{"task_id":"st_01a00d2c","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":"2026-08-17T00:44:01.048Z","updated_at":"2026-08-19T00:39:50.116Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":0},"name":"blocked-update-recovery","task_summary":"Recover blocked Telegram ingress update","description":"Recover blocked Telegram ingress update","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":"Goal: safely recover exactly the durably failed Telegram polling update 629525116 after deployed fix candidate f38d0373a58877806ff64a9cac54ab01e6e6e47f7101e3dcfd5ffbf05f8bb101 so the polling offset advances, with zero business-state mutation and no duplicate customer delivery. Current service dualcoachtest PID 535046 active/Telegram connected; historical update plain ASCII checkin is failed reason handler_exception; fixed code now renders the safe fallback via authoritative DM topic 0. Observer v6.2 is already armed in built-in session outside your control. Build an append-only, sealed, deterministic incident recovery controller under .omo/evidence/task26 via apply_patch; do not modify product source or historical evidence. First prove no supported existing CLI recovery exists for a non-committed handler_exception and capture exact receipt store path/hash/schema. Controller must fail closed unless service is stopped, installed Hermes wheel/hash matches 2110071..., editable profile mapping is intact, receipt contains exactly target failed update with reason handler_exception and no handled/recovered conflict, customer enabled g6 ACTIVE, adaptive activation/delivery false, delivery count zero, and authority digest matches. Archive the original receipt byte-exactly. Atomically remove only that failed entry with O_NOFOLLOW, 0600, fsync file+directory, preserving every other receipt byte-semantic entry. Arm a journal/application-log watcher before restart, start service, let Bot API naturally replay the same pending update once through fixed code, and prove: no telegram_handler_exception for target, target receives a normal handled receipt, next polling offset is >629525116, service healthy Telegram connected, at most one safe fallback response and zero check-in/business/delivery/adaptive mutations. If exact customer send count cannot be proven without exposing content, record bounded Bot API message id/count only. Seal controller/tests/pre/post inventories and receipt. No commit/Git/plan/todo/Boulder/ledger edits, no token/provider changes, no other update deletion/drop_pending_updates, no unrelated profiles. If any precondition fails, leave service stopped or restore exact original receipt and report fail-closed. Return evidence root/seal, pre/post receipt hashes, replay/offset evidence, service state, authority hashes, and whether user may now send `오늘 체크인`.\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":1761519,"final_response":"I read this as completion reporting - summarize the recovery and verification evidence.\n\nRecovery succeeded for Telegram update `629525116`.\n\n- Natural replay handled exactly once; no subsequent redelivery occurred.\n- Polling offset lower bound: `629525117`.\n- Target removed from all live receipt sections.\n- Business-state inventories are byte-identical.\n- Delivery count remains zero; observer recorded no lifecycle transition.\n- Service is active and Telegram-connected, PID `545777`.\n- Controller tests: `8 passed`.\n- Product source and historical evidence were not modified.\n\nEvidence:\n`.omo/evidence/task26/task26-telegram-poll-recovery-st_01a00d2c`\n\nFinal seal SHA-256:\n`00d44de03e8dde668da8058091751291b13457c8bd086917dfe85e42b3813df8`\n\nThe customer may now send `오늘 체크인`.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":1292288,"turns":39,"tool_calls":80,"output_tokens":36285,"total_tokens":5408291,"generation_ms":765622,"tokens_per_second":47,"cost_usd":5.215011999999999,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.9520617924721075,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.9404129481612642}}