Skip to content

Paw Patrol WorkerRun en-019e056c-0256-7653-a387-25114d67ad95 - #236

Closed
rita-aga wants to merge 1 commit into
codex/paw-patrol-worker-reportingfrom
codex/paw-patrol-e6ddd98d
Closed

Paw Patrol WorkerRun en-019e056c-0256-7653-a387-25114d67ad95#236
rita-aga wants to merge 1 commit into
codex/paw-patrol-worker-reportingfrom
codex/paw-patrol-e6ddd98d

Conversation

@rita-aga

@rita-aga rita-aga commented May 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Created automatically by paw-codex-worker.

WorkerRun: en-019e056c-0256-7653-a387-25114d67ad95
Worker: mac-mini-codex-prod
Base branch: codex/paw-patrol-worker-reporting
Head branch: codex/paw-patrol-e6ddd98d
Worktree: /Users/openclaw/Development/temperpaw-worktrees/codex-paw-patrol-e6ddd98d

Task:
You are the local Codex implementer for TemperPaw paw-patrol.

WorkRequest or legacy PatrolRequest: en-019e056b-f5a9-7621-ba69-df33e6ddd98d
FactoryCase: en-019e056c-00c7-7601-a9f8-05aaf04e3639
WorkCycle: wc-019e056c-0189-7af3-ab94-68e854ce809f
Summary: codex-live-unhappy-path-proof: Live Paw Patrol unhappy-path proof. Scope is proof-only: create or update exactly one file, .proofs/mac-mini-review-rewo...

Request:
Live Paw Patrol unhappy-path proof. Scope is proof-only: create or update exactly one file, .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md, and do not edit source code, specs, config, lockfiles, or deployment/channel/Discord files.

This proof intentionally exercises reviewer-requested rework:

  1. On the first implementation pass, create .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md with a short visual Mermaid diagram and include the exact marker REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: needs_changes. Do not include REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: fulfilled on the first pass.
  2. The independent reviewer must request changes while that marker is still needs_changes.
  3. When this same WorkCycle is re-run with reviewer feedback, update the same file on the same branch/PR to replace the marker with REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: fulfilled and add a line saying the reviewer-requested rework was fulfilled.
  4. The final proof should mention the WorkCycle, WorkerRun, ReviewRun, EvaluationRun, and PR if available.
  5. Run only lightweight verification that is appropriate for a Markdown-only proof change, and report it.

Required loop:

  1. Work in the assigned git worktree and branch.
  2. Follow red-green TDD before implementation.
  3. Keep orchestration Temper-native: entity specs, WASM integrations, and Cedar policies.
  4. Run focused tests and relevant live/E2E verification for touched behavior.
  5. Produce a visual ProofPacket with changed-files map, state diagram, tests, E2E evidence, risk notes, and OData links.
  6. Finish normally. The paw-codex-worker will report WorkerRun.ReportDone or WorkerRun.ReportFailed to Temper after the local Codex process exits.

Codex change evidence:

?? .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md
(no unstaged diff stat)

After this PR is reported to Temper, Patrol should run independent ReviewRun and EvaluationRun gates before human merge review.

Created automatically by paw-codex-worker.

WorkerRun: `en-019e056c-0256-7653-a387-25114d67ad95`
Worker: `mac-mini-codex-prod`
Base branch: `codex/paw-patrol-worker-reporting`
Head branch: `codex/paw-patrol-e6ddd98d`
Worktree: `/Users/openclaw/Development/temperpaw-worktrees/codex-paw-patrol-e6ddd98d`

Task:
You are the local Codex implementer for TemperPaw paw-patrol.

WorkRequest or legacy PatrolRequest: en-019e056b-f5a9-7621-ba69-df33e6ddd98d
FactoryCase: en-019e056c-00c7-7601-a9f8-05aaf04e3639
WorkCycle: wc-019e056c-0189-7af3-ab94-68e854ce809f
Summary: codex-live-unhappy-path-proof: Live Paw Patrol unhappy-path proof. Scope is proof-only: create or update exactly one file, .proofs/mac-mini-review-rewo...

Request:
Live Paw Patrol unhappy-path proof. Scope is proof-only: create or update exactly one file, .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md, and do not edit source code, specs, config, lockfiles, or deployment/channel/Discord files.

This proof intentionally exercises reviewer-requested rework:
1. On the first implementation pass, create .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md with a short visual Mermaid diagram and include the exact marker REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: needs_changes. Do not include REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: fulfilled on the first pass.
2. The independent reviewer must request changes while that marker is still needs_changes.
3. When this same WorkCycle is re-run with reviewer feedback, update the same file on the same branch/PR to replace the marker with REVIEW_REWORK_STATUS: fulfilled and add a line saying the reviewer-requested rework was fulfilled.
4. The final proof should mention the WorkCycle, WorkerRun, ReviewRun, EvaluationRun, and PR if available.
5. Run only lightweight verification that is appropriate for a Markdown-only proof change, and report it.

Required loop:
1. Work in the assigned git worktree and branch.
2. Follow red-green TDD before implementation.
3. Keep orchestration Temper-native: entity specs, WASM integrations, and Cedar policies.
4. Run focused tests and relevant live/E2E verification for touched behavior.
5. Produce a visual ProofPacket with changed-files map, state diagram, tests, E2E evidence, risk notes, and OData links.
6. Finish normally. The paw-codex-worker will report WorkerRun.ReportDone or WorkerRun.ReportFailed to Temper after the local Codex process exits.

Codex change evidence:
```git-status
?? .proofs/mac-mini-review-rework-20260508T023021Z.md
```

```git-diff-stat
(no unstaged diff stat)
```

After this PR is reported to Temper, Patrol should run independent ReviewRun and EvaluationRun gates before human merge review.
@rita-aga

rita-aga commented May 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Superseded by the completed live review-rework proof in #238 and the implementation PR #229. Closing to keep the PR list clean.

@rita-aga rita-aga closed this May 8, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant