Best possible solution:

Land the narrow diagnostics/message update after redacted real-run proof demonstrates the replay-unsafe timeout path; keep broader replay-safe recovery in #87781 separate.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

No high-confidence live reproduction is included in this PR. Source inspection and focused tests establish the timeout/diagnostic path, but the PR body only provides unit and format commands.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes for the code shape: the patch localizes the wording and diagnostic enrichment to Codex app-server helpers with focused tests. It is not merge-ready until real behavior proof confirms the runtime path.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model gpt-5.5, reasoning high; reviewed against 0e86ca135225.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a normal-priority Codex app-server diagnostic and user-facing timeout-message bugfix with limited blast radius.
• rating: 🧂 unranked krab: Overall readiness is 🧂 unranked krab; proof is 🧂 unranked krab and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs real behavior proof before merge: The PR body and comments provide tests only; it still needs redacted terminal/log/live output, a terminal screenshot, or a recording showing the after-fix replay-unsafe timeout message and item metadata. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

PR surface:

Source +9, Tests +29. Total +38 across 5 files.

What I checked:

• Repository policy read: Read the full root AGENTS.md and the scoped extensions/AGENTS.md; the proof gate and extension-boundary guidance apply to this Codex plugin PR. (AGENTS.md:1, 0e86ca135225)
• Current main timeout message is still less explicit: Current main's side-effect timeout message warns that work may have happened but does not explain that OpenClaw intentionally avoided automatic replay. (extensions/codex/src/app-server/attempt-results.ts:10, 0e86ca135225)
• Current main diagnostics omit item details for item/completed: Current main returns only lastNotificationMethod for non-rawResponseItem/completed notifications, so item/completed timeout diagnostics do not include item id/type/status/tool metadata. (extensions/codex/src/app-server/attempt-notifications.ts:27, 0e86ca135225)
• Timeout outcome is surfaced to callers: runCodexAppServerAttempt attaches promptTimeoutOutcome to the final attempt result, so the edited message is user-visible on the timeout path. (extensions/codex/src/app-server/run-attempt.ts:2095, 0e86ca135225)
• PR diff is focused: The PR patch changes the side-effect timeout string, adds item metadata extraction for notifications with params.item, and adds a focused attempt-notifications test. (extensions/codex/src/app-server/attempt-notifications.ts:24, 1f272b3dc3b9)
• Real behavior proof remains missing: The live PR body lists unit and format commands only, and the existing ClawSweeper comment records that no redacted terminal/log/live output has shown the after-fix replay-unsafe timeout path. (1f272b3dc3b9)

Likely related people:

• steipete: Central Codex app-server history shows Peter Steinberger introduced app-server controls and authored the module-split and lifecycle hardening commits around the affected timeout/result path. (role: feature-history owner; confidence: high; commits: 31a0b7bd42a5, 8d72aafdbb8d, 3b65e2302a55; files: extensions/codex/src/app-server/run-attempt.ts, extensions/codex/src/app-server/attempt-results.ts, extensions/codex/src/app-server/attempt-notifications.ts)
• vincentkoc: Recent history shows Vincent Koc changed Codex app-server startup/auth behavior in run-attempt.ts, adjacent to the affected runtime path. (role: recent adjacent contributor; confidence: medium; commits: f1cc8f0cfc7c, 859eb0666282; files: extensions/codex/src/app-server/run-attempt.ts)

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.