{"task_id":"st_01a05b16","status":"completed","residency_state":"resident","parent_session_id":"01a04e1a-4e0a-7c69-845d-0b5d1e71f82d","root_session_id":"01a04e1a-4e0a-7c69-845d-0b5d1e71f82d","depth":1,"execution_mode":"in-process","model":"openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol","notify_on_terminal":true,"created_at":"2026-09-01T03:49:28.901Z","updated_at":"2026-09-01T03:55:51.975Z","notification":{"run_epoch":0,"notified_epoch":0},"name":"find-cron-no-send-recovery","task_summary":"Find supported Topic-59 suppression or maintenance path","description":"Find truthful no-send cron recovery","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: Determine one evidence-safe operational recovery that lets r70 cron produce latest SUCCESS after a single service restart while causing zero Telegram sends/updates and preserving truthful ledgers; or prove none exists. ONE DELIVERABLE: `/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/evidence/nutricoach-telegram-checkin-stepper/task-10-cron-no-send-recovery-analysis.json` with verdict RECOVERABLE/NO_SAFE_PATH, exact commands/API/state transitions, code evidence, protected-inventory impact. READ-ONLY only. No Git/GitHub, edits, service restart, job execution, ledger/config mutation, network/customer/authority action. Read debug and next-cron evidence; inspect installed r70 + worktree weekly operations dispatcher, Topic59PublicationLedger state machine, scheduler, cron control surface, activation authority, preflight protected/volatile inventory. Investigate independently: (1) supported maintenance hold/suppress/skip/pre-call-failure state for a current-day Topic59 slot that truthfully prevents provider call and is terminal/idempotent; (2) whether old latest=sending slots are incident/no-retry and can safely remain without blocking restart; (3) whether temporarily disabling weekly/cron or job via supported control can yield a successful no-op tick and then restore exact protected bytes/healthy weekly_enabled before preflight; (4) whether an operator dry-run/health-only tick can update health without customer delivery and without fabricating success; (5) whether current-day send eligibility can be fenced by an existing idempotency/maintenance file that is explicitly volatile and authenticated; (6) whether cron latest success requirement can be satisfied by a distinct health check already recognized by preflight. Reject any approach that marks sent/delivered without receipt, converts uncertain to failed without evidence, triggers provider I/O, or mutates sealed/protected state irreversibly. Trace exact next scheduler behavior after restart and after proposed recovery. Check candidate-r3/preseal compatibility. If RECOVERABLE, provide exact staged sequence with immediate safety checks, rollback, no-replay rules and tests required. If NO_SAFE_PATH, identify the single policy/code guard and what user decision or new r71 package change is required. Do not expose customer values.\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":1353625,"final_response":"I read this as a read-only recovery-path investigation - I traced all supported controls and delivered the evidence verdict.\n\nCreated:\n\n`/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/evidence/nutricoach-telegram-checkin-stepper/task-10-cron-no-send-recovery-analysis.json`\n\nVerdict: `NO_SAFE_PATH`\n\nCore blocker: an absent current-day Topic-59 slot unconditionally transitions to `PREPARED -> SENDING`; no authenticated terminal maintenance-skip state exists. Paused/no-due ticks cannot update cron success.\n\nVerified:\n- JSON valid; no diagnostics\n- SHA-256: `968a3ea4e15d149736d47c239d410ed9b88b7dbb20e0703214a2a6b19c3025d0`\n- Service remains active with original PID and `NRestarts=0`\n- r71 action/runtime/observer roots remain absent\n- No job execution, restart, network action, ledger/config mutation, or Telegram operation occurred","run_stats":{"runtime_ms":382845,"turns":16,"tool_calls":84,"output_tokens":18279,"input_tokens":277879,"cache_read_tokens":2667520,"total_tokens":2963678,"generation_ms":358890,"tokens_per_second":51,"cost_usd":3.271525,"cache_hit_rate_last":0.9907902499145158,"cache_hit_rate_run":0.9056565850670826,"token_status":"complete","cost_status":"reported","duration_status":"monotonic"},"task_seq":67,"config_generation":0,"background_mode":"background"}