{"task_id":"st_01a01e97","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":false,"created_at":"2026-08-20T09:51:58.724Z","updated_at":"2026-08-22T11:35:37.734Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":-1},"name":"task27-final-f3-supplemental","task_summary":"Recheck F3 reliability after cleanup","description":"Verify reliability and exactly-once","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 FINAL F3. Reverify reliability, fail-closed, replay/idempotency, rollback, recovery, and exactly-once claims for exact candidate `d1109d8f78aaccf949ec4f664d9e62584c3cca33032030518bc3e2d712239112` after supplemental cleanup. Inspect existing F3 evidence plus controller/tests (22 PASS), authorization chain, deterministic operation `005a3c3f9897e2d298a9a7409759509e`, consumption record, receipt SHA `13b28b...659d`, refusal on reexecution, stopped service, and frozen archive. Confirm cleanup did not weaken shipped candidate behavior. No edits/actions. Return PASS/FAIL, exact evidence, residual risk, and whether F3 may be checked.\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":4111719,"final_response":"I read this as a read-only F3 release-gate revalidation - I traced the candidate, cleanup authorization, transaction semantics, terminal state, and frozen artifacts without mutation.\n\n## Verdict: PASS\n\n**F3 may be checked: YES.** Supplemental cleanup did not alter or weaken shipped candidate `d1109d8f...39112`.\n\n### Exact evidence\n\n- Existing F3 receipt: `task27-v38-final-verification-f3.json`\n  - SHA-256 `55bdbc3f0f2ada90c94dc87dde365b4f19b3c868a839d700575835b498ab7740`\n  - Status `PASS`; all 13 reliability/exactly-once requirements pass.\n- Frozen candidate remains bound to:\n  - Candidate `d1109d8f78aaccf949ec4f664d9e62584c3cca33032030518bc3e2d712239112`\n  - Hermes wheel `f8b3c779...c1860b1`\n  - Delivered seal `54be54cf...752f67`\n  - Postfreeze seal `3002d815...5878f6`\n  - Direct scan found no writable entries or symlinks in the delivered root.\n- Supplemental controller:\n  - SHA-256 `65fc6c93e4ba7b0efaff84563f50d37875d150551a00260e7f3ade7b9d009e9f`\n  - Tests SHA-256 `3833be95b478bcce4e96c6f7b95c07930d86e8b3f804fd7a5fffc324416fa3c1`\n  - Matrix expands to 22 cases and supplied execution is 22 PASS.\n- Authorization chain:\n  - Preview SHA `670c9d07198942503a9da892d4dc723312ec60ccab538c8552f78a1b22660287`\n  - Approved preview seal `7d7b9d5b...61889`\n  - Final authorization SHA `83a46c25d8a0ef67c71511e0b1786154f075a2b4572f9b4f9feaec34a6d3e6f1`\n  - Execute permission seal `6cd72f0c...26774`\n  - Controller, candidate, wheel, preview, identity, paths, stopped-service constraint and prior cleanup receipt are all pinned.\n- Deterministic operation recomputes exactly as:\n  - `sha256(\"task27-supplemental-cleanup-controller-v1:<permission-seal>\")[:32]`\n  - Result `005a3c3f9897e2d298a9a7409759509e`\n- Consumption record:\n  - `authorization-consumed.json` SHA `8e6b7d0bb30fc891d20b6fdf9a02edaf879546dce8c8328598ab98e9fb689d75`\n  - Status `CONSUMED_ON_COMMIT`, bound to the operation, authorization and receipt path.\n- Terminal receipt:\n  - SHA-256 `13b28b5745cf1fb6e8aa9457f14ad86dbf972c3c203394e2fd919d99b7bf659d`\n  - Byte-identical to frozen archive `receipt.json`.\n- Frozen recovery archive:\n  - Manifest SHA `636acca796ef627cc488c85d5cbc79894eaaa1ee68bbd8660aaf7692d4b9b7e2`\n  - Source/copy digests match:\n    - Outbox `29f118ab...bd104`\n    - Membership `ff57a22a...e367`\n  - Directories `0500`, files `0400`, zero writable entries, zero symlinks.\n- Terminal live state:\n  - Outbox absent.\n  - Membership directory absent.\n  - Service `inactive/dead`, `MainPID=0`.\n- Replay/idempotency:\n  - Existing fixed output is checked before execution and causes `receipt reuse refused`.\n  - The 22-case matrix covers one-use refusal, bad seals, authorization mismatch, drift, foreign state, unsafe entries, and exact rollback.\n- Rollback/recovery:\n  - Faults after archive copy and after pruning restore byte-equivalent source state and remove partial archive state.\n  - Committed archive retains byte-recoverable copies.\n\n### Claim boundary\n\nThe shipped candidate’s provider-delivery exactly-once claim remains supported: atomic authority claim before provider I/O, one transport, one audited receipt, permanent consumption on success/failure/unknown outcome, and no retry after unknown outcome.\n\nSupplemental cleanup supports one successful committed execution and process-level rollback; this is not a universal distributed or power-loss exactly-once guarantee.\n\n### Residual risk\n\n- `receipt-hashes.sha256` is stale: its check currently fails for `task27_final_cleanup_controller.py` and it does not include supplemental terminal artifacts.\n- `task27-supplemental-verification-receipt.json` records the older 20-test/controller revision, not the final 22-test hashes.\n- Cleanup rollback is process-local; SIGKILL/power loss between filesystem operations would require manual recovery from the frozen archive.\n- Integrity remains owner-permission/hash sealed, not externally signed or WORM against a privileged host administrator.\n\nThese are evidence-housekeeping and host-trust limitations, not F3 behavior regressions.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":126393,"turns":9,"tool_calls":37,"output_tokens":5711,"total_tokens":864453,"generation_ms":115992,"tokens_per_second":49,"cost_usd":1.3500320000000001,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.8286472083248718,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.8060907699867946}}