Skip to content

fix(core): preserve routing rejection explanations #1

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
robinbraemer wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix(core): preserve routing rejection explanations #1

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
73d3408
fix(core): preserve ineligible routing diagnostics
robinbraemer Jul 30, 2026
3c26867
no-mistakes(document): Documented rejection diagnostics; focused lint…
Jul 30, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions docs/architecture.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -179,6 +179,11 @@ reservations, then opaque account ID.

Anonymous traffic is balanced but never assigned using inferred identity.

When no candidate is eligible, the portable core returns a typed `NoEligibleAccountsError` carrying
the complete `CandidateExplanation` array produced during selection, including each opaque account
ID and its rejection reason. AgentOS and other consumers should render those explanations rather
than reimplementing eligibility policy.

## Generation-safe credential lifecycle

Every subscription credential has a monotonically increasing router generation.
Expand Down
32 changes: 28 additions & 4 deletions packages/core/test/selection.test.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -228,16 +228,40 @@ describe("selectAccount", () => {
Effect.gen(function* () {
const failure = yield* Effect.flip(
selectAccount({
candidates: [candidate("unknown", { usage: false })],
candidates: [
candidate("reauth", { requiresReauthentication: true }),
candidate("blocked", {
block: AccountBlock.make({
kind: "quota",
retryAt: now + hour
})
}),
candidate("unknown", { usage: false }),
candidate("short-exhausted", { shortUsed: 91 }),
candidate("weekly-exhausted", { weeklyUsed: 98 }),
candidate("too-old", { observedAt: now - day - 1 }),
candidate("expired-reset", { weeklyResetAt: now })
],
config: defaultRoutingConfig,
now
})
)

expect(failure).toBeInstanceOf(NoEligibleAccountsError)
expect(failure.explanations).toHaveLength(1)
expect(failure.explanations[0]?.accountId).toBe("unknown")
expect(failure.explanations[0]?.rejection.valueOrUndefined).toBe("usage_unknown")
expect(
failure.explanations.map((explanation) => [
explanation.accountId,
Option.getOrUndefined(explanation.rejection)
])
).toEqual([
[AccountId.make("reauth"), "reauthentication_required"],
[AccountId.make("blocked"), "active_block"],
[AccountId.make("unknown"), "usage_unknown"],
[AccountId.make("short-exhausted"), "short_headroom"],
[AccountId.make("weekly-exhausted"), "weekly_headroom"],
[AccountId.make("too-old"), "usage_too_old"],
[AccountId.make("expired-reset"), "weekly_reset_elapsed"]
])
})
)
})