{"task_id":"st_019fe188","status":"cancelled","residency_state":"disposed","parent_session_id":"019fd78b-bc20-7f7e-baca-b4bb0dc6b301","root_session_id":"019fd78b-bc20-7f7e-baca-b4bb0dc6b301","depth":1,"execution_mode":"in-process","model":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol","notify_on_terminal":true,"created_at":"2026-08-08T13:21:07.227Z","updated_at":"2026-08-08T13:23:49.835Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":-1},"name":"dualcoach-task7-remediation-v4","task_summary":"Fix Task 7 authority and hard-crash architecture gaps","description":"Task 7 final architecture remediation","category":"deep","requested_model":{"provider":"openai-codex","model_id":"gpt-5.6-sol","display":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol","source":"category","variant":"medium","reasoning_effort":"medium"},"resolved_model":{"provider":"openai-codex","model_id":"gpt-5.6-sol","display":"GPT-5.6 Sol","source":"category","variant":"medium","reasoning_effort":"medium"},"spawn_spec":{"version":1,"cwd":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach","prompt":"Implement the smallest complete Task 7 remediation in /home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent. You are the ONLY writer for Task 7 files. Do not touch .omo, commit, reset, stash, clean, use network/providers/Telegram/customer data, or modify unrelated dirty work. First pin current five-file hashes/digest 2114658ed4e8af3865ef4d71f5dfa311421ee11bc609b8173420a4a70903464f and write failing-first tests for EVERY confirmed architecture finding below. Then fix them surgically under the approved JSON/flock design.\n\nConfirmed blockers from independent architecture gate:\n1) Authority forgery: nutrition_coaching.py around 5982-6004 loads root marker but does not cryptographically bind root source_digest to the live authoritative journal/marker. A probe recomputed journal+marker after changing terminal actor/authority digest while leaving root unchanged, and reader accepted it. Establishment sentinel/root must be non-reconstructible and its immutable binding validated on every read. Reads must never create or repair authority.\n2) Complete deletion reconstruction: if root+journal+marker are absent while any V2 draft/request/event/delivery projection exists, reads/commands must fail closed; projections must never establish replacement authority. Cover marker-only, journal-only, token deletion, empty journal, forged root/marker, and all-three deletion with byte-exact non-mutation.\n3) Delivery post-send/pre-receipt crash: telegram.py transport may complete before mark_delivered persists receipt. The system must meet the approved exactly-once explicit delivery requirement across restart. Implement a durable pre-send idempotency/outbox contract and deterministic reconciliation that never retransmits and can complete receipt/audit/projections. If the Telegram SDK has no provider receipt lookup/idempotency key contract, model the transport operation as a durable command with stable delivery ID and persist sufficient receipt evidence at the actual transport boundary; do not falsely claim recovery. Add real callback fault/restart tests for crash before send, after send before receipt persistence, after receipt before audit, stale card repaint, and exactly one fake transport call.\n4) Adaptive callback boundary: `_handle_adaptive_review_callback` must not invoke provider/humanizer/card-generation/worker orchestration inline. It may validate/enqueue and render already-authoritative state only. Add static and callback tests proving zero forbidden calls.\n5) Preserve existing guarantees: generation-only child blocks parent; exact lineage identity/parent tip/chronology/acyclicity; authoritative hold; claim-bound worker CAS and conflicting idempotence; separate generation/delivery receipts+contracts; exact two attempts; nc1 queue-only; deterministic create/edit projection restart recovery.\n\nThe previous manual verifier failed due its own temporary script SyntaxError, not candidate code. Provide a simple hermetic driver or existing-test invocations that actually execute the required matrix; avoid complex generated scripts/nonlocal mistakes.\n\nTDD: show failing-first outputs for each blocker, then minimal implementation, then focused hardening and all affected Task 7 suites. Run Ruff, py_compile, scoped git diff --check, offline uv build if declared cache permits (distinguish infrastructure absence), unsuppressed ty changed-symbol delta, AST no-inline checks, and 11+ hermetic real-surface fault/restart scenarios. Freeze one immutable candidate and return exact hashes/digest, tests, manual QA, type delta, cleanup/non-touch, and unrelated failures. Observable stop: all confirmed blockers fixed and one frozen candidate receipt ready for independent verification.\n\n<Category_Context name=\"deep\">\nYou are operating in DEEP mode. This is the category reserved for goal-oriented autonomous work on hairy problems that reward thorough exploration and comprehensive solutions.\n\nThe orchestrator chose this category because the task benefits from depth over speed. You should feel empowered to spend the time needed: five to fifteen minutes of silent exploration before the first edit is normal and correct. Rushing to implementation on a deep task is a failure mode, not a feature.\n\n# How deep mode adjusts the base behavior\n\n**Exploration budget: generous.** Read the files you need, trace dependencies both directions, fire 2-5 explore/librarian sub-agents in parallel for broader questions. Build a complete mental model before the first `apply_patch`. Exploration here is an investment, not overhead.\n\n**Goal, not plan.** You receive a GOAL describing the desired outcome. You figure out HOW to achieve it. The orchestrator deliberately did not hand you a step-by-step plan; producing one and asking for approval is not what was asked. Execute.\n\n**Atomic task treatment.** When the goal contains numbered steps or phases, treat them as sub-steps of ONE task and execute them all in this turn. Splitting them across turns is wrong unless they reveal an architectural blocker that requires the user's input. If the \"steps\" turn out to be genuinely independent tasks that should have been separate delegations, flag that in your final message and refuse the ones beyond scope.\n\n**Root cause bias.** Prefer root-cause fixes over symptom fixes. A null check around `foo()` is a symptom fix; fixing whatever causes `foo()` to return unexpected values is the root fix. Trace at least two levels up before settling on an answer. In deep mode, you have permission (and the expectation) to do the deeper fix.\n\n**Ambition scaled to context.** For brand-new greenfield work, be ambitious. Choose strong defaults, avoid AI-slop aesthetics, produce something you would be proud to hand to another senior engineer. For changes in an existing codebase, be surgical and respect the existing patterns; depth does not mean invasiveness.\n\n**Completion bar: full delivery.** \"Simplified version\", \"proof of concept\", and \"you can extend this later\" are not acceptable deliveries for a deep task. The orchestrator routed here specifically for a complete solution. If you hit a genuine blocker (missing secret, design decision only the user can make, three materially different attempts all failed), document it and return; otherwise, finish the task.\n\n**Status cadence: sparse.** The user is not on the other side of this conversation; the orchestrator is, and they will synthesize your progress. Send commentary only at meaningful phase transitions (starting exploration, starting implementation, starting verification, hitting a genuine blocker). Do not narrate every tool call; silence during focused work is expected.\n</Category_Context>"},"host_pid":489237,"error_message":"Stalled before any failing-first test or source byte change despite explicit steering; replacing with a more tightly scoped single writer.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":162530,"turns":6,"tool_calls":24,"output_tokens":3763,"total_tokens":254559,"generation_ms":82380,"tokens_per_second":46,"cost_usd":0.58351,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.8915945804369063,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.6941099539067609}}