Skip to content

fix: require successful tool evidence before Kanban completion - #2

Closed
benperry6 wants to merge 1 commit into
LeonSGP43:fix/32746-kanban-tool-evidencefrom
benperry6:contrib/32940-live-tool-evidence
Closed

fix: require successful tool evidence before Kanban completion#2
benperry6 wants to merge 1 commit into
LeonSGP43:fix/32746-kanban-tool-evidencefrom
benperry6:contrib/32940-live-tool-evidence

Conversation

@benperry6

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Follow-up to NousResearch#32940 and issue NousResearch#32746, built directly on this branch.

This changes Kanban completion proof from tool-call intent to successful material execution evidence:

  • records a metadata-only, current-run receipt in task_events;
  • covers native Hermes tools, Codex app-server tools, and MCP business-error responses;
  • uses a bounded wait for cross-process receipt visibility;
  • rejects completion without qualifying evidence, leaves the task running, and records a protocol_violation event.

Verification:

  • 19 targeted Kanban tests passed;
  • 24 Codex projector tests passed;
  • 58 Codex app-server session tests passed;
  • Ruff, py_compile, and git diff --check passed;
  • independent code review: PASS.

The separate product decision about a reasoning-only/no-tool exception remains intentionally with maintainers.

Cherry-pick alternative: e19ff6c499f0b9832f05af127254c28cc333cf8d.

Persist one metadata-only tool receipt per current task run so both native Hermes and Codex app-server workers can prove successful material work before completion. Reject failed results, preserve the running task, and close the cross-process notification race with a bounded read.

Co-Authored-By: GPT-5.6 SOL <noreply@openai.com>
@benperry6

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Superseded by a fresh, standalone current-main commit:

benperry6@5de30d1

The refreshed implementation is based on upstream 1bbb6e5bce56e721ab685af4cd87df21bbff4d35 and avoids asking this older author branch to absorb unrelated mainline history. Closing this follow-up to keep one current implementation reference.

@benperry6 benperry6 closed this Aug 25, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant