{"task_id":"st_01a02f52","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":"2026-08-23T15:52:25.121Z","updated_at":"2026-08-25T12:01:54.864Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":0},"name":"v140-baseline-decision","task_summary":"Assess whether direct profile build digest is a release gate","description":"Resolve Todo 1 A/B contract question","category":"architect","requested_model":{"provider":"openai-codex","model_id":"gpt-5.6-sol","display":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol","source":"category","variant":"xhigh","reasoning_effort":"xhigh"},"fallback_models":[{"provider":"clinepass","model_id":"cline-pass/glm-5.2","display":"clinepass/cline-pass/glm-5.2","source":"category","variant":"xhigh","reasoning_effort":"medium"},{"provider":"openai-codex","model_id":"gpt-5.6-terra","display":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-terra","source":"category","variant":"xhigh","reasoning_effort":"xhigh"}],"resolved_model":{"provider":"openai-codex","model_id":"gpt-5.6-sol","display":"GPT-5.6 Sol","source":"category","variant":"xhigh","reasoning_effort":"xhigh"},"spawn_spec":{"version":1,"cwd":"/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach","prompt":"Provide one decision memo only: determine whether NutriCoach v1.4.0 plan Todo 1 technically requires a stable digest for a direct wheel build from the retained target profile source tree, or whether that direct build may remain a non-product diagnostic while the actual split product derivation is the release gate.\n\nRead-only inputs:\n- Plan: `/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/plans/nutricoach-v140-weekly-operations.md`, especially Todo 1 and Todo 12.\n- Consolidation checkpoint: `/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/start-work/checkpoints/nutricoach-v140-todo1-consolidation.md`.\n- Target evidence root: `/home/cube/projects/richard/.worktrees/nutricoach-v140-impl/.omo/evidence/nutricoach-v140-weekly-operations/`.\n- v1.3.3 qualification and candidate binding under `/home/cube/projects/richard/.worktrees/nutricoach-v111-impl/.omo/evidence/v1.3.3-checkin-authority-isolation/`.\n- DualCoach upgrade skill: `/home/cube/.omo/memory/agents/traning-coach-e178cb81/repo/skills/dualcoach-v1-upgrade/SKILL.md`.\n\nKnown facts to independently verify:\n- Actual sealed v1.3.3 product identity is Hermes wheel `cf4ccf…` plus unchanged sealed v1.3.2 profile wheel `a099b3…`.\n- Complete 998-input Hermes product derivation and 56-file sealed profile snapshot each reproduce expected products twice.\n- Exact source lane passes 87 tests.\n- A separate direct build of the retained profile source is explicitly not the sealed product and yielded different diagnostic wheel hashes in two contexts (`09c5…`, `d302…`).\n\nAnalyze the exact contract, not effort preference. Address:\n1. Does Todo 1's phrase “two isolated pre-feature builds produce the exact four hashes above” bind the product derivation only or every incidental direct source-tree build?\n2. Does accepting a diagnostic-only direct source build weaken candidate provenance, migration/rollback, or Todo 12 reproducibility?\n3. If A is valid, state the exact evidence language/gate needed so no misleading product claim remains.\n4. If B is required, identify the exact plan/invariant that makes it mandatory.\n\nDo not modify any file, run live actions, or propose unrelated redesign. Return a concise memo with verdict `A_VALID`, `B_REQUIRED`, or `OWNER_POLICY_CHOICE`, reasoning, and non-negotiable safeguards.\n\n<Category_Context>\nYou are a big-picture system design consultant, NOT an implementer.\n\n<Method>\n1. Survey the WHOLE architecture end to end before proposing anything: module boundaries, data flow, ownership, and the blast radius of the area in question.\n2. Produce at least TWO viable designs and state the trade-offs of each in concrete terms (coupling, testability, migration cost, failure modes).\n3. Recommend ONE of them with the reasoning that decided it, the boundaries it assumes, and the risks it carries.\n4. Demand the SIMPLEST architecture that handles the actual requirements. Reject enterprise patterns that do not pay for themselves.\n</Method>\n\n<Advisory_Mode>\nWhen the caller marks the task advisory-only, produce NO file edits: return the analysis, options, recommendation, and risks as structured text.\n</Advisory_Mode>\n</Category_Context>"},"host_pid":1082531,"final_response":"I read this as a release-contract decision - the memo distinguishes canonical product derivation from incidental buildability.\n\n# Decision memo\n\n**Verdict: `A_VALID`**\n\n## Decision\n\nTodo 1 requires two reproducible executions of the **canonical split product derivation**, not a stable digest for every buildable source subtree.\n\nThe qualified v1.3.3 architecture is:\n\n- Complete 998-input candidate root -> Hermes wheel `cf4ccf…`\n- Exact 56-file sealed v1.3.2 profile snapshot -> profile wheel `a099b3…`\n- Retained target profile source -> source/test lane only; `87 passed`\n\nThe direct target-profile wheels `09c5…` and `d302…` are therefore non-product diagnostics.\n\n## Contract reading\n\n“Two isolated pre-feature builds produce the exact four hashes above” names only:\n\n1. Hermes wheel `cf4ccf…`\n2. Profile wheel `a099b3…`\n3. Telegram source `8b6c7b…`\n4. Regression source, corrected by the retained erratum to `75ab5e…c4c73f…`\n\nIt cannot literally mean four build outputs because two are source-file hashes. In context, each isolated verification run must build the two named product wheels and verify the two named source identities. No fifth direct-profile wheel digest appears in the plan.\n\nThe upgrade skill’s two-build invariant applies to **wheels being sealed as products**. It does not promote every nested buildable tree into a release artifact. Todo 12 will make the v1.4.0 profile wheel a product; that future wheel must then reproduce identically twice.\n\n## Alternatives and trade-offs\n\n### A — Split product gate, direct build diagnostic\n\nMatches the actual v1.3.3 candidate binding and rollback artifact pair. It keeps product provenance, source-test lineage, and incidental buildability separate. Its failure mode is misleading evidence that labels a diagnostic wheel as a product.\n\n### B — Require one stable direct-profile digest\n\nProvides a simpler one-root mental model, but requires reconstructing the retained profile tree and may invalidate the qualified source-test lineage. It adds coupling without strengthening the already complete 998/56 product derivation.\n\n**Recommendation: A.** It is the smallest architecture matching the sealed product boundary.\n\n## Effect on later gates\n\nA does not weaken:\n\n- **Candidate provenance:** Candidate identity remains bound to `cf4ccf… + a099b3…`, not either diagnostic wheel.\n- **Migration/rollback:** These operate on sealed candidate/runtime/config/state identities; the diagnostic wheel is never installed.\n- **Todo 12 reproducibility:** Todo 12 independently requires complete v1.4 source and wheel inventories, two identical product builds, installed-wheel Golden Path parity, and migration/rollback evidence.\n\nAny retained-profile source byte that enters the v1.4 profile wheel must be declared as changed relative to `a099b3…`; it cannot be treated as an unchanged baseline member.\n\n## Required evidence language\n\nThe authoritative receipt must state:\n\n> The canonical pre-feature product derivation is split-source: two isolated runs built Hermes from the complete 998-input authority to `cf4ccf…` and the profile from the exact 56-file sealed v1.3.2 snapshot to `a099b3…`. The target `dualcoach/profile` direct build is not the sealed v1.3.3 profile product, is not a candidate-identity, deployment, migration, or rollback input, and has no expected digest. Observed `09c5…` and `d302…` values are retained diagnostic observations only. PASS does not claim reproducibility of that diagnostic build.\n\n## Non-negotiable safeguards\n\n- Supersede, rather than mutate, evidence that fixes `09c5…` while claiming overall PASS.\n- Retain both diagnostic hashes and the `needs-fix` audit as history.\n- Gate Todo 1 on two exact 998/56 split derivations, corrected source hashes, `87 passed`, and unchanged live candidate.\n- Do not include a direct-profile diagnostic digest in candidate identity or rollback material.\n- Todo 12 must close all actual v1.4 product inputs and reproduce both new product wheels twice.\n\nNo plan clause mandates B. B becomes mandatory only if the direct target profile tree is explicitly redefined as a canonical product derivation root.","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":192838,"turns":4,"tool_calls":18,"output_tokens":7938,"total_tokens":155317,"generation_ms":189602,"tokens_per_second":42,"cost_usd":0.631739,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.8045324145487047,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.5176314128878605}}