{"task_id":"st_01a0159e","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":"2026-08-18T16:04:21.466Z","updated_at":"2026-08-24T11:11:54.952Z","notification":{"run_epoch":27,"notified_epoch":27},"name":"repair-same-invocation-evidence","task_summary":"Implement same-invocation adversarial evidence contracts","description":"Repair Golden Path evidence contract","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":"Implement the strict same-invocation Task26 evidence contract in /home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent. One deliverable: a test-first source patch whose installed Golden Path invocation actually executes and emits native hash-linked receipts for every plan clause, and whose independent verifier derives each verdict from those native artifacts rather than trusting summary counters. Required branches in the SAME source_golden_path invocation: all 22 raw natural Korean answers and canonical results; clear forms including '보통 수준입니다.' with zero re-asks; genuine ambiguity producing deterministic issue; later-field revision cannot target field zero and binds the correct field; preview artifacts cannot satisfy production acceptance; approved-card projection failure prevents capability issuance; unknown delivery outcome is not retried; cleanup resumes forward to one terminal receipt. Preserve the successful customer attestation, owner review, activation, check-in, approval, exactly-one delivery, duplicate rejection, archive/disable/quiescence path. First add focused tests that fail on the current scripts because native adversarial receipts/checks are absent; show RED. Then implement the smallest maintainable design, extracting a focused module if needed instead of bloating oversized scripts. Update verify_source_golden_path.py and/or independent verification so missing, forged, summary-only, or hash-unbound adversarial artifacts fail. Run focused tests and a disposable source Golden Path + verifier GREEN. Do not build/seal the final candidate, edit plan/ledger/evidence history, commit, push, touch profiles/live services/Telegram, or weaken existing tests. Preserve unrelated dirty changes. Return changed files, RED/GREEN commands and outputs, artifact schema/invariants, and any blocker. Stop only when the source-level same-invocation evidence contract and verifier are GREEN offline.\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":1082531,"final_response":"I read this as pinning Task26 Ty semantics to Python 3.12 without normalizing diagnostics - implemented test-first and verified against the sealed binary.\n\n## Semantic boundary\n\nEvery hermetic Ty invocation is now exactly:\n\n```text\nsealed-ty\ncheck\ngateway/platforms/nutrition_coaching.py\n--output-format\ngitlab\n--python-version\n3.12\n```\n\nRequirements:\n\n- `--python-version` appears exactly once.\n- Target is exactly `3.12`.\n- Qualification interpreter role is `selected_qualification_python`.\n- Qualification interpreter major/minor must be `3.12`.\n- Wrong, duplicate, omitted, or ambient target values fail closed.\n- No target inference from ambient Python, configuration, or environment.\n\nThe runner also requires exact qualified diagnostics:\n\n```text\nraw diagnostics:\nf4a2265141525dc8005430e8afdf61145ff88c24a7fc00aad2d7609b3f2ce86a\n\nsemantic fingerprint:\n4b24118c95c05fa392f976a69034da7e7d24f63d098b32ef5c252537ab13da61\n\ndiagnostic count:\n810\n\ncapability diagnostic count:\n0\n```\n\nThe semantic fingerprint hashes the complete sorted diagnostic objects, including message text. Messages are never normalized or ignored.\n\n## Schema changes\n\n```text\ntask26-preexecution-hermetic-ty-binding-v1\n-> task26-preexecution-hermetic-ty-binding-v2\n\ntask26-hermetic-ty-execution-v1\n-> task26-hermetic-ty-execution-v2\n\ntask26-ty-capability-surface-receipt-v2\n-> task26-ty-capability-surface-receipt-v3\n\ntask26-hermetic-ty-attestation-v1\n-> task26-hermetic-ty-attestation-v2\n\ntask26-sealed-hermetic-ty-attestation-v1\n-> task26-sealed-hermetic-ty-attestation-v2\n```\n\nThese remain unchanged:\n\n```text\ntask26-sealed-final-state-v7\ninstalled-golden-runtime-portable-v2\n```\n\nThe new bindings record:\n\n- Target Python version.\n- Qualification interpreter executable role and version.\n- Exact Ty command argv.\n- Ty version.\n- Corrected wheel and executable hashes.\n- Runner and gate tool hashes.\n- Raw diagnostic hash and count.\n- Message-sensitive semantic fingerprint.\n- Capability diagnostic count through the surface receipt.\n\n## Rehydration and standalone checks\n\nRehydration independently verifies:\n\n- Runtime interpreter is Python 3.12.\n- Execution provenance schema and target.\n- Exact command and single target flag.\n- Surface receipt schema and target.\n- Exact raw diagnostics.\n- Exact semantic fingerprint.\n- Exact wheel and executable identities.\n- Capability count remains zero.\n\nThe standalone verifier checks the same preexecution binding and sealed attestation before invoking candidate code, including exact key sets and attestation hash.\n\n## RED\n\nMissing target was accepted before the fix:\n\n```text\ntest_ty_surface_gate_rejects_missing_wrong_duplicate_or_ambient_target\nFAILED: returncode was 0\n```\n\nDirect sealed-binary omitted-target reproduction:\n\n```json\n{\n  \"count\": 810,\n  \"raw_sha256\": \"5ac266487fea8355d15ad3499874d5c30570a4910b158cea32db9ee8a7954bb4\",\n  \"semantic_fingerprint_sha256\": \"5c0781c9752c4784a2aec6789958de3331b60267b7671c786524a92c9af360ca\"\n}\n```\n\nThat exactly matched the explicit 3.14 result rather than the qualified 3.12 result.\n\n## Actual sealed-binary driver\n\n```json\n{\n  \"changed_message_positions\": 21,\n  \"raw_equal\": false,\n  \"fingerprint_equal\": false,\n  \"runs\": {\n    \"3.12\": {\n      \"count\": 810,\n      \"flag_count\": 1,\n      \"raw_sha256\": \"f4a2265141525dc8005430e8afdf61145ff88c24a7fc00aad2d7609b3f2ce86a\",\n      \"semantic_fingerprint_sha256\": \"4b24118c95c05fa392f976a69034da7e7d24f63d098b32ef5c252537ab13da61\"\n    },\n    \"3.14\": {\n      \"count\": 810,\n      \"flag_count\": 1,\n      \"raw_sha256\": \"5ac266487fea8355d15ad3499874d5c30570a4910b158cea32db9ee8a7954bb4\",\n      \"semantic_fingerprint_sha256\": \"5c0781c9752c4784a2aec6789958de3331b60267b7671c786524a92c9af360ca\"\n    }\n  },\n  \"status\": \"PASS\"\n}\n```\n\nThe difference is 21 changed diagnostic messages despite equal counts. Those changes now fail rather than being normalized.\n\nThe disposable original/rehydrated runner test uses a scrubbed hostile environment and verifies byte-identical raw diagnostics, receipts, target, interpreter version, and semantic fingerprint.\n\nCleanup:\n\n```text\nruntime_residue=0\n```\n\n## Files changed\n\nProduction:\n\n```text\nscripts/task26_hermetic_ty_runner.py\nscripts/task26_ty_surface_gate.py\ngateway/platforms/task26_candidate_derivation.py\ngateway/platforms/task26_final_state.py\nscripts/independent_verify_candidate.py\n```\n\nTests and fixtures:\n\n```text\ntests/gateway/test_task26_ty_surface_gate.py\ntests/gateway/test_task26_ty_wheel_builder.py\ntests/gateway/test_task26_candidate_derivation.py\ntests/gateway/test_task26_final_state.py\ntests/gateway/test_task26_independent_candidate_verifier.py\ntests/gateway/test_source_golden_path_verifier.py\ntests/gateway/test_installed_golden_path_provenance.py\n```\n\nCurrent production tool hashes:\n\n```text\ncf6cdcf816809dcc4283b681d991d84d386c980ec9ae524be7df9b9077e18307  task26_hermetic_ty_runner.py\n2af0cdb4e73d9f98e4b81acf2e62161e2d2448e51d0e7d983d1ef35b12a8f041  task26_ty_surface_gate.py\n2c1b0930f83c593d97aa6464f8788bbaa22ee7c9c96dfc0550962adbe04f1edc  task26_candidate_derivation.py\nf923a33040204035e36b8c05a0bc69f2a29ee41d2fa7049e6579c1395466c21a  task26_final_state.py\n43ff2ee11d079b4735e0b16a6cc2702db951ad9f7f55ac1edd81bbb8ab9fe3e4  independent_verify_candidate.py\n```\n\n## GREEN\n\nFocused runner, gate, builder, final-state, standalone, bootstrap, candidate, Golden, and provenance suite:\n\n```text\n218 passed in 36.48s\n```\n\nRuff:\n\n```text\nAll checks passed!\n```\n\nFocused Ty:\n\n```text\nAll checks passed!\n```\n\nNo implementation blocker remains. Existing immutable bundles retain their old verifier and runner bytes and were not modified. No candidate, evidence, ledger, live state, profile, commit, or push was created or changed.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":695204,"turns":48,"tool_calls":82,"output_tokens":25069,"total_tokens":9578126,"generation_ms":564180,"tokens_per_second":44,"cost_usd":7.015403,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.9956712593372459,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.965414107756292}}