[codex] Add delivery NO_REPLY runtime contracts by 100yenadmin · Pull Request #71039 · openclaw/openclaw

100yenadmin · 2026-04-24T09:11:48Z

Summary

Adds the delivery/NO_REPLY contract rung from RFC #71004. This is test-only: it locks currently-green follow-up delivery behavior for silent replies, dispatcher fallback, and Codex app-server preservation of silent terminal text. It also documents one known JSON-envelope delivery gap as a TODO for the later runtime-plan delivery migration.

No production delivery behavior changes in this PR.

flowchart TD
  Outcome["Agent payloads"] --> Delivery["OpenClaw delivery policy"]
  Delivery --> Silent["Exact/whitespace NO_REPLY suppresses visible delivery"]
  Delivery --> Media["NO_REPLY + media remains deliverable"]
  Delivery --> Dispatcher["Missing origin route falls back to dispatcher"]
  Delivery --> Todo["TODO: JSON NO_REPLY envelope suppression"]
  Codex["Codex app-server adapter"] --> Outcome

Files Changed And Why

File	Purpose
`test/helpers/agents/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.ts`	Shared NO_REPLY and delivery fixture data.
`src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts`	Follow-up runner delivery/suppression/fallback rows.
`extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts`	Codex terminal text preservation rows.

Contract Matrix

Path	Covered behavior
Follow-up runner	Exact/whitespace `NO_REPLY` payloads do not route to origin or dispatcher and still clean up typing state.
Follow-up runner	`NO_REPLY` payloads with media remain deliverable instead of being suppressed as silent text.
Follow-up runner	Successful visible output with incomplete origin routing falls back to dispatcher.
Follow-up runner	Existing route-failure and provider-drop rows remain covered by the same focused shard.
Follow-up runner	JSON `NO_REPLY` envelope suppression is explicitly marked `todo`.
Codex app-server adapter	Exact, whitespace, and JSON `NO_REPLY` terminal text is preserved for shared delivery suppression instead of adapter-specific handling.

Known Red Row

Future row	Why not green here
JSON/enveloped `NO_REPLY` suppression in follow-up delivery	Current production delivery suppresses exact text tokens only; behavior change belongs in `AgentRuntimePlan` delivery policy.

How This Helps The RuntimePlan Work

Delivery is OpenClaw-owned policy. Codex should preserve terminal content and side-channel state; the shared delivery layer should decide whether output is visible, silent, routed to origin, or routed to dispatcher.

Reviewer Notes

Test-only; no delivery code changes.
The JSON NO_REPLY row is intentionally TODO, not forgotten.
Captures the audit’s Bug 4 class without introducing more patch churn in follow-up routing.

Verification

node scripts/run-vitest.mjs run --config test/vitest/vitest.auto-reply-reply.config.ts src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts — 28 passed, 1 todo
node scripts/run-vitest.mjs run --config test/vitest/vitest.extensions.config.ts extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts
./node_modules/.bin/oxlint --tsconfig tsconfig.oxlint.core.json test/helpers/agents/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.ts src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts
git diff --check -- test/helpers/agents/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.ts src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts

Refs #71004
Follows #71009
Follows #71029
Follows #71038

greptile-apps · 2026-04-24T09:17:18Z

Greptile Summary

This is a test-only PR adding runtime contract tests for the delivery/NO_REPLY policy domain across two test targets: the followup runner and the Codex app-server adapter. No production code is modified; all new assertions are consistent with the existing isSilentReplyPayloadText / isSilentReplyText logic in tokens.ts and the resolveFinalAssistantText trim behavior in CodexAppServerEventProjector.

Confidence Score: 5/5

Safe to merge — test-only change with no production code modified.

All three new test cases correctly reflect the production-code behavior (tokens.ts silent-reply matchers, event-projector text trimming). Assertions are tight and the contract fixture is well-scoped. visibleText is exported but unused in this PR, which is a trivial cosmetic point that does not affect correctness.

No files require special attention.

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "test: add delivery no reply runtime cont..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds test-only runtime contract coverage for Delivery/NO_REPLY behavior across the shared follow-up runner and the Codex app-server adapter, ensuring silent-terminal handling and routing fallback semantics are locked before any production refactors from RFC #71004.

Changes:

Introduces a shared delivery NO_REPLY contract fixture used by both core and Codex tests.
Adds follow-up runner tests for NO_REPLY suppression (no origin/dispatcher delivery), media deliverability, and dispatcher fallback when origin routing is incomplete.
Adds Codex app-server adapter tests ensuring silent terminal text is preserved for shared suppression (exact/whitespace/JSON envelope).

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
test/helpers/agents/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.ts	Adds shared constants for delivery/`NO_REPLY` contract scenarios.
src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts	Adds contract tests covering follow-up `NO_REPLY` suppression, media deliverability, and dispatcher fallback behavior.
extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts	Adds Codex adapter contract test asserting silent terminal text is preserved and recognized as silent by shared token logic.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

steipete · 2026-04-24T16:48:11Z

Closing as superseded by #71096, which consolidates this contract shard into the single RuntimePlan / Pi-Codex parity review branch.

Codex review note: keeping the individual shard open would split the same contract surface across multiple stale branches now that #71096 carries the combined stack.

test: add delivery no reply runtime contracts

42d2a48

openclaw-barnacle Bot added extensions: codex size: S labels Apr 24, 2026

100yenadmin marked this pull request as ready for review April 24, 2026 09:15

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 24, 2026 09:15

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of 100yenadmin April 24, 2026 09:15 View session

100yenadmin mentioned this pull request Apr 24, 2026

[codex] Add transcript repair runtime contracts #71042

Closed

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread extensions/codex/src/app-server/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contract.test.ts Outdated

Comment thread src/auto-reply/reply/followup-runner.test.ts

This was referenced Apr 24, 2026

[codex] Add prompt overlay runtime contracts #71044

Closed

[codex] Add schema normalization runtime contracts #71046

Closed

Eva added 2 commits April 24, 2026 16:40

test: document json no-reply delivery gap

537abf8

test: align delivery contract fixtures

9086588

100yenadmin mentioned this pull request Apr 24, 2026

RFC: Contract-first Pi/Codex agent runtime rewrite #71004

Closed

100yenadmin requested a review from Copilot April 24, 2026 10:15

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of 100yenadmin April 24, 2026 10:16 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Apr 24, 2026

[codex] Add transport params runtime contracts #71048

Closed

[codex] Add contract-first Pi/Codex runtime plan suite #71096

Merged

steipete closed this Apr 24, 2026

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

[codex] Add delivery NO_REPLY runtime contracts#71039

[codex] Add delivery NO_REPLY runtime contracts#71039
100yenadmin wants to merge 3 commits intoopenclaw:mainfrom
electricsheephq:contract-first/delivery-no-reply-runtime-contracts

100yenadmin commented Apr 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

greptile-apps Bot commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

steipete commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

100yenadmin commented Apr 24, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Files Changed And Why

Contract Matrix

Known Red Row

How This Helps The RuntimePlan Work

Reviewer Notes

Verification

Uh oh!

greptile-apps Bot commented Apr 24, 2026

Greptile Summary

Confidence Score: 5/5

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

steipete commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

100yenadmin commented Apr 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading