…ilure escalation (NousResearch#507) (NousResearch#32273)

Three granular patch-tool refinements from the Roo Code deep-dive (NousResearch#507).

## Indentation preservation (fuzzy_match.py)

When fuzzy_find_and_replace matches via a non-exact strategy, the file's
indentation may differ from what the LLM sent in old_string/new_string
(common case: model sends zero-indent old/new for a method body that
lives inside an 8-space-indented class). Before this commit the
replacement was spliced in verbatim, producing a file with a broken
indent level that may still parse but is logically wrong.

The fix computes the indent delta between old_string's first meaningful
line and the matched region's first meaningful line, then re-indents
every line of new_string by that delta. Exact-strategy matches are
untouched (passthrough). Same approach as Roo Code's
multi-search-replace.ts:466-500.

## CRLF preservation (file_operations.py)

Models nearly always send tool args with bare LF endings (JSON-encoded),
but the file on disk may have CRLF (Windows-line-ending configs, .bat,
.cmd, .ini files). Before this commit:

- write_file silently normalized CRLF to LF on every overwrite
- patch produced mixed-ending files: the substituted region had LF,
  the surrounding context kept CRLF

The fix detects the file's existing line endings (via pre_content if
already read for lint/LSP, otherwise a tiny head -c 4096 probe), and
normalizes the entire write to that ending. New files are written
verbatim (no detection possible).

## Per-file failure escalation (file_tools.py)

When the agent fails to patch the same file 3+ times in a row, the
existing 'old_string not found' hint isn't strong enough — the model
keeps retrying with variations against a stale view of the file.

The fix tracks consecutive failures per (task_id, resolved_path) and
injects an escalating hint after 3 failures: 'This is failure #N
patching X. Stop retrying. Either re-read fresh, use longer context,
or fall back to write_file.' Counter resets on a successful patch to
the same path.

## Validation

- 22 new tests across tests/tools/test_fuzzy_match.py (5),
  test_line_ending_preservation.py (12), test_patch_failure_tracking.py (5)
- All existing tests pass (165/165 in the touched files)
- E2E verified with real _handle_patch / _handle_write_file calls
  against real CRLF files and real failure loops

Closes part of NousResearch#507. The remaining open items in NousResearch#507 (2b start_line
hint, behavioral rules) were declined after audit:
- 2b adds schema bloat for a problem the existing 'multiple matches'
  contract already handles
- Behavioral rules conflict with the personality system

Items 1, 2d, 2e, 3, 4 of NousResearch#507 were already landed in earlier work.

…ilure escalation (NousResearch#507) (NousResearch#32273)

Three granular patch-tool refinements from the Roo Code deep-dive (NousResearch#507).

## Indentation preservation (fuzzy_match.py)

When fuzzy_find_and_replace matches via a non-exact strategy, the file's
indentation may differ from what the LLM sent in old_string/new_string
(common case: model sends zero-indent old/new for a method body that
lives inside an 8-space-indented class). Before this commit the
replacement was spliced in verbatim, producing a file with a broken
indent level that may still parse but is logically wrong.

The fix computes the indent delta between old_string's first meaningful
line and the matched region's first meaningful line, then re-indents
every line of new_string by that delta. Exact-strategy matches are
untouched (passthrough). Same approach as Roo Code's
multi-search-replace.ts:466-500.

## CRLF preservation (file_operations.py)

Models nearly always send tool args with bare LF endings (JSON-encoded),
but the file on disk may have CRLF (Windows-line-ending configs, .bat,
.cmd, .ini files). Before this commit:

- write_file silently normalized CRLF to LF on every overwrite
- patch produced mixed-ending files: the substituted region had LF,
  the surrounding context kept CRLF

The fix detects the file's existing line endings (via pre_content if
already read for lint/LSP, otherwise a tiny head -c 4096 probe), and
normalizes the entire write to that ending. New files are written
verbatim (no detection possible).

## Per-file failure escalation (file_tools.py)

When the agent fails to patch the same file 3+ times in a row, the
existing 'old_string not found' hint isn't strong enough — the model
keeps retrying with variations against a stale view of the file.

The fix tracks consecutive failures per (task_id, resolved_path) and
injects an escalating hint after 3 failures: 'This is failure #N
patching X. Stop retrying. Either re-read fresh, use longer context,
or fall back to write_file.' Counter resets on a successful patch to
the same path.

## Validation

- 22 new tests across tests/tools/test_fuzzy_match.py (5),
  test_line_ending_preservation.py (12), test_patch_failure_tracking.py (5)
- All existing tests pass (165/165 in the touched files)
- E2E verified with real _handle_patch / _handle_write_file calls
  against real CRLF files and real failure loops

Closes part of NousResearch#507. The remaining open items in NousResearch#507 (2b start_line
hint, behavioral rules) were declined after audit:
- 2b adds schema bloat for a problem the existing 'multiple matches'
  contract already handles
- Behavioral rules conflict with the personality system

Items 1, 2d, 2e, 3, 4 of NousResearch#507 were already landed in earlier work.

…ilure escalation (NousResearch#507) (NousResearch#32273)

Three granular patch-tool refinements from the Roo Code deep-dive (NousResearch#507).

## Indentation preservation (fuzzy_match.py)

When fuzzy_find_and_replace matches via a non-exact strategy, the file's
indentation may differ from what the LLM sent in old_string/new_string
(common case: model sends zero-indent old/new for a method body that
lives inside an 8-space-indented class). Before this commit the
replacement was spliced in verbatim, producing a file with a broken
indent level that may still parse but is logically wrong.

The fix computes the indent delta between old_string's first meaningful
line and the matched region's first meaningful line, then re-indents
every line of new_string by that delta. Exact-strategy matches are
untouched (passthrough). Same approach as Roo Code's
multi-search-replace.ts:466-500.

## CRLF preservation (file_operations.py)

Models nearly always send tool args with bare LF endings (JSON-encoded),
but the file on disk may have CRLF (Windows-line-ending configs, .bat,
.cmd, .ini files). Before this commit:

- write_file silently normalized CRLF to LF on every overwrite
- patch produced mixed-ending files: the substituted region had LF,
  the surrounding context kept CRLF

The fix detects the file's existing line endings (via pre_content if
already read for lint/LSP, otherwise a tiny head -c 4096 probe), and
normalizes the entire write to that ending. New files are written
verbatim (no detection possible).

## Per-file failure escalation (file_tools.py)

When the agent fails to patch the same file 3+ times in a row, the
existing 'old_string not found' hint isn't strong enough — the model
keeps retrying with variations against a stale view of the file.

The fix tracks consecutive failures per (task_id, resolved_path) and
injects an escalating hint after 3 failures: 'This is failure #N
patching X. Stop retrying. Either re-read fresh, use longer context,
or fall back to write_file.' Counter resets on a successful patch to
the same path.

## Validation

- 22 new tests across tests/tools/test_fuzzy_match.py (5),
  test_line_ending_preservation.py (12), test_patch_failure_tracking.py (5)
- All existing tests pass (165/165 in the touched files)
- E2E verified with real _handle_patch / _handle_write_file calls
  against real CRLF files and real failure loops

Closes part of NousResearch#507. The remaining open items in NousResearch#507 (2b start_line
hint, behavioral rules) were declined after audit:
- 2b adds schema bloat for a problem the existing 'multiple matches'
  contract already handles
- Behavioral rules conflict with the personality system

Items 1, 2d, 2e, 3, 4 of NousResearch#507 were already landed in earlier work.
#AI commit#

…ilure escalation (NousResearch#507) (NousResearch#32273)

Three granular patch-tool refinements from the Roo Code deep-dive (NousResearch#507).

## Indentation preservation (fuzzy_match.py)

When fuzzy_find_and_replace matches via a non-exact strategy, the file's
indentation may differ from what the LLM sent in old_string/new_string
(common case: model sends zero-indent old/new for a method body that
lives inside an 8-space-indented class). Before this commit the
replacement was spliced in verbatim, producing a file with a broken
indent level that may still parse but is logically wrong.

The fix computes the indent delta between old_string's first meaningful
line and the matched region's first meaningful line, then re-indents
every line of new_string by that delta. Exact-strategy matches are
untouched (passthrough). Same approach as Roo Code's
multi-search-replace.ts:466-500.

## CRLF preservation (file_operations.py)

Models nearly always send tool args with bare LF endings (JSON-encoded),
but the file on disk may have CRLF (Windows-line-ending configs, .bat,
.cmd, .ini files). Before this commit:

- write_file silently normalized CRLF to LF on every overwrite
- patch produced mixed-ending files: the substituted region had LF,
  the surrounding context kept CRLF

The fix detects the file's existing line endings (via pre_content if
already read for lint/LSP, otherwise a tiny head -c 4096 probe), and
normalizes the entire write to that ending. New files are written
verbatim (no detection possible).

## Per-file failure escalation (file_tools.py)

When the agent fails to patch the same file 3+ times in a row, the
existing 'old_string not found' hint isn't strong enough — the model
keeps retrying with variations against a stale view of the file.

The fix tracks consecutive failures per (task_id, resolved_path) and
injects an escalating hint after 3 failures: 'This is failure #N
patching X. Stop retrying. Either re-read fresh, use longer context,
or fall back to write_file.' Counter resets on a successful patch to
the same path.

## Validation

- 22 new tests across tests/tools/test_fuzzy_match.py (5),
  test_line_ending_preservation.py (12), test_patch_failure_tracking.py (5)
- All existing tests pass (165/165 in the touched files)
- E2E verified with real _handle_patch / _handle_write_file calls
  against real CRLF files and real failure loops

Closes part of NousResearch#507. The remaining open items in NousResearch#507 (2b start_line
hint, behavioral rules) were declined after audit:
- 2b adds schema bloat for a problem the existing 'multiple matches'
  contract already handles
- Behavioral rules conflict with the personality system

Items 1, 2d, 2e, 3, 4 of NousResearch#507 were already landed in earlier work.

…tion (NousResearch#32273)

Port three patch-tool reliability refinements from upstream's Roo Code
deep-dive (NousResearch#507/NousResearch#32273), adapted to our diverged file tooling.

Indentation preservation (tools/fuzzy_match.py): when fuzzy_find_and_replace
matches via a non-exact strategy, re-indent new_string by the delta between
old_string's first meaningful line and the matched region's, so a zero-indent
old/new from the model lands at the file's actual indent depth instead of
splicing a broken indent level. Exact matches pass through untouched.

CRLF preservation (tools/file_operations.py): detect the file's existing line
endings (via pre_content if already read for lint/LSP, else a head -c 4096
probe) and normalize the whole write to that ending. Stops write_file from
silently flipping a CRLF file to LF, and stops patch from producing mixed
endings when only a substituted region changed. New files written verbatim.

Per-file failure escalation (tools/file_tools.py): track consecutive patch
failures per (task_id, resolved_path); after 3 in a row on the same path,
inject an escalating hint telling the model to stop retrying variations and
re-read / widen old_string / fall back to write_file. Counter resets on a
successful patch. Bounded to 64 distinct paths per task.

22 new tests (test_fuzzy_match +6, test_line_ending_preservation +12,
test_patch_failure_tracking +5); existing file_operations/file_tools/
patch suites stay green (143 passed).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

…ted (Wave 4 patch reliability)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

…ilure escalation (NousResearch#507) (NousResearch#32273)

Three granular patch-tool refinements from the Roo Code deep-dive (NousResearch#507).

## Indentation preservation (fuzzy_match.py)

When fuzzy_find_and_replace matches via a non-exact strategy, the file's
indentation may differ from what the LLM sent in old_string/new_string
(common case: model sends zero-indent old/new for a method body that
lives inside an 8-space-indented class). Before this commit the
replacement was spliced in verbatim, producing a file with a broken
indent level that may still parse but is logically wrong.

The fix computes the indent delta between old_string's first meaningful
line and the matched region's first meaningful line, then re-indents
every line of new_string by that delta. Exact-strategy matches are
untouched (passthrough). Same approach as Roo Code's
multi-search-replace.ts:466-500.

## CRLF preservation (file_operations.py)

Models nearly always send tool args with bare LF endings (JSON-encoded),
but the file on disk may have CRLF (Windows-line-ending configs, .bat,
.cmd, .ini files). Before this commit:

- write_file silently normalized CRLF to LF on every overwrite
- patch produced mixed-ending files: the substituted region had LF,
  the surrounding context kept CRLF

The fix detects the file's existing line endings (via pre_content if
already read for lint/LSP, otherwise a tiny head -c 4096 probe), and
normalizes the entire write to that ending. New files are written
verbatim (no detection possible).

## Per-file failure escalation (file_tools.py)

When the agent fails to patch the same file 3+ times in a row, the
existing 'old_string not found' hint isn't strong enough — the model
keeps retrying with variations against a stale view of the file.

The fix tracks consecutive failures per (task_id, resolved_path) and
injects an escalating hint after 3 failures: 'This is failure #N
patching X. Stop retrying. Either re-read fresh, use longer context,
or fall back to write_file.' Counter resets on a successful patch to
the same path.

## Validation

- 22 new tests across tests/tools/test_fuzzy_match.py (5),
  test_line_ending_preservation.py (12), test_patch_failure_tracking.py (5)
- All existing tests pass (165/165 in the touched files)
- E2E verified with real _handle_patch / _handle_write_file calls
  against real CRLF files and real failure loops

Closes part of NousResearch#507. The remaining open items in NousResearch#507 (2b start_line
hint, behavioral rules) were declined after audit:
- 2b adds schema bloat for a problem the existing 'multiple matches'
  contract already handles
- Behavioral rules conflict with the personality system

Items 1, 2d, 2e, 3, 4 of NousResearch#507 were already landed in earlier work.