llm-mock-server 1.0.4 → 1.0.6

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/logs/batch-8.log

@@ -0,0 +1,388 @@
+ATTEMPT 1/2
+$ codex exec --ephemeral -C /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server -s workspace-write -c approval_policy="never" -c model_reasoning_effort="low" -o /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/results/batch-8.raw.txt You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 8
+Batch name: Governance & Contracts
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, high_level_elegance, package_organization
+Batch rationale: architecture contracts, compatibility policy, docs-vs-runtime scope, and quality-gate coverage
+
+Files assigned:
+- README.md
+- src/types.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+9a. For package_organization, ground scoring in objective structure signals from `holistic_context.structure` (root_files fan_in/fan_out roles, directory_profiles, coupling_matrix). Prefer thresholded evidence (for example: fan_in < 5 for root stragglers, import-affinity > 60%, directories > 10 files with mixed concerns).
+9b. Suggestions must include a staged reorg plan (target folders, move order, and import-update/validation commands).
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Governance & Contracts",
+  "batch_index": 8,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}
+
+
+STDOUT:
+
+
+STDERR:
+OpenAI Codex v0.114.0 (research preview)
+--------
+workdir: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+model: gpt-5.4
+provider: openai
+approval: never
+sandbox: workspace-write [workdir, /tmp, $TMPDIR, /Users/suyash.x.srijan/.codex/memories]
+reasoning effort: low
+reasoning summaries: none
+session id: 019cf2d9-478c-7f11-85cf-d666e8b06e46
+--------
+user
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 8
+Batch name: Governance & Contracts
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, high_level_elegance, package_organization
+Batch rationale: architecture contracts, compatibility policy, docs-vs-runtime scope, and quality-gate coverage
+
+Files assigned:
+- README.md
+- src/types.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+9a. For package_organization, ground scoring in objective structure signals from `holistic_context.structure` (root_files fan_in/fan_out roles, directory_profiles, coupling_matrix). Prefer thresholded evidence (for example: fan_in < 5 for root stragglers, import-affinity > 60%, directories > 10 files with mixed concerns).
+9b. Suggestions must include a staged reorg plan (target folders, move order, and import-update/validation commands).
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Governance & Contracts",
+  "batch_index": 8,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}
+
+mcp startup: no servers
+ERROR: {"detail":"The 'gpt-5.4' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account."}
+Warning: no last agent message; wrote empty content to /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/results/batch-8.raw.txt
+
+
+
+Transient runner failure detected; retrying in 2.0s (attempt 2/2).
+
+ATTEMPT 2/2
+$ codex exec --ephemeral -C /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server -s workspace-write -c approval_policy="never" -c model_reasoning_effort="low" -o /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/results/batch-8.raw.txt You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 8
+Batch name: Governance & Contracts
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, high_level_elegance, package_organization
+Batch rationale: architecture contracts, compatibility policy, docs-vs-runtime scope, and quality-gate coverage
+
+Files assigned:
+- README.md
+- src/types.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+9a. For package_organization, ground scoring in objective structure signals from `holistic_context.structure` (root_files fan_in/fan_out roles, directory_profiles, coupling_matrix). Prefer thresholded evidence (for example: fan_in < 5 for root stragglers, import-affinity > 60%, directories > 10 files with mixed concerns).
+9b. Suggestions must include a staged reorg plan (target folders, move order, and import-update/validation commands).
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Governance & Contracts",
+  "batch_index": 8,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}
+
+
+STDOUT:
+
+
+STDERR:
+OpenAI Codex v0.114.0 (research preview)
+--------
+workdir: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+model: gpt-5.4
+provider: openai
+approval: never
+sandbox: workspace-write [workdir, /tmp, $TMPDIR, /Users/suyash.x.srijan/.codex/memories]
+reasoning effort: low
+reasoning summaries: none
+session id: 019cf2d9-5356-7551-888b-f71a967ffa34
+--------
+user
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 8
+Batch name: Governance & Contracts
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, high_level_elegance, package_organization
+Batch rationale: architecture contracts, compatibility policy, docs-vs-runtime scope, and quality-gate coverage
+
+Files assigned:
+- README.md
+- src/types.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+9a. For package_organization, ground scoring in objective structure signals from `holistic_context.structure` (root_files fan_in/fan_out roles, directory_profiles, coupling_matrix). Prefer thresholded evidence (for example: fan_in < 5 for root stragglers, import-affinity > 60%, directories > 10 files with mixed concerns).
+9b. Suggestions must include a staged reorg plan (target folders, move order, and import-update/validation commands).
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Governance & Contracts",
+  "batch_index": 8,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}
+
+mcp startup: no servers
+ERROR: {"detail":"The 'gpt-5.4' model is not supported when using Codex with a ChatGPT account."}
+Warning: no last agent message; wrote empty content to /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/results/batch-8.raw.txt
+