{"task_id":"st_01a0048e","status":"completed","residency_state":"evicted","parent_session_id":"01a00387-aaf8-7f2f-89e3-e24c1af24859","root_session_id":"01a00387-aaf8-7f2f-89e3-e24c1af24859","depth":1,"execution_mode":"in-process","model":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol","notify_on_terminal":true,"created_at":"2026-08-15T08:34:07.805Z","updated_at":"2026-08-18T04:02:59.336Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":0},"name":"task26-objective-live-preflight","task_summary":"Find the safest normal-path exact-candidate Telegram rehearsal route","description":"Preflight exact-candidate live path","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"},"fallback_models":[{"provider":"clinepass","model_id":"cline-pass/deepseek-v4-pro","display":"clinepass/cline-pass/deepseek-v4-pro","source":"category","variant":"medium","reasoning_effort":"medium"},{"provider":"clinepass","model_id":"cline-pass/glm-5.2","display":"clinepass/cline-pass/glm-5.2","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":"Read-only objective-lane live rehearsal preflight for immutable current candidate 2e0894eac92bc396cc4723bf1f18ebc653b95018dd41574df435941c235da925. Determine the minimal supported normal-path real Telegram customer/owner lifecycle that can produce exact-current-candidate intended-DM delivery and no-recovery-shortcut evidence while respecting authoritative boundaries: synthetic actor 8527916639 already completed Tasks22-24; Task25 archived/cleared the live profile; do not restore the Task25 archive, direct-mutate durable state, replay service/raw listener, retarget historical execution, create a fourth bootstrap invite, or ask the actor to reconnect merely to prove old binding. Inspect Golden Path/Recovery Runbook, current profile/service state, candidate wheel/source, Task21-25 receipts and archive indexes. Identify whether a supported fresh disposable profile/session or normal reactivation path exists without violating those boundaries. Run only read-only hash/config/systemd/status/process/Telegram topology preflight; no service start, profile mutation, invite creation, Telegram/provider/customer action, network send, archive write, credential change, or Git action. Return: PASS if one concrete bounded path exists, exact operator commands and handset actions, permissions/authorization required, preconditions, expected durable states/receipts, cleanup, and why it is normal path; FAIL if impossible without relaxing one boundary, naming the single minimal boundary requiring explicit user authorization. Also confirm candidate bytes can actually be used by the runtime without mutating candidate. Observable stop: decision-complete preflight only.\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":4082105,"final_response":"I read this as a decision-complete read-only preflight - the result is FAIL because every supported fresh-customer path requires another canonical invite.\n\n## Verdict: FAIL\n\nNo bounded normal path exists under all stated boundaries.\n\n### Decisive blocker\n\nThe single minimal boundary requiring explicit user authorization is:\n\n> Permit exactly one additional fresh canonical customer bootstrap invite.\n\nThis would be the fourth invite issued for this rehearsal lineage. It should target a genuinely fresh disposable Telegram customer identity, not reconnect `8527916639` merely to validate its historical binding.\n\n### Why no existing path works\n\n- Current registry: `ordinary_v1`, zero customers.\n- Current service-state map: zero customers.\n- Customer bootstrap ledger: exactly three sessions, all `EXPIRED`, with zero claims.\n- Expired tokens are rejected as unavailable.\n- Candidate ingress accepts only `/start rc1_<token>`.\n- Registration requires a live `PREPARED` invite claimed from a private customer DM.\n- The candidate exposes no tokenless registration or customer-reactivation command.\n- Restoring the Task25 archive or directly inserting a customer would violate explicit boundaries.\n- A fresh disposable profile still requires issuing a new canonical invite; changing profiles does not avoid the fourth-invite boundary.\n- Tasks 22-25 are explicitly classified as historical compatibility/provenance only and cannot prove execution against candidate `2e0894...`.\n- Task22 expressly records `global_no_recovery_shortcut_criterion: not_claimed`; therefore historical evidence cannot satisfy the requested no-shortcut proof.\n\n### Candidate/runtime finding\n\nThe candidate itself is intact and executable without mutating it:\n\n- Full candidate verifier: `PASS`\n- Full digest: `2e0894eac92bc396cc4723bf1f18ebc653b95018dd41574df435941c235da925`\n- Wheel SHA-256: `af4a9d0a1ffffb6eb7551c1d6dc2b32853ca6d024332a4f8f5702bbf992f141b`\n- Candidate wheel successfully zip-imported its `hermes_cli`, bootstrap, controller, and admin modules.\n- Both candidate CLI help surfaces executed directly from the sealed wheel.\n- Pre/post hashes, modes, timestamps, and cache-leaf scan remained unchanged.\n\nHowever, the current systemd runtime is **not** deployed from this candidate:\n\n- Service: `inactive/dead`, `MainPID=0`; no matching process.\n- Unit points to the repository `.venv`.\n- Installed distribution points to predecessor wheel SHA-256 `6a3f5f...`.\n- Installed payload differs from the current candidate.\n- Exact-candidate live rehearsal would therefore also require an ordinary controlled wheel deployment/service rebind before startup. That does not mutate the immutable candidate, but it does not solve the missing customer authority without the additional invite.\n\nNo service, profile, Telegram/provider, archive, credential, network-send, Git, or durable-state action was performed.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":233236,"turns":9,"tool_calls":37,"output_tokens":10914,"total_tokens":756997,"generation_ms":227083,"tokens_per_second":48,"cost_usd":1.302251,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.9794261175092719,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.8207558676447526}}