message: 403: {"code":"ENTITLEMENT_ERROR","message":"Error 403: the user is not subscribed to required model plan"}

stop_reason: error


error_message: 403: {"code":"ENTITLEMENT_ERROR","message":"Error 403: the user is not subscribed to required model plan"}


I read this as a read-only Korean customer audit of the Telegram onboarding copy, parser examples, and progress publishing, so I’ll inspect the relevant code and return only PASS or FAIL, blocker count, and required copy changes.


The requested path is not present from the reported working directory, so I’m locating the repository first, then I’ll audit the exact file and its publishing path without changing anything.


FAIL
blocker_count: 3

Exact copy changes required:

1. Clarify `food_preferences_profile`:
   “1 종교나 신념 때문에 먹지 않는 음식 · 2 싫어하는 음식 · 3 선호하는 음식이나 식사 방식”
   Add: “알레르기나 속이 불편한 음식은 다음 질문에서 따로 확인할게요.”
   Change example to: “1 종교상 돼지고기 제외 / 2 고수 / 3 한식”

2. Clarify the mandatory calculation basis:
   “칼로리 계산에 반드시 필요한 기준이에요. 다른 용도로 판단하지 않아요. 1 남성 기준 · 2 여성 기준”

3. Customer v2 clarification cards must show v2 formats, not legacy formats. Use age, `1 또는 2` calculation basis, and the v2 `cm`, `kg`, and date examples. The parser must accept those same examples.

Parser examples: PASS.
15/17 progress flow: PASS. No progress copy change required.


I read this as a read-only re-audit of the extracted customer v2 copy, parser, and publication path, so I’ll locate the new file, compare it with the live Telegram flow, and return the final verdict with only required copy changes.


FAIL
blocker_count: 3

Exact copy changes required:

1. Clarify food categories:
   “1 종교나 신념 때문에 먹지 않는 음식 · 2 싫어하는 음식 · 3 선호하는 음식이나 식사 방식”
   Add: “알레르기나 속이 불편한 음식은 다음 질문에서 따로 확인할게요.”
   Change example to: “1 종교상 돼지고기 제외 / 2 고수 / 3 한식”

2. Clarify the required calculation basis:
   “칼로리 계산에 반드시 필요한 기준이에요. 다른 용도로 판단하지 않아요. 1 남성 기준 · 2 여성 기준”

3. Reconciliation clarification cards must use customer v2 formats, not legacy formats. Age, calculation basis, `cm`, `kg`, and date examples must match the v2 prompts and parser.

Parser examples: PASS through the live wrapper.
15/17 progress: PASS and coherent.


I read this as a final read-only UX re-review after the three reported fixes, so I’ll inspect the current extracted copy, wrapper, clarification copy, and publication flow, then verify the focused tests and report only remaining copy blockers.


FAIL
blocker_count: 1

Exact remaining copy change:

Customer v2 clarification cards still append legacy `답변 형식:` text. Remove that legacy line and show only parser-aligned v2 copy.

This applies to clarification retries too. Sensitive clarifications must retain the v2 safety and trust wording, including `확실하지 않음`, not legacy `잘 모르겠음`.

All primary prompts, examples, and 15/17 progress copy pass.


I read this as the final read-only acceptance check for the customer v2 UX fixes, so I’ll verify the current clarification rendering, revision parsing, sensitive fallback, and focused tests before returning the final verdict.


FAIL
blocker_count: 1


I read this as a request for the single remaining blocker: `gateway/platforms/telegram_nutrition_onboarding_runtime_collection.py` still shows legacy `answer_error(field)` copy on invalid customer_v2 clarification replies instead of the v2 prompt.


I read this as the final acceptance check after the last clarification retry fix, so I’ll verify the current call sites and focused UX test, then return only PASS or FAIL with the blocker count.


PASS
blocker_count: 0