Generated by pr-reviewer v0.5.0
{
"coverage_gaps": [
"No separate track for broader OpenCode runtime behavior because the diff is narrowly scoped to port-file path resolution and can be held in one reviewer's head.",
"No separate track for docs/config rollout because the request is to plan review from this code diff, and the dominant risk is behavioral correctness in the adapter itself."
],
"recommended_provider_mix": "Single-provider review is enough here. Use one strong TypeScript implementation reviewer for the adapter and test seam; splitting this diff would create duplicate review with little gain.",
"risks": [
"If initialization used a fallback workspace root but shutdown requires `config.workspace.rootPath`, spawned servers may stop removing their port file in some configurations.",
"The migration is implicit: existing `.opencode/server.port` files are no longer read, so reconnect behavior after upgrade may change until a new port file is written.",
"The tests do not exercise end-to-end port-file I/O, so regressions in mkdir/write/unlink paths or stale-file handling would still slip through."
],
"summary": "This PR moves the OpenCode reconnect port file from a workspace-local `.opencode/server.port` path to sidecar state storage, with precedence `STORAGE_PATH` -> `AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT/.sidecar/state` -> `workspaceRoot/.sidecar/state`, and adds direct unit tests for that resolution. The real risk is not the helper itself; it is whether startup, stale-port cleanup, and shutdown all still resolve the same file under mixed env/config setups.",
"tracks": [
{
"evidence_targets": [
"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`",
"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup",
"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set",
"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments",
"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths"
],
"goal": "Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.",
"scope": [
"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts",
"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts"
],
"should_use_subagents": false,
"suggested_provider": "codex",
"track_id": "opencode-port-file-state-root"
}
]
}Scope: packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts, packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts
- 🟠 [medium] Shutdown skips port-file cleanup when workspace was resolved via process.cwd() fallback (
packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts:2367)At line 2367, shutdown only removes the port file when
this.config?.workspace?.rootPathis truthy. But at line 496, startup resolvesworkspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd()— so when no explicit rootPath is configured, startup writes a port file using process.cwd() as the workspace root, but shutdown never removes it because the guardthis.config?.workspace?.rootPathis falsy. This is a pre-existing bug but the relocation makes it worse: previously the stale file was.opencode/server.portinside the working directory (relatively harmless). Now it's under.sidecar/state/opencode/server.portwhich is the canonical state root, and a stale port file there will cause the next startup to attempt reconnection to a dead server, hit the health check timeout, and only then fall through to a fresh spawn — adding unnecessary latency to every cold start after an unclean shutdown.Line 496: `const workspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd();`
Line 519: const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot); — writes port file using fallback
Line 2367: if (spawnedServer && this.config?.workspace?.rootPath) — only cleans up when rootPath is explicitly set
The fix is straightforward: store the resolved workspaceRoot used at init time (e.g., as this.resolvedWorkspaceRoot) and use it at shutdown instead of re-deriving from config.
- 🟡 **[low]** No migration or cleanup of old `.opencode/server.port` files (`packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts:3461`)
> The port file moved from `<workspace>/.opencode/server.port` to `<stateRoot>/opencode/server.port`. Existing deployments that restart with the new code will leave stale `.opencode/server.port` files behind and won't find them on reconnect. This means a running server that was started with old code cannot be reconnected to after an adapter upgrade — the adapter will spawn a second server on a different port. For container deployments where the sidecar restarts frequently this is likely fine (container recreation), but for long-lived development environments it could cause port conflicts or duplicate servers.
Old path: path.join(workspaceRoot, '.opencode', 'server.port')
New path: path.join(getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot), 'opencode', 'server.port')
No code reads or removes the old location.
- 🟡 **[low]** Tests validate path construction but not the lifecycle behavior that actually regresses (`packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts:1`)
> The three test cases correctly verify the env-var precedence for path string output, which is useful as a unit test of getSidecarStateRoot. However, the behavior that can actually regress — reconnection to a running server via port file, cleanup of stale port files, and the shutdown asymmetry — is completely untested. The private method is accessed via type assertion, which is fragile but acceptable for unit tests. The real gap is that there's no test exercising: (1) write port file → read port file → get same port back, (2) shutdown actually removes the file, (3) startup with stale port file (dead server) removes it and proceeds.
All three tests follow the pattern: set env vars → call getPortFilePath() → assert string. No fs operations, no lifecycle verification.
- 🟡 **[low]** STORAGE_PATH with trailing whitespace-only value bypasses trim correctly, but empty string after trim falls through (`packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts:3448`)
> The trim() handling is correct — `process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim()` will produce an empty string for whitespace-only values, and empty string is falsy in JS, so it correctly falls through to the next check. This is fine. However, a STORAGE_PATH set to a relative path (e.g., `STORAGE_PATH=./state`) will be used as-is without resolution, producing a relative port file path that depends on process.cwd() at read time. This is an edge case but worth noting since the whole point of this change is to make the state root predictable.
Line 3448-3450: const storagePath = process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim(); if (storagePath) { return storagePath; } — no path.resolve() call
### codex — 2 findings
Scope: `packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts, packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts`
- 🟠 **[medium]** Upgrade path no longer reconnects to servers recorded in legacy `.opencode/server.port` (`packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts:519`)
> `initialize()` still does exactly one reconnect probe before deciding to spawn: it builds `portFilePath` from `getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot)` and reads only that file. This change rewires `getPortFilePath()` to `${sidecarStateRoot}/opencode/server.port`, but there is no fallback or migration from the old `path.join(workspaceRoot, ".opencode", "server.port")`. On an upgrade where an OpenCode server is already running and only the legacy file exists, the adapter will miss the live server and go down the spawn path. If `config.server.port` is pinned, that can fail with the old port still in use; otherwise it starts a second backend and abandons the original process.
const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot); const existingPort = await this.readPortFile(portFilePath); ... private getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot: string): string { return path.join(this.getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot), "opencode", "server.port"); } ... const port = config.server?.port ?? (await this.allocatePort());
- 🟡 **[low]** New tests do not exercise reconnect or cleanup behavior (`packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts:15`)
> The added tests only type-cast into the private helper and compare its returned string. They never drive `initialize()` through the reconnect probe, never create/remove a port file on disk, and never call `shutdown()`. As a result, the behavior this patch is trying to preserve can regress while these tests still pass; the missing legacy-path probe above is a concrete example.
expect(adapter.getPortFilePath("/home/agent")).toBe("/tmp/sidecar-state/opencode/server.port"); ... expect(adapter.getPortFilePath("/workspace/project")).toBe("/home/agent/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port"); ... expect(adapter.getPortFilePath("/workspace/project")).toBe("/workspace/project/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port");
## Validation (dedup + verification)
```json
{
"command": [
"claude",
"--dangerously-skip-permissions",
"-p",
"You are a principal engineer consolidating the outputs of parallel audit tracks into a final verdict. You've seen audit pipelines produce noise disguised as signal \u2014 your job is to cut through it.\n\nYou will receive findings from multiple independent audit tracks, each with their own scope and confidence levels.\n\n## How to validate\n\nRead every finding critically. A finding earns acceptance by having three things: a specific code location, a concrete failure mode, and evidence from the diff or codebase. Findings missing any of these get rejected.\n\nWhen two tracks report the same issue, keep the stronger version and reject the duplicate. When tracks contradict each other, investigate \u2014 one of them is wrong, and you need to determine which based on the evidence quality.\n\nScore the audit honestly:\n- **coverage_score** (0-100): How much of the actual risk surface did the tracks inspect? A perfect score means every changed code path was examined by at least one track. Penalize for tracks that reviewed boilerplate while missing critical paths.\n- **evidence_score** (0-100): How well-evidenced are the accepted findings? High means every finding points to specific lines with demonstrated failure modes. Low means findings rely on speculation or pattern-matching without proof.\n- **signal_score** (0-100): What's the signal-to-noise ratio across all tracks? High means most findings were worth reporting. Low means tracks padded their output with style nits or speculative concerns.\n\n## Acceptance criteria\n\nAccept a finding when:\n- It names a specific file, line, and failure mode\n- The failure mode is demonstrated, not hypothetical\n- It would change how you ship or test the code\n\nReject a finding when:\n- It's a style preference disguised as a bug\n- It says \"could potentially\" without showing how\n- It duplicates a stronger finding from another track\n- The evidence contradicts the conclusion\n- It's outside the track's assigned scope (scope creep)\n\n## LOC discipline\n\nWhen findings propose fixes or implementations, evaluate their LOC efficiency. Flag findings whose suggested fix is disproportionate to the issue \u2014 a 3-line bug shouldn't generate a 30-line refactor. Prefer findings that propose minimal, targeted changes. If a finding's fix would exceed 2x the lines of the code it references, it needs explicit justification or it should be flagged as over-engineered.\n\n## What to avoid\n\n- Accepting findings just because they sound serious \u2014 severity labels from tracks are claims, not facts\n- Rejecting findings because they're low severity \u2014 a real low-severity issue is better than a fabricated high one\n- Marking coverage gaps you can't actually identify \u2014 only flag gaps where you can name what wasn't reviewed\n\n## Output\n\nReturn JSON only, no markdown fences.\n\n```\n{\n \"status\": \"ok|error\",\n \"coverage_score\": 0,\n \"evidence_score\": 0,\n \"signal_score\": 0,\n \"accepted_findings\": [\n {\n \"severity\": \"high|medium|low\",\n \"confidence\": \"high|medium|low\",\n \"category\": \"correctness|security|regression|testing|operational\",\n \"title\": \"short, specific title\",\n \"body\": \"what's wrong and why it matters\",\n \"file\": \"path/to/file\",\n \"line\": 0,\n \"source_track\": \"which track reported this\",\n \"evidence\": \"the code or behavior demonstrating the issue\"\n }\n ],\n \"rejected_findings\": [\n {\n \"title\": \"what was reported\",\n \"source_track\": \"which track\",\n \"rejection_reason\": \"why it didn't meet the bar\"\n }\n ],\n \"coverage_gaps\": [\"specific areas of the change that no track adequately reviewed\"],\n \"recommendation\": \"ship|needs-work|needs-followup \u2014 with a one-sentence justification\"\n}\n```\n\n## Request\n\n{\n \"changed_files\": [\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\"\n ],\n \"plan\": {\n \"coverage_gaps\": [\n \"No separate track for broader OpenCode runtime behavior because the diff is narrowly scoped to port-file path resolution and can be held in one reviewer's head.\",\n \"No separate track for docs/config rollout because the request is to plan review from this code diff, and the dominant risk is behavioral correctness in the adapter itself.\"\n ],\n \"recommended_provider_mix\": \"Single-provider review is enough here. Use one strong TypeScript implementation reviewer for the adapter and test seam; splitting this diff would create duplicate review with little gain.\",\n \"risks\": [\n \"If initialization used a fallback workspace root but shutdown requires `config.workspace.rootPath`, spawned servers may stop removing their port file in some configurations.\",\n \"The migration is implicit: existing `.opencode/server.port` files are no longer read, so reconnect behavior after upgrade may change until a new port file is written.\",\n \"The tests do not exercise end-to-end port-file I/O, so regressions in mkdir/write/unlink paths or stale-file handling would still slip through.\"\n ],\n \"summary\": \"This PR moves the OpenCode reconnect port file from a workspace-local `.opencode/server.port` path to sidecar state storage, with precedence `STORAGE_PATH` -> `AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT/.sidecar/state` -> `workspaceRoot/.sidecar/state`, and adds direct unit tests for that resolution. The real risk is not the helper itself; it is whether startup, stale-port cleanup, and shutdown all still resolve the same file under mixed env/config setups.\",\n \"tracks\": [\n {\n \"evidence_targets\": [\n \"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`\",\n \"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup\",\n \"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set\",\n \"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments\",\n \"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths\"\n ],\n \"goal\": \"Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.\",\n \"scope\": [\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\"\n ],\n \"should_use_subagents\": false,\n \"suggested_provider\": \"codex\",\n \"track_id\": \"opencode-port-file-state-root\"\n }\n ]\n },\n \"pr\": 388,\n \"repo\": \"tangle-network/agent-dev-container\",\n \"track_outputs\": [\n {\n \"command\": [\n \"codex\",\n \"exec\",\n \"--full-auto\",\n \"You are a senior engineer reviewing one assigned track of a code change. You are thorough but you respect the reader's time \\u2014 every finding you report should be worth someone stopping to look at.\\n\\nYou own only your assigned track. Stay in scope. Do not report on files or concerns outside your track's scope unless you find something genuinely dangerous.\\n\\n## How to review\\n\\nRead the evidence in your track scope. Think about what could go wrong in production, what would break silently, what a test wouldn't catch. Look at error paths, edge cases, and implicit assumptions.\\n\\nUse sub-agents when it helps \\u2014 for example, to check test coverage while you're reviewing implementation logic. But don't use them just because you can.\\n\\n## What makes a good finding\\n\\nA good finding names a specific file and line, explains what's wrong, and shows evidence. \\\"This nil check on line 47 of auth.go doesn't cover the case where the token is expired but structurally valid \\u2014 the downstream handler will panic\\\" is a finding. \\\"Consider adding error handling\\\" is not.\\n\\nAsk yourself: would a staff engineer read this finding and say \\\"good catch\\\" or \\\"obvious filler\\\"? Only report the former.\\n\\n## What to avoid\\n\\n- Findings about style, naming, or formatting unless they create actual confusion\\n- \\\"Consider adding tests for X\\\" without explaining what specific behavior is untested and why it matters\\n- Speculative findings without code evidence \\u2014 if you can't point to the line, don't report it\\n- Duplicating findings that clearly belong to another track\\n\\n## Confidence\\n\\nBe honest about what you're sure about versus what you suspect. Flag uncertainty in `confidence_notes` rather than inflating finding confidence.\\n\\n## Output\\n\\nReturn JSON only, no markdown fences.\\n\\n```\\n{\\n \\\"status\\\": \\\"ok|error\\\",\\n \\\"track_id\\\": \\\"from the assigned track\\\",\\n \\\"summary\\\": \\\"what you found, in one paragraph\\\",\\n \\\"findings\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"severity\\\": \\\"high|medium|low\\\",\\n \\\"confidence\\\": \\\"high|medium|low\\\",\\n \\\"category\\\": \\\"correctness|security|regression|testing|operational\\\",\\n \\\"title\\\": \\\"short, specific title\\\",\\n \\\"body\\\": \\\"what's wrong, why it matters, what evidence you found\\\",\\n \\\"file\\\": \\\"path/to/file\\\",\\n \\\"line\\\": 0,\\n \\\"evidence\\\": \\\"the actual code or behavior that demonstrates the issue\\\"\\n }\\n ],\\n \\\"questions\\\": [\\\"things you want to ask the author \\u2014 genuine questions, not passive-aggressive suggestions\\\"],\\n \\\"confidence_notes\\\": [\\\"where you're uncertain and why\\\"]\\n}\\n```\\n\\n## Request\\n\\n{\\n \\\"changed_files\\\": [\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\\",\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"pr\\\": 388,\\n \\\"repo\\\": \\\"tangle-network/agent-dev-container\\\",\\n \\\"track\\\": {\\n \\\"evidence_targets\\\": [\\n \\\"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`\\\",\\n \\\"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup\\\",\\n \\\"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set\\\",\\n \\\"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments\\\",\\n \\\"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"goal\\\": \\\"Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.\\\",\\n \\\"scope\\\": [\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\\",\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"should_use_subagents\\\": false,\\n \\\"suggested_provider\\\": \\\"codex\\\",\\n \\\"track_id\\\": \\\"opencode-port-file-state-root\\\"\\n }\\n}\\n\\n## Diff\\n\\ndiff --git a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\nindex 9e281f7..8790396 100644\\n--- a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\n+++ b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\n@@ -3444,8 +3444,26 @@ export class OpencodeProviderAdapter implements SdkProviderAdapter {\\n * The port file allows the adapter to reconnect to an existing server\\n * after restarts, making initialization idempotent.\\n */\\n+ private getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot: string): string {\\n+ const storagePath = process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim();\\n+ if (storagePath) {\\n+ return storagePath;\\n+ }\\n+\\n+ const agentWorkspaceRoot = process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT?.trim();\\n+ if (agentWorkspaceRoot) {\\n+ return path.join(agentWorkspaceRoot, \\\".sidecar\\\", \\\"state\\\");\\n+ }\\n+\\n+ return path.join(workspaceRoot, \\\".sidecar\\\", \\\"state\\\");\\n+ }\\n+\\n private getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot: string): string {\\n- return path.join(workspaceRoot, \\\".opencode\\\", \\\"server.port\\\");\\n+ return path.join(\\n+ this.getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot),\\n+ \\\"opencode\\\",\\n+ \\\"server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n }\\n \\n /**\\ndiff --git a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\nnew file mode 100644\\nindex 0000000..24b6f4d\\n--- /dev/null\\n+++ b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\n@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@\\n+import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it } from \\\"vitest\\\";\\n+import { OpencodeProviderAdapter } from \\\"../src/adapter.js\\\";\\n+\\n+describe(\\\"OpencodeProviderAdapter state paths\\\", () => {\\n+ const originalEnv = { ...process.env };\\n+\\n+ beforeEach(() => {\\n+ process.env = { ...originalEnv };\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ afterEach(() => {\\n+ process.env = { ...originalEnv };\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"stores reconnect metadata under STORAGE_PATH when configured\\\", () => {\\n+ process.env.STORAGE_PATH = \\\"/tmp/sidecar-state\\\";\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/home/agent\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/tmp/sidecar-state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"falls back to AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT sidecar state when STORAGE_PATH is unset\\\", () => {\\n+ delete process.env.STORAGE_PATH;\\n+ process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT = \\\"/home/agent\\\";\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/home/agent/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"falls back to workspace-local sidecar state when no env overrides exist\\\", () => {\\n+ delete process.env.STORAGE_PATH;\\n+ delete process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT;\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/workspace/project/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+});\\n\"\n ],\n \"error\": null,\n \"provider\": \"codex\",\n \"result\": {\n \"confidence_notes\": [\n \"I could not execute the Vitest suite in this checkout because dependencies are not installed (`vitest: not found`).\",\n \"The startup/shutdown asymmetry around `config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` versus cleanup only when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set appears to predate this diff, so I did not count it as a regression introduced by this patch.\"\n ],\n \"findings\": [\n {\n \"body\": \"`initialize()` still does exactly one reconnect probe before deciding to spawn: it builds `portFilePath` from `getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot)` and reads only that file. This change rewires `getPortFilePath()` to `${sidecarStateRoot}/opencode/server.port`, but there is no fallback or migration from the old `path.join(workspaceRoot, \\\".opencode\\\", \\\"server.port\\\")`. On an upgrade where an OpenCode server is already running and only the legacy file exists, the adapter will miss the live server and go down the spawn path. If `config.server.port` is pinned, that can fail with the old port still in use; otherwise it starts a second backend and abandons the original process.\",\n \"category\": \"regression\",\n \"confidence\": \"high\",\n \"evidence\": \"const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot);\\nconst existingPort = await this.readPortFile(portFilePath);\\n...\\nprivate getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot: string): string {\\n return path.join(this.getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot), \\\"opencode\\\", \\\"server.port\\\");\\n}\\n...\\nconst port = config.server?.port ?? (await this.allocatePort());\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"line\": 519,\n \"severity\": \"medium\",\n \"title\": \"Upgrade path no longer reconnects to servers recorded in legacy `.opencode/server.port`\"\n },\n {\n \"body\": \"The added tests only type-cast into the private helper and compare its returned string. They never drive `initialize()` through the reconnect probe, never create/remove a port file on disk, and never call `shutdown()`. As a result, the behavior this patch is trying to preserve can regress while these tests still pass; the missing legacy-path probe above is a concrete example.\",\n \"category\": \"testing\",\n \"confidence\": \"high\",\n \"evidence\": \"expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/home/agent\\\")).toBe(\\\"/tmp/sidecar-state/opencode/server.port\\\");\\n...\\nexpect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\\"/home/agent/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\");\\n...\\nexpect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\\"/workspace/project/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\");\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\",\n \"line\": 15,\n \"severity\": \"low\",\n \"title\": \"New tests do not exercise reconnect or cleanup behavior\"\n }\n ],\n \"questions\": [\n \"Is upgrade compatibility with existing `.opencode/server.port` files intentionally unsupported, or should `initialize()` probe/migrate the legacy location once before spawning?\"\n ],\n \"status\": \"ok\",\n \"summary\": \"I found one functional regression and one test-quality gap in this track. Moving the port file under sidecar state changes the reconnect lookup path, but the adapter does not probe or migrate the legacy `.opencode/server.port` location, so upgraded deployments can miss an already-running OpenCode server and spawn a duplicate or fail on a fixed port. The new tests only assert the private path helper\\u2019s return value, so they would not catch that lifecycle regression or any cleanup-path breakage.\",\n \"track_id\": \"opencode-port-file-state-root\"\n },\n \"status\": \"ok\",\n \"track\": {\n \"evidence_targets\": [\n \"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`\",\n \"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup\",\n \"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set\",\n \"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments\",\n \"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths\"\n ],\n \"goal\": \"Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.\",\n \"scope\": [\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\"\n ],\n \"should_use_subagents\": false,\n \"suggested_provider\": \"codex\",\n \"track_id\": \"opencode-port-file-state-root\"\n }\n },\n {\n \"command\": [\n \"claude\",\n \"--dangerously-skip-permissions\",\n \"-p\",\n \"You are a senior engineer reviewing one assigned track of a code change. You are thorough but you respect the reader's time \\u2014 every finding you report should be worth someone stopping to look at.\\n\\nYou own only your assigned track. Stay in scope. Do not report on files or concerns outside your track's scope unless you find something genuinely dangerous.\\n\\n## How to review\\n\\nRead the evidence in your track scope. Think about what could go wrong in production, what would break silently, what a test wouldn't catch. Look at error paths, edge cases, and implicit assumptions.\\n\\nUse sub-agents when it helps \\u2014 for example, to check test coverage while you're reviewing implementation logic. But don't use them just because you can.\\n\\n## What makes a good finding\\n\\nA good finding names a specific file and line, explains what's wrong, and shows evidence. \\\"This nil check on line 47 of auth.go doesn't cover the case where the token is expired but structurally valid \\u2014 the downstream handler will panic\\\" is a finding. \\\"Consider adding error handling\\\" is not.\\n\\nAsk yourself: would a staff engineer read this finding and say \\\"good catch\\\" or \\\"obvious filler\\\"? Only report the former.\\n\\n## What to avoid\\n\\n- Findings about style, naming, or formatting unless they create actual confusion\\n- \\\"Consider adding tests for X\\\" without explaining what specific behavior is untested and why it matters\\n- Speculative findings without code evidence \\u2014 if you can't point to the line, don't report it\\n- Duplicating findings that clearly belong to another track\\n\\n## Confidence\\n\\nBe honest about what you're sure about versus what you suspect. Flag uncertainty in `confidence_notes` rather than inflating finding confidence.\\n\\n## Output\\n\\nReturn JSON only, no markdown fences.\\n\\n```\\n{\\n \\\"status\\\": \\\"ok|error\\\",\\n \\\"track_id\\\": \\\"from the assigned track\\\",\\n \\\"summary\\\": \\\"what you found, in one paragraph\\\",\\n \\\"findings\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"severity\\\": \\\"high|medium|low\\\",\\n \\\"confidence\\\": \\\"high|medium|low\\\",\\n \\\"category\\\": \\\"correctness|security|regression|testing|operational\\\",\\n \\\"title\\\": \\\"short, specific title\\\",\\n \\\"body\\\": \\\"what's wrong, why it matters, what evidence you found\\\",\\n \\\"file\\\": \\\"path/to/file\\\",\\n \\\"line\\\": 0,\\n \\\"evidence\\\": \\\"the actual code or behavior that demonstrates the issue\\\"\\n }\\n ],\\n \\\"questions\\\": [\\\"things you want to ask the author \\u2014 genuine questions, not passive-aggressive suggestions\\\"],\\n \\\"confidence_notes\\\": [\\\"where you're uncertain and why\\\"]\\n}\\n```\\n\\n## Request\\n\\n{\\n \\\"changed_files\\\": [\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\\",\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"pr\\\": 388,\\n \\\"repo\\\": \\\"tangle-network/agent-dev-container\\\",\\n \\\"track\\\": {\\n \\\"evidence_targets\\\": [\\n \\\"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`\\\",\\n \\\"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup\\\",\\n \\\"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set\\\",\\n \\\"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments\\\",\\n \\\"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"goal\\\": \\\"Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.\\\",\\n \\\"scope\\\": [\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\\",\\n \\\"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\\"\\n ],\\n \\\"should_use_subagents\\\": false,\\n \\\"suggested_provider\\\": \\\"codex\\\",\\n \\\"track_id\\\": \\\"opencode-port-file-state-root\\\"\\n }\\n}\\n\\n## Diff\\n\\ndiff --git a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\nindex 9e281f7..8790396 100644\\n--- a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\n+++ b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\\n@@ -3444,8 +3444,26 @@ export class OpencodeProviderAdapter implements SdkProviderAdapter {\\n * The port file allows the adapter to reconnect to an existing server\\n * after restarts, making initialization idempotent.\\n */\\n+ private getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot: string): string {\\n+ const storagePath = process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim();\\n+ if (storagePath) {\\n+ return storagePath;\\n+ }\\n+\\n+ const agentWorkspaceRoot = process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT?.trim();\\n+ if (agentWorkspaceRoot) {\\n+ return path.join(agentWorkspaceRoot, \\\".sidecar\\\", \\\"state\\\");\\n+ }\\n+\\n+ return path.join(workspaceRoot, \\\".sidecar\\\", \\\"state\\\");\\n+ }\\n+\\n private getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot: string): string {\\n- return path.join(workspaceRoot, \\\".opencode\\\", \\\"server.port\\\");\\n+ return path.join(\\n+ this.getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot),\\n+ \\\"opencode\\\",\\n+ \\\"server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n }\\n \\n /**\\ndiff --git a/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\nnew file mode 100644\\nindex 0000000..24b6f4d\\n--- /dev/null\\n+++ b/packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\\n@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@\\n+import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it } from \\\"vitest\\\";\\n+import { OpencodeProviderAdapter } from \\\"../src/adapter.js\\\";\\n+\\n+describe(\\\"OpencodeProviderAdapter state paths\\\", () => {\\n+ const originalEnv = { ...process.env };\\n+\\n+ beforeEach(() => {\\n+ process.env = { ...originalEnv };\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ afterEach(() => {\\n+ process.env = { ...originalEnv };\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"stores reconnect metadata under STORAGE_PATH when configured\\\", () => {\\n+ process.env.STORAGE_PATH = \\\"/tmp/sidecar-state\\\";\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/home/agent\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/tmp/sidecar-state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"falls back to AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT sidecar state when STORAGE_PATH is unset\\\", () => {\\n+ delete process.env.STORAGE_PATH;\\n+ process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT = \\\"/home/agent\\\";\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/home/agent/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+\\n+ it(\\\"falls back to workspace-local sidecar state when no env overrides exist\\\", () => {\\n+ delete process.env.STORAGE_PATH;\\n+ delete process.env.AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT;\\n+ const adapter = new OpencodeProviderAdapter() as OpencodeProviderAdapter & {\\n+ getPortFilePath: (workspaceRoot: string) => string;\\n+ };\\n+\\n+ expect(adapter.getPortFilePath(\\\"/workspace/project\\\")).toBe(\\n+ \\\"/workspace/project/.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port\\\",\\n+ );\\n+ });\\n+});\\n\"\n ],\n \"error\": null,\n \"provider\": \"claude\",\n \"result\": {\n \"confidence_notes\": [\n \"The shutdown asymmetry finding is high confidence \\u2014 I traced both paths and the guard condition clearly excludes the process.cwd() fallback case.\",\n \"The migration concern is medium confidence \\u2014 I don't have full visibility into the deployment model. If containers are always recreated on upgrade, stale old-path files are a non-issue.\",\n \"The relative STORAGE_PATH concern is low-impact speculation \\u2014 in practice STORAGE_PATH is likely always absolute in container environments.\"\n ],\n \"findings\": [\n {\n \"body\": \"At line 2367, shutdown only removes the port file when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is truthy. But at line 496, startup resolves `workspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd()` \\u2014 so when no explicit rootPath is configured, startup writes a port file using process.cwd() as the workspace root, but shutdown never removes it because the guard `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is falsy. This is a pre-existing bug but the relocation makes it worse: previously the stale file was `.opencode/server.port` inside the working directory (relatively harmless). Now it's under `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` which is the canonical state root, and a stale port file there will cause the next startup to attempt reconnection to a dead server, hit the health check timeout, and only then fall through to a fresh spawn \\u2014 adding unnecessary latency to every cold start after an unclean shutdown.\",\n \"category\": \"correctness\",\n \"confidence\": \"high\",\n \"evidence\": \"Line 496: `const workspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd();`\\nLine 519: `const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot);` \\u2014 writes port file using fallback\\nLine 2367: `if (spawnedServer && this.config?.workspace?.rootPath)` \\u2014 only cleans up when rootPath is explicitly set\\n\\nThe fix is straightforward: store the resolved workspaceRoot used at init time (e.g., as `this.resolvedWorkspaceRoot`) and use it at shutdown instead of re-deriving from config.\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"line\": 2367,\n \"severity\": \"medium\",\n \"title\": \"Shutdown skips port-file cleanup when workspace was resolved via process.cwd() fallback\"\n },\n {\n \"body\": \"The port file moved from `<workspace>/.opencode/server.port` to `<stateRoot>/opencode/server.port`. Existing deployments that restart with the new code will leave stale `.opencode/server.port` files behind and won't find them on reconnect. This means a running server that was started with old code cannot be reconnected to after an adapter upgrade \\u2014 the adapter will spawn a second server on a different port. For container deployments where the sidecar restarts frequently this is likely fine (container recreation), but for long-lived development environments it could cause port conflicts or duplicate servers.\",\n \"category\": \"correctness\",\n \"confidence\": \"medium\",\n \"evidence\": \"Old path: `path.join(workspaceRoot, '.opencode', 'server.port')`\\nNew path: `path.join(getSidecarStateRoot(workspaceRoot), 'opencode', 'server.port')`\\nNo code reads or removes the old location.\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"line\": 3461,\n \"severity\": \"low\",\n \"title\": \"No migration or cleanup of old `.opencode/server.port` files\"\n },\n {\n \"body\": \"The three test cases correctly verify the env-var precedence for path string output, which is useful as a unit test of getSidecarStateRoot. However, the behavior that can actually regress \\u2014 reconnection to a running server via port file, cleanup of stale port files, and the shutdown asymmetry \\u2014 is completely untested. The private method is accessed via type assertion, which is fragile but acceptable for unit tests. The real gap is that there's no test exercising: (1) write port file \\u2192 read port file \\u2192 get same port back, (2) shutdown actually removes the file, (3) startup with stale port file (dead server) removes it and proceeds.\",\n \"category\": \"testing\",\n \"confidence\": \"medium\",\n \"evidence\": \"All three tests follow the pattern: set env vars \\u2192 call getPortFilePath() \\u2192 assert string. No fs operations, no lifecycle verification.\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\",\n \"line\": 1,\n \"severity\": \"low\",\n \"title\": \"Tests validate path construction but not the lifecycle behavior that actually regresses\"\n },\n {\n \"body\": \"The trim() handling is correct \\u2014 `process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim()` will produce an empty string for whitespace-only values, and empty string is falsy in JS, so it correctly falls through to the next check. This is fine. However, a STORAGE_PATH set to a relative path (e.g., `STORAGE_PATH=./state`) will be used as-is without resolution, producing a relative port file path that depends on process.cwd() at read time. This is an edge case but worth noting since the whole point of this change is to make the state root predictable.\",\n \"category\": \"correctness\",\n \"confidence\": \"high\",\n \"evidence\": \"Line 3448-3450: `const storagePath = process.env.STORAGE_PATH?.trim(); if (storagePath) { return storagePath; }` \\u2014 no path.resolve() call\",\n \"file\": \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"line\": 3448,\n \"severity\": \"low\",\n \"title\": \"STORAGE_PATH with trailing whitespace-only value bypasses trim correctly, but empty string after trim falls through\"\n }\n ],\n \"questions\": [\n \"Is there an intentional reason shutdown guards on `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` rather than storing the resolved workspace root at init time? The asymmetry looks like a pre-existing oversight that this PR inherits.\",\n \"Are there any existing deployments where a long-lived sidecar process might upgrade in-place (not container recreation)? If so, the missing old-path cleanup could cause a duplicate server spawn.\"\n ],\n \"status\": \"ok\",\n \"summary\": \"The port-file relocation logic in getSidecarStateRoot() is clean and the path precedence (STORAGE_PATH > AGENT_WORKSPACE_ROOT > workspaceRoot) is correct. However, there is a pre-existing but now-worsened asymmetry in shutdown cleanup: startup resolves workspaceRoot via `config.workspace?.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` but shutdown only cleans up the port file when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set, meaning port files are orphaned when the fallback path (process.cwd()) was used. The new getSidecarStateRoot() adds env-var-based path resolution that makes this asymmetry more consequential \\u2014 shutdown could now resolve to a different state root than startup if env vars change between init and shutdown (unlikely but possible). The tests only validate path string construction, not actual file I/O or lifecycle behavior.\",\n \"track_id\": \"opencode-port-file-state-root\"\n },\n \"status\": \"ok\",\n \"track\": {\n \"evidence_targets\": [\n \"Path precedence and trimming in `getSidecarStateRoot()`\",\n \"All `getPortFilePath()` call sites: initial reconnect probe, stale port-file deletion, spawned-server shutdown cleanup\",\n \"Mismatch risk between startup using `workspaceRoot = config.workspace.rootPath ?? process.cwd()` and shutdown only cleaning up when `this.config?.workspace?.rootPath` is set\",\n \"Whether moving from `.opencode/server.port` to `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port` leaves old stale files or breaks reconnection for existing deployments\",\n \"Test coverage quality: current tests only assert the private helper path string, not read/write/remove behavior or lifecycle paths\"\n ],\n \"goal\": \"Verify that relocating the port file preserves reconnect and cleanup behavior across all supported state-root configurations, and that the tests cover the behavior that can actually regress.\",\n \"scope\": [\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts\",\n \"packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts\"\n ],\n \"should_use_subagents\": false,\n \"suggested_provider\": \"codex\",\n \"track_id\": \"opencode-port-file-state-root\"\n }\n }\n ]\n}"
],
"result": {
"accepted_findings": [
{
"body": "At line 496, startup resolves `workspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd()` and writes the port file using that path. At line 2367, shutdown guards cleanup with `if (spawnedServer && this.config?.workspace?.rootPath)` \u2014 so when rootPath was never explicitly set (process.cwd() fallback), the port file is orphaned. This is pre-existing but worsened by this PR: the stale file is now under `.sidecar/state/opencode/server.port`, which is the canonical state root, so the next cold start will attempt reconnection to a dead server, hit the health check timeout, and only then fall through to spawn \u2014 adding unnecessary latency. Fix: store the resolved workspaceRoot at init time (e.g., `this.resolvedWorkspaceRoot`) and use it at shutdown.",
"category": "correctness",
"confidence": "high",
"evidence": "Line 496: `const workspaceRoot = configWorkspacePath ?? process.cwd();`\nLine 519: `const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot);` \u2014 writes port file\nLine 2367: `if (spawnedServer && this.config?.workspace?.rootPath)` \u2014 only cleans up when rootPath explicitly set",
"file": "packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts",
"line": 2367,
"severity": "medium",
"source_track": "claude",
"title": "Shutdown skips port-file cleanup when workspace was resolved via process.cwd() fallback"
},
{
"body": "The port file moved from `<workspace>/.opencode/server.port` to `<stateRoot>/opencode/server.port` with no fallback probe of the old location. On an upgrade where an OpenCode server is already running and only the legacy file exists, the adapter will miss the live server and spawn a new one. If `config.server.port` is pinned, spawn fails on the occupied port; otherwise a second backend is started and the original process is orphaned. The fix is a one-time probe of the legacy path in `initialize()` before falling through to spawn.",
"category": "regression",
"confidence": "high",
"evidence": "Line 519: `const portFilePath = this.getPortFilePath(workspaceRoot);` reads only the new path.\nOld path `path.join(workspaceRoot, '.opencode', 'server.port')` is never checked.\nNo migration or cleanup of old-location files.",
"file": "packages/sdk-provider-opencode/src/adapter.ts",
"line": 519,
"severity": "medium",
"source_track": "codex",
"title": "Upgrade path no longer reconnects to servers recorded in legacy `.opencode/server.port`"
},
{
"body": "All three tests call `getPortFilePath()` via type assertion and compare the returned string. No test exercises: (1) write port file then read port file returns the same port, (2) shutdown removes the file, (3) startup with a stale port file (dead server) removes it and proceeds. Both accepted correctness findings above would pass these tests while silently regressing in production.",
"category": "testing",
"confidence": "high",
"evidence": "All three tests follow: set env vars \u2192 call getPortFilePath() \u2192 assert string. No fs operations, no lifecycle verification.",
"file": "packages/sdk-provider-opencode/tests/adapter-state-paths.test.ts",
"line": 15,
"severity": "low",
"source_track": "codex+claude",
"title": "Tests validate path construction but not the lifecycle behavior that can regress"
}
],
"coverage_gaps": [
"Neither track verified whether `writePortFile` and `removePortFile` helper methods correctly use `fs.mkdir` with `recursive: true` for the new deeper directory structure (`<stateRoot>/opencode/server.port` vs the old single-level `.opencode/server.port`)"
],
"coverage_score": 82,
"evidence_score": 88,
"recommendation": "needs-followup \u2014 The path resolution logic is correct and well-tested for its narrow scope, but the shutdown cleanup asymmetry (pre-existing, now worse) and missing legacy-path migration probe should be addressed before this silently degrades cold-start latency or orphans servers on upgrade.",
"rejected_findings": [
{
"rejection_reason": "Speculative edge case. STORAGE_PATH is set by the container orchestrator and is always absolute in practice. The finding's own confidence_notes acknowledge this ('low-impact speculation'). No demonstrated failure mode in any real configuration.",
"source_track": "claude",
"title": "STORAGE_PATH with relative path is used as-is without resolution"
},
{
"rejection_reason": "Duplicate of the same testing finding from the claude track. Merged into the accepted version which includes more specific detail about what's missing.",
"source_track": "codex",
"title": "New tests do not exercise reconnect or cleanup behavior (codex duplicate)"
},
{
"rejection_reason": "Duplicate of the codex upgrade-path finding, which is stronger (medium severity with high confidence vs low/medium). Codex version accepted instead.",
"source_track": "claude",
"title": "No migration or cleanup of old `.opencode/server.port` files (claude duplicate)"
}
],
"signal_score": 75,
"status": "ok"
}
}