Conversation
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Automations to automatically generate PRs for you. |
|
@codex review |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
![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: 01ca0537be
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 Security Review · Automatically triggered
Here are some automated security review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 01ca0537be
ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub
This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
- You comment "@codex security review"
- A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.
|
@codex review |
🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: cb5ac4b075
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 Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
Review-gate bookkeeping: the Codex Review Summary card (node |
782cca6 to
d24d776
Compare
ThomasK33
changed the title
Launch UI evidence — Sol and LunaExact source:
Limits: this was an unsent scratch draft, not a persistent-workspace send. No live API, Codex or gateway call. Negative Pro-route gating is covered by targeted automated tests, not these UI recordings. A supplementary phone Sol-reload clip showed only its earlier state and was excluded; the phone Sol reload has screenshot/snapshot evidence instead. The two accepted recordings below were decoded and inspected. Screenshots
Desktop recordingdesktop.webmPhone recordingmobile.webmGenerated with |
Final handoff — blocked for merge, not a release-ready verdictBoth GPT-6 Sol and Luna are implemented at
The PR body preserves the full post-cap sequence, including the earlier Generated with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 40e4b2a6b8
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: bfc0906fa6
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: a4c7c15635
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 Security Review · Automatically triggered
Here are some automated security review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a4c7c15635
ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub
This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
- You comment "@codex security review"
- A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.
a4c7c15 to
2c4803c
Compare
ThomasK33
changed the title
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please. 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". |
🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
… correct their Codex context cap Stacked on #4350, which makes a requested reasoning_effort "none" reach the wire for GPT-6 Sol/Luna. Headless tool loops (Dream consolidation, memory harvest, refine, sidebar status) call streamText with tools and no provider options, so nothing requests "none" and Chat Completions defaults to medium, which rejects function calling. A model-boundary middleware fills in "none" for tool-bearing Chat Completions requests that asked for no effort, wrapped outside #4350's body-patching wrapper so the injected value survives the SDK; explicit caller efforts are left alone. The Coder openai-compat path resolves scoped "Treat as" aliases through resolveModelForMetadata before clamping. The assumed 372K Codex OAuth cap for Sol/Luna becomes the 272K published in the pinned Codex catalog. _Generated with `xum` • Model: `coder:anthropic/claude-fable-5-1` • Thinking: `xhigh` • Cost: `$174.60`_ <!-- mux-attribution: model=coder:anthropic/claude-fable-5-1 thinking=xhigh costs=174.60 -->
2c4803c to
c9a0f57
Compare
ThomasK33
changed the title
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish! 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". |
🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
This branch was successfully deployed
1 participant
Summary
Stacked on #4350. That PR makes a requested
reasoning_effort: "none"reach the wire for GPT-6 Sol/Luna. This PR closes the three gaps left after #4348 and #4350: headless tool loops that request no effort at all, Coder-scoped aliases onopenai-compatinstances, and the assumed 372K Codex OAuth context cap (272K in the pinned Codex catalog).Background
reasoning_effort: "none"; an omitted effort defaults tomedium.buildProviderOptionsclamps agent turns (🤖 feat: add GPT-6 Sol and Luna model support #4348) and 🤖 fix: send GPT-6 Sol/Luna reasoning effort none and repair main CI #4350 makes that clamp serialize, but Dream consolidation, memory harvest, refine and sidebar-status generation callstreamTextwith tools and no provider options, so nothing requestsnoneand their tool calls are rejected on Chat Completions routes (directwireFormat: chatCompletions, Coderopenai-compatinstances). Raised by Codex on the earlier revision of this PR; the Coder alias case is its round-6 finding.codex-rs/models-manager/models.json—gpt-6-sol/gpt-6-lunacontext_window: 272000.maincopies Astra's 372K with an "assumed" comment.Implementation
clampGpt6ChatCompletionsToolReasoning(providerModelFactory.ts): atransformParamsmiddleware that setsreasoningEffort: "none"when the request carries tools and no effort was requested, for Sol/Luna capability identities on Chat Completions. Explicit caller efforts are preserved (this keeps 🤖 fix: send GPT-6 Sol/Luna reasoning effort none and repair main CI #4350's "requestedhighstayshigh" contract intact). It wraps outsidecreateOpenAIModelWithPreservedOptionsso the injectednoneis seen by that wrapper's body patch instead of being stripped by the SDK.resolveModelForMetadata(coder:<instance>/<model>)so scoped "Treat as" aliases are clamped too.CODEX_OAUTH_CONTEXT_WINDOW_OVERRIDES:gpt-6-sol/gpt-6-luna372K → 272K with the pin cited inline; Astra and the GPT-5.6 family are unchanged (🤖 fix: reconcile GPT-5.6 Sol promotional pricing and Astra Codex context cap #4347).Dropped from earlier revisions: catalog/aliases/pricing/labels/migration/docs (landed in #4348), the
@ai-sdk/openaiBun patch (BunpatchedDependenciesnever reach npm installs of@coder/xum; #4350's runtime rewrite is the right fix), and thehasToolsplumbing throughbuildProviderOptions.Validation
Repo-pinned Bun 1.3.5, on this stacked tree (no SDK patch, so a green body assertion proves the wrapper composition).
providerModelFactory.test.ts› "clamps %s tool requests … at the model boundary" (Sol raw id, mappedteam-luna, Astra control, Responses control) and › "clamps %s tool requests through a Coder openai-compat instance" (coder:chat-proxy/team-lunamapped,coder:chat-proxy/gpt-6-solraw,team-astracontrol). Red proof: with the clamp disabled, exactly the four Sol/Luna Chat Completions cases fail (Expected "none" / Received undefined); 🤖 fix: send GPT-6 Sol/Luna reasoning effort none and repair main CI #4350's 11 wire cases are unaffected. Reverting the Coder capability argument to the raworiginModelIdfails exactly the mappedteam-lunacase.codexOAuth.test.tsasserts Astra (372K) and Sol/Luna (272K) separately.contextLimit,tokenMeterUtils,thinking,turnRequestBuilder,providerOptionssuites pass.make static-checkgreen.Risks
toolsarray, and no requested effort. Responses, tool-free requests, explicit efforts, Astra, GPT-5.6 and non-OpenAI providers are untouched.Readiness and follow-ups
gpt6-reasoning-none-followup(🤖 fix: send GPT-6 Sol/Luna reasoning effort none and repair main CI #4350); after it squash-merges this PR is rebased ontomainand retargeted.mainunblock forTest / Unit(release commit leftpackages/mux-compatat 0.29.0): 🤖 fix: version-lock mux compat package to v0.30.0 #4354 standalone, also folded into 🤖 fix: send GPT-6 Sol/Luna reasoning effort none and repair main CI #4350; whichever becomes empty is closed.Preserved review and delivery record — fifteen Codex executions including this head, one code-advisor pass
01ca053252bba9/cb5ac4b, replied and resolvedcb5ac4b64169a3, replied and resolved64169a340e4b2a6ce20ecd0, replied and resolvedbfc0906f(supersedingce20ecd0)a4c7c156, replied and resolveda4c7c156@codex review(code + security)2c4803c0(residual onmainafter #4348)@codex review(code + security)c9a0f572(stacked on #4350)@codex review(code + security)Post-cap work, retained in order:
f04892f→fcf5d0fbudget-comment accuracy;782cca6→04bad77maintainer-authorized provisional estimate;d24d776rebase integration;870259aofficial Sol launch + authorized Luna expansion;40e4b2a6verified Codex defaults, labels, route/pricing regressions, docs;ce20ecd0tool-awarenoneclamp + SDK patch;bfc0906fNix hash refresh;a4c7c156model-boundary clamp;2c4803c0residual onmain(SDK patch + clamp + Coder alias + Codex cap). Other rebase mappings:01ca053→c47ba9c,252bba9→5363ca0,cb5ac4b→a866d96,64169a3→c0d5def. The cap did not reset on rebase, handoff, scope expansion or re-scope. Backups of superseded heads:a4c7c15635f3a865baa4b937618da17459b48209,2c4803c0c9481924ad682f969542a7a6db71e9e7.Historical stop reason: implementation and validation were complete for both models, but the final head lacked review coverage under the exhausted cap. The later direct conditional merge instruction reopened delivery for one automatic final-head pair; its findings were then fixed under the user's explicit "get it merged" authorization through the normal gated merge path. When #4348 and then #4350 landed the same work first, this PR was reduced to the residual fixes above rather than closed.
Generated with
xum• Model:coder:anthropic/claude-fable-5-1• Thinking:xhigh• Cost:$174.60