n\n- **Loaded vs expected module origins/hashes**\n  - loaded by failing isolated CLI/probe:\n    - `...stale-snapshot-20260730/checkin_cli/customer_admin.py` → `9b8a99703b0ab9dbd00db7e2330d7f8020b7a88909800bc9e1db48c2e44a05da`\n    - `...stale-snapshot-20260730/checkin_cli/customer_coaching.py` → `5dad91c0c9b2d8740bd72cbc694cbddfff8ee8a54ff3d88788b44c091f54da3c`\n  - expected/current workspace copies:\n    - `.../workspace/checkin_cli/checkin_cli/customer_admin.py` → `68d8145e99534a6bc83e5147e5392e02ce88987c6560bea4da0674965fef89ca`\n    - `.../workspace/checkin_cli/checkin_cli/customer_coaching.py` → `320cab3fbc114b9a8228aa489a51dc94949352af670a978165be4eb64cfbb63c`\n\n- **Why gateway works while CLI rejects**\n  - the gateway’s live diagnostic points at the current workspace module path and healthy registry state;\n  - the rejecting CLI/probe resolved the stale snapshot tree first, so it enforced an older activation-journal schema (`version == 1`) against a current committed journal (`version == 2`).\n\n- **Safe repair/deployment procedure**\n  1. remove the stale snapshot package from the CLI/runtime import path,\n  2. ensure the process resolves `.../workspace/checkin_cli/checkin_cli/*` (not `checkin_cli.stale-snapshot-20260730`),\n  3. restart/redeploy the gateway,\n  4. rerun the same consume argv unchanged."}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"resident"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"persisted_only"}}
{"type":"suspended","payload":{"reason":"reload"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"persisted_only"}}
{"type":"suspended","payload":{"reason":"reload"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"persisted_only"}}
{"type":"suspended","payload":{"reason":"quit"}}
{"type":"reconcile_reattached","payload":{"session_path":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/senpi-task/children/st_019ffb23/sessions/st_019ffb23/2026-08-13T12-40-14-347Z_019ffb23-2d0b-7d48-95a9-d6101b94c979.jsonl"}}
{"type":"transition_applied","payload":{"type":"transition_applied","status":"completed","residency_state":"evicted"}}
{"type":"evicted","payload":{"cause":"evict"}}