{"task_id":"st_01a01fa2","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":"2026-08-20T14:43:09.013Z","updated_at":"2026-08-22T07:47:33.785Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":0},"name":"v11-f3-reliability","task_summary":"Verify boundary, replay, recovery, and installed behavior","description":"Review v1.1 reliability and replay safety","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 F3 reliability/exactly-once review. Candidate `0e383...`, release root `/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent-dualcoach-v1.1/dualcoach/releases/v1.1.0`. Independently verify 24-hour exact boundary, claim at 23:59, expiry at 24:00, wrong-chat rejection, replay rejection, fresh source and installed Golden Paths, focused 306, expanded 76, full Gateway 8552, serial timeout recheck 225, and exact wheel RECORD integrity. Assess the initial j24 timeout diagnostic versus clean j8/serial reruns without hiding it. Verify inherited delivery exactly-once logic is byte-identical outside TTL seam. No edits. Return PASS/FAIL, evidence, residual risk, JSON-ready summary.\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 reliability audit - I verified the TTL seam, exactly-once behavior, Golden Paths, suite receipts, timeout diagnosis, and wheel integrity.\n\n## Verdict: PASS\n\n### Evidence\n\n- Candidate `0e383539...d25f9` is bound to source commit `ae90902686a66fd6b66dfacba0f373a8011a594a`.\n- Independent source and installed-wheel probes passed:\n  - TTL exactly `86,400` seconds.\n  - Valid at `23:59:59`.\n  - Claim succeeds at `23:59`, entering `REGISTERING`.\n  - Unclaimed invite rejected exactly at `24:00`, entering `EXPIRED`.\n  - Wrong-chat/private-DM mismatch rejected without consuming the invite.\n  - Replay after claim rejected; generation remained exactly `2`.\n- Fresh Golden Path executions completed successfully:\n  - Source mode, candidate and wheel bindings exact.\n  - Installed mode from the exact candidate wheels, candidate and wheel bindings exact.\n  - Both exercised the full lifecycle, local Telegram loopback, duplicate rejection, durable delivery, cleanup, and terminal inventory.\n- Candidate verifier: `DUALCOACH_V11_CANDIDATE_INPUTS_PASS`.\n- Verifier and TTL tests: `6 passed`.\n- Hash-bound qualification evidence:\n  - Focused Task26: `306 passed`.\n  - Expanded Task26: `76 passed`.\n  - Full Gateway j8: `8,552 passed`, `0 failed`, from `8,609` collected across `385` files.\n  - Serial timeout recheck: `225 passed`.\n- j24 diagnostic was not hidden:\n  - Initial j24/140-second run had two internal timeout failures and one long-file ceiling.\n  - The same affected files passed serially (`225 passed`).\n  - Full j8 rerun passed with a 600-second ceiling; slowest file took `326.47s`.\n  - Classification as resource contention is justified, though it does not mathematically eliminate latent timing sensitivity.\n- Exact wheel integrity:\n  - Both wheels contain exactly `992` members and `992` complete RECORD rows.\n  - Every size and SHA-256 RECORD binding recomputed successfully.\n  - Only changed members:\n    1. `gateway/platforms/telegram_customer_bootstrap.py`\n    2. `hermes_agent-0.17.0.dist-info/RECORD`\n  - Source change is exactly `timedelta(minutes=30)` to `timedelta(hours=24)`.\n  - All inherited delivery/exactly-once code is therefore byte-identical outside the TTL seam.\n- Release chain:\n  - Qualification receipt SHA-256: `0bb05f14...b7fca`\n  - Full Gateway receipt SHA-256: `0563de7f...79c3b`\n  - Inventory SHA-256: `9478cab8...cc5d47`\n  - All `212` inventoried files matched size and digest.\n\n### Residual risk\n\n- **Low:** the initial j24 timeouts remain a genuine observed stress-run failure. Clean serial and j8 runs strongly support contention, but timing-sensitive behavior can never be disproven solely by reruns.\n- Raw v1.1 logs for the `306/76/8552/225` runs are not included in the compact release root; those counts were independently validated through the hash-bound qualification and Gateway receipts. Fresh Golden Paths and boundary behavior were executed directly during this audit.\n- No project files were edited. A concurrent F5 review artifact appeared during the audit and was left untouched.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"task_id\": \"st_01a01fa2\",\n  \"lane\": \"F3_reliability_exactly_once\",\n  \"verdict\": \"PASS\",\n  \"candidate_digest\": \"0e383539aea1b83205771772f1e8b417840defe60f5ea6ce184f80e3af8d25f9\",\n  \"source_commit\": \"ae90902686a66fd6b66dfacba0f373a8011a594a\",\n  \"ttl\": {\n    \"seconds\": 86400,\n    \"live_at_23_59_59\": true,\n    \"claim_at_23_59\": \"REGISTERING\",\n    \"expired_at_24_00\": true,\n    \"wrong_chat_rejected_without_consumption\": true,\n    \"replay_rejected\": true\n  },\n  \"golden_paths\": {\n    \"fresh_source\": \"PASS\",\n    \"fresh_installed\": \"PASS\"\n  },\n  \"tests\": {\n    \"boundary_and_verifier\": \"6 passed\",\n    \"focused_task26\": \"306 passed\",\n    \"expanded_task26\": \"76 passed\",\n    \"full_gateway\": {\n      \"workers\": 8,\n      \"collected\": 8609,\n      \"passed\": 8552,\n      \"failed\": 0,\n      \"files\": 385\n    },\n    \"serial_timeout_recheck\": \"225 passed\"\n  },\n  \"j24_diagnostic\": {\n    \"workers\": 24,\n    \"timeout_seconds\": 140,\n    \"observed\": \"two internal timeout failures and one long-file ceiling\",\n    \"assessment\": \"resource contention supported by clean serial and j8 reruns; retained as residual timing risk\"\n  },\n  \"wheel_integrity\": {\n    \"status\": \"PASS\",\n    \"members\": 992,\n    \"record_rows\": 992,\n    \"changed_members\": [\n      \"gateway/platforms/telegram_customer_bootstrap.py\",\n      \"hermes_agent-0.17.0.dist-info/RECORD\"\n    ],\n    \"delivery_logic_byte_identical_outside_ttl_seam\": true\n  },\n  \"residual_risk\": \"LOW\",\n  \"edits\": 0\n}\n```","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":637677,"turns":60,"tool_calls":101,"output_tokens":24273,"total_tokens":8738586,"generation_ms":554507,"tokens_per_second":44,"cost_usd":6.631659,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.9948117433792428,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.9605677464190235}}