fix(acp): preserve content audience boundaries - #10493
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ab74357c7a
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 72ee05d1e0
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6bb17bda13
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f16d7444df
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Addressed the latest empty-turn finding in
Verified with the focused audience/user-only tests, both new integration regressions, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d9ff7a866c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 538bf204cd
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 568e6b7f08
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 3a866ed200
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 2fd643dcca
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4de64b114c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f0bf5c8ac1
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
f0bf5c8 to
77e9909
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 77e990908f
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a1742fdcd3
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: bb04137ea5
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f4e08b20d1
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Chef's kiss. Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
michaelneale
left a comment
michaelneale
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice one, a lot of work.
The merges with origin/main kept our side of agent.rs and reply_parts.rs and hand-ported upstream back, which lost work in both directions: #10716's stable message identity never arrived, and our own MessageContent::Error rendering was overwritten by a later merge. Nine tests were failing. Both files now start from origin/main with only the state-machine integration reapplied, so what was dropped is restored wholesale rather than one symptom at a time: - ensure_message_event_id, attach_turn_usage's preferred_message_id, and the response-id carrier for split tool-request messages are back, along with the upstream tests that cover them. The state-machine dispatch sits in reply_impl rather than reply, so it inherits the identity boundary too. - update_session_metrics takes post_compaction_context_tokens again; the bool version derived the new baseline from the summary's output tokens and ignored everything retained. - The CLI render paths filter on user visibility again (#10493), keeping the MessageContent::Error arms we added on top. - Stop hooks pass working_dir again. It was the last caller, so the field was serialising as null for every hook event. - command_starts_turn is a shared helper again instead of being inlined at its one call site. - MessageContent::Error handling re-landed in acp/server.rs (including the CreditsExhausted route to the payment prompt) and in the markdown export. Three problems surfaced that were not merge damage: - goose-cli did not compile: ActionRequiredData gained a ToolConfirmationResponse variant that export.rs was never given, and the crate is not covered by `cargo test -p goose`. - Schedule recipe parse errors quoted the file back at the caller, which schedule_tool_security guards against. Parse failures get the generic message; the semantic checks still report their own wording. - The platform-extension prompt snapshot had been regenerated without code-mode, so it dropped the code_execution section and only matched under `cargo test -p goose`. The scheduler extension contributed a bare `## scheduler` heading to every prompt: it never set instructions, and it registered even on hosts with no scheduler service, where it also advertises no tools. client_factory can now decline, so a platform extension the host cannot provide is not registered at all. Also clears `cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets -- -D warnings`: the dummy API's event builders take a ResponseMeta instead of nine positional arguments, split_reply builds chunks instead of slicing, and StateEffect::SetRecipe is boxed. MERGE_FIXES.md records what was intentional and what is still open; delete it before the branch merges. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2 participants
Summary
Verification
cargo test -p goose-provider-types(423 passed)cargo test -p goose --test agent test_assistant_only_response_is_persisted_without_empty_turn_retrycargo test -p goose --test agent live_tool_result_projects_user_content_but_persists_canonical_resultcargo test -p goose --test acp_server_test test_load_session_replays_image_attachmentcargo test -p goose-cli --lib(258 passed)cargo test -p goose-cli planner_classification_excludes_user_only_contentcargo test --workspace --lib provider_input_(3 passed)cargo test --workspace --lib markdown_export_preserves_user_audience_tool_outputcargo test --workspace --lib first_last_projection_drops_hidden_endpoints_and_contentcargo test -p goose preserved_user_message_keeps_audience_projection_after_compactioncargo test -p goose --test compaction(3 passed)cargo test -p goose-cli planner_history_is_fixed_after_audience_projectioncargo test -p goose loaded_excerpt_projects_audience_before_selecting_endpointscargo test -p goose search_projects_audience_before_matching_and_limitingcargo test -p goose tool_pair_summary_(2 passed)cargo buildcargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warningscargo clippy --workspace --all-targets -- -D warningsafter the latest review updates and rebase onto currentmaincargo clippy -p goose --tests -- -D warningsafter aligning the compaction visibility regressionThis finding was discovered by Project Loupe.