Skip to content

fix: cap session context overrides by model window#90889

Open
clawsweeper[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
clawsweeper/gitcrawl-13603-switching-to-a-smaller-context-model-mid-session-causes-hard-cra
Open

fix: cap session context overrides by model window#90889
clawsweeper[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
clawsweeper/gitcrawl-13603-switching-to-a-smaller-context-model-mid-session-causes-hard-cra

Conversation

@clawsweeper

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot commented Jun 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Credit

Verification

  • node scripts/run-vitest.mjs src/agents/context.test.ts src/auto-reply/status.test.ts src/agents/command/session-store.test.ts
  • pnpm check:changed

Refs

ClawSweeper 🐠 replacement reef notes:

  • Cluster: gitcrawl-13603-switching-to-a-smaller-context-model-mid-session-causes-hard-cra
  • Source PRs: fix: cap effective session context window by known model limit #39859
  • Credit: Preserve @xdanger credit for the original implementation idea and source PR: fix: cap effective session context window by known model limit #39859.; Do not edit CHANGELOG.md for this normal OpenClaw repair; put release-note context in the repaired PR body/commit history.; Do not use fix(reply): block risky smaller-context model switches #44389 as source work in this repair path because the preflight routes it as security-sensitive.
  • Validation: node scripts/run-vitest.mjs src/agents/context.test.ts src/auto-reply/status.test.ts src/agents/command/session-store.test.ts; pnpm check:changed
  • Replacement reason: ClawSweeper could not update the source PR branch directly, so it opened a writable replacement PR instead.
  • Repair fallback: GitHub rejected the repair branch push because it updates workflow files and the ClawSweeper app token does not have workflows permission

Inherited issue-closing references from the source PR:
Fixes #39857

Co-author credit kept:

fish notes: model gpt-5.5, reasoning high; reviewed against 0ef2869.

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added agents Agent runtime and tooling clawsweeper Tracked by ClawSweeper automation labels Jun 6, 2026
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2026
Closed
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Jun 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed June 12, 2026, 9:02 AM ET / 13:02 UTC.

Summary
Review failed before ClawSweeper could summarize the requested change.

PR surface: Source +4, Tests +91. Total +95 across 4 files.

Reproducibility: unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Review metrics: none identified.

Stored data model
Persistent data-model change detected: serialized state: src/agents/command/session-store.test.ts, serialized state: src/agents/command/session-store.ts. Confirm migration or upgrade compatibility proof before merge.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Proof: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Patch quality: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Result: rating does not apply to this item.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Risk before merge

  • [P1] No close action taken because the review did not complete.

Maintainer options:

  1. Decide the mitigation before merge
    Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.
  2. Pause or close
    Do not merge this PR until maintainers decide whether the risk is worth taking.

Next step before merge

  • Review did not complete, so no work-lane recommendation was made.
Review details

Best possible solution:

Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.

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

Unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Unclear. Retry the review first so ClawSweeper can evaluate the actual issue and fix direction.

AGENTS.md: unclear because the file could not be read completely.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 1bd04ac98389.

Label changes

Label changes:

  • add rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool: Overall readiness is 🌊 off-meta tidepool; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🌊 off-meta tidepool.
  • remove P2: Current review triage priority is none.
  • remove rating: 🦐 gold shrimp: Current PR rating is rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool, so this older rating label is no longer current.
  • remove merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility: Current PR review selected no merge-risk labels.
  • remove merge-risk: 🚨 session-state: Current PR review selected no merge-risk labels.
  • remove status: ⏳ waiting on author: Current PR status no longer selects a status label.

Label justifications:

  • rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool: Overall readiness is 🌊 off-meta tidepool; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🌊 off-meta tidepool.
Evidence reviewed

PR surface:

Source +4, Tests +91. Total +95 across 4 files.

View PR surface stats
Area Files Added Removed Net
Source 2 23 19 +4
Tests 2 91 0 +91
Docs 0 0 0 0
Config 0 0 0 0
Generated 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0
Total 4 114 19 +95

What I checked:

  • failure reason: retryable codex transport failure (capacity)
  • codex failure detail: Codex review failed for this PR with exit 1.
  • codex stderr: nfixes, orship it`; release generation owns it. Do not ask contributors/agents for changelog edits.

Likely related people:

  • unknown: Codex failed before it could trace repository history. (role: review did not complete; confidence: low)
What the crustacean ranks mean
  • 🦀 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.

How this review workflow works
  • 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.

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. P2 Normal backlog priority with limited blast radius. merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility 🚨 May break existing users, config, migrations, defaults, or upgrade paths. merge-risk: 🚨 session-state 🚨 May lose, corrupt, stale, or mis-associate session, agent, or context state. status: needs maintainer proof decision A ClawSweeper-authored PR needs a maintainer proof capture or override decision. and removed status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. labels Jun 6, 2026
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Jun 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ClawSweeper status: this ClawSweeper-authored replacement PR is blocked on real behavior proof.

Reviewed head: 0ef28694fb56a03c49f3239d39d3f8f290d9e3cf
Proof status: not_applicable
Updated: 2026-06-12T11:20:38.140Z

Maintainer decision needed:

  • capture real behavior proof for this head
  • apply proof: override if the proof requirement should be waived
  • pause or close the replacement if proof should not be pursued

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 10, 2026
Open
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🦐 gold shrimp Decent PR readiness signal, but merge confidence is limited. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. status: needs maintainer proof decision A ClawSweeper-authored PR needs a maintainer proof capture or override decision. and removed rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. status: needs maintainer proof decision A ClawSweeper-authored PR needs a maintainer proof capture or override decision. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. labels Jun 10, 2026
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2026
Open
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added status: ⏳ waiting on author ClawSweeper has contributor-facing work open and is waiting for author action. and removed status: needs maintainer proof decision A ClawSweeper-authored PR needs a maintainer proof capture or override decision. labels Jun 12, 2026
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Jun 12, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ClawSweeper 🐠 automerge status

This pass ended as a no-op: no narrow repair surfaced, so ClawSweeper left the branch untouched.

Executor outcome: Codex fix worker failed: stream disconnected before completion: Rate limit reached for kindle-alpha (for limit alpha-test) in organization org-uV7eiQ9Go91bzhgJ7xfsJBZj on tokens per min (TPM): Limit 5000000, Used 5000000, Requested 42290. Please try again in....
Worker summary: Make this PR merge-ready for ClawSweeper automerge. Rebase onto latest main, address PR comments and review findings, fix CI/check failures, preserve release-note context, and validate before returning.

Worker actions:

  • build_fix_artifact on this PR: planned - Maintainer opted this PR into ClawSweeper automerge/autofix repair; run the direct Codex edit loop after live hydration instead of a separate read-only planning pass.

ClawSweeper left the PR as-is: no push, no rebase, no replacement PR, no merge, and no fresh ClawSweeper pass.

fish notes: reasoning high.

Automerge progress:

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool PR readiness rating does not apply to this item. and removed rating: 🦐 gold shrimp Decent PR readiness signal, but merge confidence is limited. status: ⏳ waiting on author ClawSweeper has contributor-facing work open and is waiting for author action. labels Jun 12, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

agents Agent runtime and tooling clawsweeper Tracked by ClawSweeper automation merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility 🚨 May break existing users, config, migrations, defaults, or upgrade paths. merge-risk: 🚨 session-state 🚨 May lose, corrupt, stale, or mis-associate session, agent, or context state. P2 Normal backlog priority with limited blast radius. rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool PR readiness rating does not apply to this item. size: S

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Status/session context window can over-report the selected model's actual window

1 participant

@xdanger