Merge master into codex/jsonl-storage-identity

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.md: 03c14cd780832fa03977dade2c7d14feb0399369
+2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.zh.md: 45047cc5bcb8b74668702302077ff91fd3ff6bdc

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+# Agent Note: Keep the Code Mode result card complete
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+The outer `run_code` tool persisted complete rendered content, but its editor presenter ignored that content and rebuilt the card body from a logs-only `presentationMeta` projection. A result-only run appeared correct because an empty presenter body let ACP and TUI fall back to `tool/result.content`. Once the program emitted a log, the presenter supplied non-empty content, that fallback stopped, and the returned value disappeared from the completed card. A spill policy's final head/tail preview was vulnerable to the same split ownership whenever captured logs made the stale projection non-empty.
+
+Nested Code calls never owned cards, so producing metadata for the outer call solely to reconstruct one incomplete card also obscured the intended one-card boundary.
+
+## Decision
+
+The canonical tool registry pipeline owns the final model-facing outer content. On success, the `run_code` output renderer renders captured logs followed by the return value or the explicit no-output marker. Runtime failures and pre-execution policy denials are normalized into error content by `ToolRegistry` without invoking that renderer. A post-execute block runs after successful rendering and replaces the result with error content; other post-execute policy and spill decisions may replace content before persistence.
+
+`run_code` omits `presentResult`. The established generic result fallback keeps the pending program title and renders the raw final `tool/result.content`; that durable, replayable, post-policy projection is the card's only result-content source. The host API proxy therefore omits a separate result view instead of serializing the same content in both `event.data.content` and `view.view.content`. The redundant logs-only `presentationMeta` projection remains removed.
+
+Nested dispatch remains unchanged. Calls marked by `exec.parent` emit bounded `tool/code-dispatch` diagnostics but no `tool/call` or `tool/result` surface cards, so one outer `run_code` invocation still produces exactly one card.
+
+## Testing
+
+Tool unit coverage drives logs-only, result-only, logs-plus-result, no-output, spilled-result, and failure outcomes through the canonical registry, then pins the durable content and absence of a result presenter. A host-mux regression uses a call-only presenter to prove the result frame carries raw content exactly once and no view. These cases prove stale metadata cannot replace final content without making the host duplicate that content.
+
+The keyless ACP and TUI Code Mode snapshots execute one outer program that performs two nested bash calls, logs `captured output`, and returns `CODE_ONE+CODE_TWO`. Both surfaces show one completed outer card containing both lines and no nested cards.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**Append the return value to logs metadata.** Rejected because metadata would duplicate the renderer, need a second stable formatting contract for every JSON root, and still miss post-policy content replacement or spill previews.
+
+**Merge presenter metadata with `result.content`.** Rejected because the rendered content already contains the logs; merging would duplicate them and require brittle deduplication.
+
+**Forward `result.content` through a generic result presenter.** Rejected because the durable event already carries that content and ACP/TUI already have a generic raw-content fallback. The host mux serializes a tool-owned result view beside the event, so forwarding would duplicate the rendered content in one frame merely to recreate the fallback; the default worker alone admits a 64 MiB variable-payload budget before rendering.
+
+**Create one card per nested dispatch.** Rejected because intermediate values are intentionally execution-local and never model-facing. Multiple cards would expose an implementation trace instead of the single Code Mode operation the model and user invoked.
+
+## Consequences
+
+ACP and TUI display the same complete content the model receives and replay persists, including post-policy spill previews, through their generic result fallback. The host API retains the pending program title without duplicating the raw result in a separate view payload. New `run_code` results no longer carry the optional logs metadata, but this requires no session-format bump: existing records remain valid because presentation reads their durable rendered content.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+# Agent Note: 保证 Code Mode 结果卡片内容完整
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-20-code-mode-result-card-completeness.md) | 中文
+
+## 问题
+
+外层 `run_code` 工具会持久化完整的渲染内容，但编辑器的卡片展示逻辑忽略了这些内容，转而根据仅含日志的 `presentationMeta` 投影重新构建卡片正文。仅有结果的运行看似正确，是因为展示逻辑未提供正文时，ACP 和 TUI 会回退到 `tool/result.content`。只要程序输出一条日志，展示逻辑就会提供非空内容，回退随即停止，返回值便会从完成态卡片中消失。当已捕获的日志使陈旧投影变为非空时，输出落盘策略最终生成的头尾预览也会受到同一职责拆分的影响。
+
+嵌套 Code 调用从不生成自己的卡片。因此，仅仅为了重建这一张不完整卡片而给外层调用生成元数据，还掩盖了每次外层调用只生成一张卡片的预期边界。
+
+## 决策
+
+规范的工具注册表流水线负责最终面向模型的外层内容。成功时，`run_code` 输出渲染器先渲染已捕获的日志，然后渲染返回值或显式的无输出标记。运行时失败和执行前策略拒绝由 `ToolRegistry` 归一化为错误内容，过程中不会调用该渲染器。Post-execute 阻断发生在成功渲染之后，并把结果替换为错误内容；其他 post-execute 策略与输出落盘决策可以在持久化之前替换内容。
+
+`run_code` 不提供 `presentResult`。既有的通用结果回退机制会保留待完成的程序标题，并渲染原始的最终 `tool/result.content`；这一持久、可回放且经过 post-policy 处理的投影是卡片中结果内容的唯一来源。宿主 API 代理因此不提供单独的结果视图，而不会在 `event.data.content` 与 `view.view.content` 中重复序列化同一内容。冗余的仅含日志的 `presentationMeta` 投影继续保持移除状态。
+
+嵌套分发保持不变。带有 `exec.parent` 标记的调用会发出有界的 `tool/code-dispatch` 诊断，但不会生成与 `tool/call` 或 `tool/result` 对应的界面卡片，因此一次外层 `run_code` 调用仍然只会生成一张卡片。
+
+## 测试
+
+工具单元测试通过规范注册表覆盖仅有日志、仅有结果、日志与结果并存、无输出、结果落盘和失败的结果，然后固定持久内容以及结果展示器不存在这一事实。宿主 mux 回归测试使用仅有调用的展示器，证明结果帧恰好携带一次原始内容，且不含视图。这些案例证明陈旧元数据无法替换最终内容，同时不会让宿主重复该内容。
+
+无密钥的 ACP 与 TUI Code Mode 快照会执行一个外层程序：程序进行两次嵌套 bash 调用，记录 `captured output`，并返回 `CODE_ONE+CODE_TWO`。两个界面都只显示一张完成态外层卡片，其中包含这两行内容，且没有嵌套卡片。
+
+## 备选方案
+
+**把返回值追加到日志元数据：**不予采纳。元数据会与渲染器重复，并且需要为每一种 JSON 根另行维护稳定的格式化契约；post-policy 内容替换或输出落盘预览仍然会被遗漏。
+
+**把展示元数据与 `result.content` 合并：**不予采纳。渲染内容已经包含日志；合并会造成重复，还需要依赖脆弱的去重逻辑。
+
+**通过通用结果展示器转发 `result.content`：**不予采纳。持久事件已经携带该内容，ACP 和 TUI 也已有通用的原始内容回退机制。宿主 mux 会在事件旁序列化工具拥有的结果视图，因此转发仅仅是为了重建该回退机制，却会在一个帧中重复渲染内容；仅默认 worker 在渲染前允许 64 MiB 的可变载荷预算。
+
+**为每次嵌套分发创建一张卡片：**不予采纳。中间值有意只存在于执行期间，永远不面向模型。多张卡片会暴露实现轨迹，而不是模型与用户调用的单次 Code Mode 操作。
+
+## 影响
+
+ACP 和 TUI 通过通用结果回退机制显示与模型接收及回放持久化相同的完整内容，其中包括 post-policy 输出落盘预览。宿主 API 保留待完成的程序标题，同时不在单独的视图负载中重复原始结果。新的 `run_code` 结果不再携带可选的日志元数据，但无需提升会话格式版本：现有记录仍然有效，因为展示逻辑会读取其中持久化的渲染内容。

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.md: 1a8e29c603ede50b60199e9151fca58dadcc3d40
+2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.zh.md: 6c7a421bfa84504a36d5329e13a485bf72cc6b6c

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Agent Note: A config hot-reload must not kill or degrade a live app
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+The demo apps mount `@cordisjs/plugin-hmr` as a leaf so a running agent picks up `cordis.yml` edits. One bad edit killed the process: `Include.refresh()` rethrew the YAML parse error, the HMR watcher awaits `refresh()` inside an async chokidar callback nobody catches, and the resulting unhandled rejection tripped `dsh-app-boot`'s fail-loud handler — `exit(1)` mid-session, losing the live TUI. Two adjacent defects made even *valid* reloads wrong: a file that parses to `undefined` (empty or mid-write truncated — editors and `sed -i` routinely produce these states) crashed the entry walk instead of reading as invalid, and a re-read never re-applied the include's `config.patches`, so any hot-reload of an overlay-based tree (Code Mode, personal overlays) silently reverted patched entries and removed inserted ones.
+
+## Decision
+
+Harden the vendored `@cordisjs/plugin-include` (logged as local modification 8 in [vendor/README.md](../../../../vendor/README.md)) rather than the callers:
+
+- `refresh()` awaits the whole read-and-update and catches failures, logs a warning, and keeps the last good entry tree. A hot-reload is advisory; the invariant is that no file state reachable by an editor may take the process down.
+- `read()` rejects a non-array parse result with a `TypeError`, folding the `undefined`-parse case into the same "invalid file" signal, and commits `content`/`data` only after a successful parse — so reverting an edit to the exact last good content correctly reads as "unchanged".
+- `refresh()` and the `internal/update` listener apply `this.applyPatches(...)` before `root.update()`, restoring parity with `[Service.init]`. `applyPatches` deep-copies the cached parse (`structuredClone`) instead of mutating it, so repeated application converges and removing a patch reverts to the file's own values. The listener uses the incoming config's `patches` and persists that config itself: it vetoes the fiber restart (children update in place), and `Fiber.update` only assigns `this.config` behind `next()`, so without the explicit assignment the next re-read would re-apply the old overlay.
+
+Boot-time behavior stays fail-loud and gets a sharper diagnostic: `[Service.init]` falls back to `initial` (or "config file not found") only on `ENOENT`; an existing-but-invalid file now fails with its real parse error instead of being mislabelled as absent or silently overwritten by `initial`.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**Catch in the HMR watcher callback instead of `refresh()`.** Rejected: it would leave `refresh()` a trap for every other caller (the `internal/update` path shares the same tree-update logic), and it cannot fix the `undefined`-parse or patch-loss defects, which live inside the include.
+
+**Filter config-file rejections in `installFailLoud`.** Rejected: the fail-loud handler exists to make late load failures visible; teaching it to classify exceptions by origin would silently swallow genuine boot failures and leave the stale-`data` crash in place.
+
+**A PTY e2e proving the TUI survives a bad edit.** Rejected as the primary gate: the PTY smoke reads the repo's committed `cordis.yml`, so corrupting it in-place is not test-safe, and a temp copy cannot resolve the tree's bare package specifiers. The unit spec drives the exact `refresh()` entry point the watcher calls; the fix was additionally verified manually against the live TUI (bad YAML, empty file, restored file).
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A bad `cordis.yml` edit now logs `ignoring config reload at <file>` and the agent keeps running on the last good tree; the next valid edit applies normally. With no logger exporter mounted in the TUI demos the warning is currently invisible on screen — surfacing loader warnings in the TUI is deferred.
+- Overlay trees survive base-file reloads with patches intact instead of silently reverting to the unpatched base.
+- The vendored include diverges further from upstream; the divergence is logged in the vendor manifest and re-applies on the next sync.
+- Known gap, out of scope here: the HMR watcher only handles chokidar `change` events, so editors that replace the file by rename (BSD `sed -i`, `git checkout`) do not trigger a config reload at all; and a reloaded app-entry config does not visibly restart the running TUI (pre-existing on the unmodified tree).
+
+## Testing
+
+`packages/ui/app-boot/tests/config-reload.spec.ts` boots real Loader trees against temp configs and pins: an invalid-YAML edit and an empty-file edit both resolve `refresh()` without rejection and keep the previous entry config; a subsequent valid edit applies; an overlay tree re-applies both entry patches and inserted entries on re-read; a hot-update of the include entry's own `patches` applies immediately, survives the next file re-read, and reverts cleanly when the patches are removed. The assertions fail on the unpatched vendored include.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Agent Note: 配置热重载不得杀死或降级正在运行的应用
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-20-config-hot-reload-resilience.md) | 中文
+
+## Problem
+
+各示例应用把 `@cordisjs/plugin-hmr` 挂载为叶子配置项，让运行中的 agent 能感知 `cordis.yml` 的编辑。一次错误的编辑就会杀死进程：`Include.refresh()` 把 YAML 解析错误原样抛出，HMR 的文件监听器在一个无人捕获的异步 chokidar 回调里 await `refresh()`，产生的未处理 rejection 触发 `dsh-app-boot` 的快速失败处理器——会话中途 `exit(1)`，正在运行的 TUI 就此丢失。另有两个相邻缺陷让*合法*的重载也出错：解析结果为 `undefined` 的文件（空文件或写入中途被截断的文件——编辑器和 `sed -i` 常态性地产生这类中间状态）会让配置项遍历直接崩溃，而不是被判定为无效文件；并且重新读取时从不重新应用 include 的 `config.patches`，因此对基于 overlay 的配置树（Code Mode、个人 overlay）做任何热重载，都会悄悄把打过补丁的配置项回退、并把插入的配置项移除。
+
+## Decision
+
+加固 vendor 的 `@cordisjs/plugin-include`（在 [vendor/README.md](../../../../vendor/README.md) 中记录为本地修改第 8 条），而不是修改调用方：
+
+- `refresh()` await 整个「读取并更新」过程并捕获失败，记录一条警告，并保留上一份完好的配置树。热重载是尽力而为的；不变式是编辑器可能产生的任何文件状态都不得导致进程退出。
+- `read()` 对非数组的解析结果抛出 `TypeError`，把 `undefined` 解析结果并入同一个「无效文件」信号，并且只在解析成功后才提交 `content`/`data`——因此把编辑撤销回与上一份完好内容完全一致时，会正确地判定为「无变化」。
+- `refresh()` 与 `internal/update` 监听器在 `root.update()` 之前调用 `this.applyPatches(...)`，与 `[Service.init]` 保持一致。`applyPatches` 对缓存的解析结果做深拷贝（`structuredClone`）而不是就地修改，因此重复应用会收敛，移除补丁会回退到文件自身的值。监听器使用传入配置中的 `patches` 并自行持久化该配置：它否决 fiber 重启（子配置项就地更新），而 `Fiber.update` 只在 `next()` 之后才赋值 `this.config`，若不显式赋值，下一次重新读取会重新应用旧的 overlay。
+
+启动期行为保持快速失败并获得更准确的诊断：`[Service.init]` 只在 `ENOENT` 时回退到 `initial`（或「config file not found」）；存在但无效的文件现在会以真实的解析错误失败，而不是被误标为文件缺失、或被 `initial` 静默覆盖。
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**在 HMR 监听回调里捕获，而不是在 `refresh()` 里。** 否决：这会让 `refresh()` 继续成为其他所有调用方的陷阱（`internal/update` 路径共享同一套树更新逻辑），而且无法修复 `undefined` 解析结果与补丁丢失这两个位于 include 内部的缺陷。
+
+**在 `installFailLoud` 里过滤配置文件相关的 rejection。** 否决：快速失败处理器的存在意义就是让延迟出现的加载失败可见；教它按来源给异常分类会悄悄吞掉真正的启动失败，并且原样保留陈旧 `data` 导致的崩溃。
+
+**用 PTY e2e 证明 TUI 能在错误编辑后存活。** 否决其作为主要门禁：PTY 冒烟测试读取仓库中已提交的 `cordis.yml`，就地破坏它对测试不安全，而临时副本无法解析该配置树的裸包说明符。单元测试直接驱动监听器所调用的 `refresh()` 入口；此外还对运行中的 TUI 做了人工验证（错误 YAML、空文件、恢复文件）。
+
+## Consequences
+
+- 现在错误的 `cordis.yml` 编辑会记录 `ignoring config reload at <file>`，agent 继续运行在上一份完好的配置树上；下一次合法编辑正常生效。TUI 示例没有挂载任何日志导出器，这条警告目前不会显示在屏幕上——在 TUI 中呈现 loader 警告的工作暂缓。
+- overlay 配置树在基础文件重载后补丁保持完整，不再悄悄回退到未打补丁的基础配置。
+- vendor 的 include 与上游进一步分叉；该分叉已记录在 vendor 的 manifest 里，下次同步时重新应用。
+- 已知缺口，不在本次范围内：HMR 监听器只处理 chokidar 的 `change` 事件，因此通过重命名替换文件的编辑方式（BSD `sed -i`、`git checkout`）完全不会触发配置重载；应用配置项重载后也不会可见地重启运行中的 TUI（未修改的代码树上即已如此）。
+
+## Testing
+
+`packages/ui/app-boot/tests/config-reload.spec.ts` 用真实 Loader 树加载临时配置并固定以下行为：无效 YAML 编辑和空文件编辑都让 `refresh()` 正常 resolve 而不产生 rejection，并保留之前的配置项配置；随后的合法编辑正常生效；overlay 配置树在重新读取时重新应用配置项补丁和插入的配置项；对 include 配置项自身 `patches` 的热更新立即生效、在下一次文件重读后依然保持、并在补丁移除后干净地回退。这些断言在未打补丁的 vendor include 上会失败。

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.md: 4bca02fe3893ac39621ed79a000ca8f86db4ff67
+2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.zh.md: 1f187eb6448a3c9ca6784ec2bddd7295be2706d7

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: Semantic session checkpoints
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+Persistence buffered every synchronous `session/event` until the loop's final turn checkpoint. A turn is the correct conversational transaction, but it is too coarse as the only crash-recovery point: a hard crash during a long model request or tool call could discard the whole in-flight turn, including the request envelope needed to identify what had been attempted. A tool call with no result was also repaired with one undifferentiated interruption error, so the resumed model could not tell whether execution had started and could retry a side effect blindly.
+
+## Decision
+
+`dsh-session-checkpoint-policy` owns semantic durability barriers as a zero-config plugin beside a persistence backend. It wraps `llm/stream` lazily and flushes the live session after `request/header` is logged but before the adapter stream is constructed. It wraps top-level `tools/execute` after ordered pre-execute policy and flushes the recorded `tool/call` before the tool body; nested dispatches reuse the outer model-visible call. It flushes at `agent/post-step` after the assistant message and ordered results are recorded. The loop's existing final `turn/end` checkpoint remains the closing boundary.
+
+Persistence and checkpoint scheduling remain separate Cordis plugins. A backend makes requested `session/flush` boundaries durable but does not choose them; loading it without this policy is valid and retains the loop's coarser checkpoints. First-party persisted apps and runtimes explicitly mount both, while a specialized deployment may intentionally omit or replace the policy. Registration order governs whether events appended by other `agent/post-step` listeners join this checkpoint; the loop-owned assistant message and ordered results always precede the event.
+
+Checkpoint failure and cancellation are fail-closed at effect boundaries. A rejected request checkpoint prevents adapter dispatch; a rejected tool checkpoint becomes an error result without invoking the tool body. If cancellation lands while the tool checkpoint is pending, the policy rechecks the signal and returns the canonical `ABORTED_BEFORE_DISPATCH` result. A rejected post-step checkpoint stops continuation before another model request. Persistence serialization continues to belong to the coordinator, so concurrent tool checkpoints cannot duplicate event sequences.
+
+The ACP app owns its bridge, checkpoint policy, and persistence backend in one ordered Cordis effect. Cordis unloads sibling plugin effects concurrently, so independent mounts would let persistence detach while bridge teardown was still closing an interrupted turn. The composite lifecycle unloads the bridge first, waits for its agents to quiesce and flush the real `step/end` and `turn/end`, then removes checkpoint scheduling and persistence.
+
+Crash repair distinguishes durable evidence. An assistant tool request without a `tool/call` becomes `TOOL_NOT_STARTED` and may be retried if still needed. A durable `tool/call` without a result becomes `TOOL_OUTCOME_UNKNOWN`; its model-visible result permits retry only for read-only or idempotent operations and directs the model to verify external state or ask the user before deciding about side-effecting work. A provider that supports idempotency keys can receive the stable `callId`, but the Harness does not claim generic exactly-once effects.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+Flushing every event or streaming chunk minimizes loss but turns local append and `fsync` latency into the hot path and destabilizes streaming throughput. Moving the barriers into `agent-loop` prevents omission for that loop but hides checkpoint policy inside the mechanism and removes Cordis-level replacement and ordering. Keeping turn-only flush preserves throughput but loses the request and execution intent needed for safe recovery. Automatically retrying every unmatched call is safe only for a subset of tools and can duplicate irreversible effects.
+
+## Consequences
+
+Hard-crash recovery retains the complete model request, durable tool intent, and complete settled step at the nearest semantic boundary while allowing partial streaming chunks since the previous boundary to remain lossy. Default CLI, TUI, ACP, Python SDK runtime, headless persistence tests, and JSON-RPC compositions mount the policy with their persistence backend. Unit tests cover ordering, cancellation during a checkpoint, fail-closed behavior, nested dispatch, disposal, and Loader shape; a real child process killed with `SIGKILL` proves request and tool-intent recovery through JSONL, and the shared persistence contract proves both recovery classifications across backends. Keyless ACP snapshots prove both that retry-risk guidance reaches resumed history and the next model turn and that graceful cancellation persists the loop's real closing boundaries.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: 语义会话检查点
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-21-semantic-session-checkpoints.md) | 中文
+
+## 问题
+
+持久化机制会缓冲所有同步 `session/event`，直到 agent loop（智能体循环）执行最后的轮次检查点才写入。一个轮次是正确的对话事务，但作为唯一的崩溃恢复点过于粗粒度：如果在耗时的模型请求或工具调用期间发生硬崩溃，整个进行中的轮次都可能丢失，其中包括识别已尝试操作所需的请求封套。系统还会使用同一种不作区分的中断错误，修复没有结果的工具调用，因此恢复运行的模型无法判断调用是否已经开始，可能会盲目重试带有副作用的操作。
+
+## 决策
+
+`dsh-session-checkpoint-policy` 以零配置插件的形式与持久化后端共同加载，并负责语义持久性屏障。该插件惰性包装 `llm/stream`，在记录 `request/header` 之后、构造适配器流之前，刷新活动会话。该插件还在有序的执行前策略之后包装顶层 `tools/execute`，在进入工具主体前刷新已记录的 `tool/call`；嵌套分发则复用外层模型可见调用。它还会在 `agent/post-step` 时刷新会话，此时模型消息与按序结果都已记录。现有的最终 `turn/end` 检查点仍是轮次的收尾边界。
+
+持久化与检查点调度仍是相互独立的 Cordis 插件。后端使请求的 `session/flush` 边界持久化，但不选择边界；只加载后端而不加载本策略仍是有效组合，并保留循环提供的较粗检查点。第一方持久化应用与运行时会显式加载两者，专用部署则可以有意省略或替换本策略。注册顺序决定其他 `agent/post-step` 监听器追加的事件是否会纳入本检查点；循环自身记录的助手消息与有序结果始终先于该事件。
+
+检查点失败与取消在副作用边界上采取失败关闭策略。请求检查点被拒绝时，系统不会分发给适配器；工具检查点被拒绝时，系统会返回错误结果，不调用工具主体。如果在工具检查点等待期间收到取消，策略会重新检查信号，并返回标准的 `ABORTED_BEFORE_DISPATCH` 结果。步骤后检查点被拒绝时，系统会在发起下一个模型请求前停止继续执行。持久化写入的串行化仍由协调器负责，因此并发的工具检查点不会产生重复的事件序号。
+
+ACP（Agent Client Protocol）应用在一个有序 Cordis effect 中统一持有其桥接层、检查点策略与持久化后端。Cordis 会并发卸载同级插件的 effect；如果分别加载，桥接层仍在为被中断的轮次收尾时，持久化后端就可能已经卸载。组合生命周期会先卸载桥接层，等待其各 agent 达到静止，并刷新真实的 `step/end` 与 `turn/end`，再移除检查点调度与持久化。
+
+崩溃修复会区分持久化证据。如果模型发出了工具请求，却没有 `tool/call`，系统会将其标记为 `TOOL_NOT_STARTED`；如果仍有需要，可以重试。如果持久化的 `tool/call` 没有结果，系统会将其标记为 `TOOL_OUTCOME_UNKNOWN`；对应的模型可见结果只允许重试只读或幂等操作，并指示模型在决定是否重试有副作用的工作前，先验证外部状态或询问用户。支持幂等键的模型提供方可以获取稳定的 `callId`，但 Harness 不承诺通用的副作用恰好执行一次保证。
+
+## 考虑过的替代方案
+
+刷新每个事件或流式分片虽能尽可能减少丢失，但会把本地追加与 `fsync` 延迟带入热路径，破坏流式输出的吞吐稳定性。将这些屏障放入 `agent-loop`，虽能防止该循环漏装，却会将检查点策略隐藏在机制中，并失去 Cordis 层的替换与排序能力。仅保留轮次刷新可以维持吞吐量，但会丢失安全恢复所需的请求与执行意图。自动重试所有未匹配调用只对部分工具安全，可能会重复不可逆的副作用。
+
+## 后果
+
+发生硬崩溃时，崩溃恢复会在最近的语义边界保留完整的模型请求、持久化的工具意图与完整且已结束的步骤，但允许上一个边界之后的部分流式分片仍可能丢失。默认的 CLI（命令行界面）、TUI、ACP、Python SDK 运行时、headless 持久化测试与 JSON-RPC 组合都会在持久化后端旁加载该策略。单元测试覆盖顺序、检查点期间的取消、失败关闭行为、嵌套分发、dispose（资源释放）与 Loader 形状；一个被 `SIGKILL` 终止的真实子进程通过 JSONL 证明系统可以恢复请求与工具意图，共享持久化契约则证明各后端都支持这两种恢复分类。无密钥 ACP 快照既证明重试风险指引会进入恢复后的历史记录与下一个模型轮次，也证明取消流程正常收尾时，系统会持久化由循环实际生成的闭合边界。

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.md: e959eef37a9e9c0fea79b82ff970daddd9257609
+2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.zh.md: 7f6d6529a8aa4a655a1d3292e7f41bfb822f05a3

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: A collapsed sidebar retains its control rail
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+The sidebar close action persisted a zero width preference, and the layout mapped that preference to a zero-width grid track. The only sidebar toggle and the settings entry both lived inside that clipped track, so closing the sidebar removed every visible recovery control. Reloading preserved the closed preference and reproduced the lockout.
+
+## Decision
+
+The layout maps a closed sidebar (persisted width `0`) to the fixed `SIDEBAR_COLLAPSED` width of 56px: a 24px icon column between the sidebar's 16px horizontal paddings. The compact rail participates in the concession solver and retains its right border, while the stored expanded width remains untouched.
+
+`AppFrame` marks the sidebar collapsed from the persisted width preference rather than from the resolved track width, removes the resize handle while collapsed, and passes `collapsed` to the sidebar slot as owner props from the render site. Collapse and expand animate: the frame transitions `grid-template-columns` (and the remaining handle its `left`) on the deepsuite sider curve — `--ds-ease-in-out` over `--ds-transition-duration-slow`, both supplied by ui-theme's base sheet; transitions pause during drags and under `prefers-reduced-motion`.
+
+`SidebarRoot` reads the owner `collapsed` prop and morphs in place rather than swapping renders: the four control rows persist into the rail — expand toggle, new session, new workspace, search, in the same top-down order as their expanded rows — animating their geometry (heights, paddings, margins, capsule borders) on the same curve, each aligned with its expanded counterpart's behavior (the search icon expands the sidebar and focuses the search box). Wide-only content (brand, labels, input, session tree) cross-fades out over 200ms, stays mounted while the collapse animates, and unmounts once the 300ms settle passes — dropping the sessions subscription and leaving the rendered and accessibility trees. The search query lives with the root and survives the round trip.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+- **Render an expand button over the center column** — rejected because it recovers only the toggle, not the persistent settings area, and splits sidebar chrome across two package owners.
+- **Keep a zero-width grid track and let the rail overflow it** — rejected because the rail would overlap the center column and leave hit testing and responsive geometry disconnected from the grid.
+- **Keep the complete sidebar tree mounted and hide it with clipping** — rejected because hidden controls remain in the semantic tree and continue subscribing and rendering even though only two controls belong in the collapsed state.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A collapsed sidebar reserves 56px instead of yielding the entire width to the center column. Expanding restores the persisted width and drag behavior.
+- The settings entry remains visible but retains its existing placeholder behavior; this change does not introduce an account or settings screen.
+- Layout solver tests pin the compact width, sidebar component tests pin the visible controls, and the keyless real-bundle web smoke test pins collapse and recovery through the assembled client.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: 侧边栏折叠后保留控制栏
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-22-collapsed-sidebar-control-rail.md) | 中文
+
+## 问题
+
+侧边栏关闭操作会持久化宽度偏好 `0`，布局再将该偏好映射为宽度为零的网格轨道。侧边栏唯一的开关与设置入口都位于这个被裁切的轨道内，因此关闭侧边栏会移除所有可见的恢复控件。页面重新加载时仍会读取关闭偏好，从而再次陷入无法恢复的状态。
+
+## 决策
+
+布局将关闭的侧边栏（持久化宽度为 `0`）映射为固定的 `SIDEBAR_COLLAPSED` 宽度 56px：在侧边栏两侧各 16px 的水平内边距之间放置一列 24px 的图标控件。紧凑控制栏参与空间收缩求解，并保留右侧边框；已存储的展开宽度保持不变。
+
+`AppFrame` 根据持久化的宽度偏好标记侧边栏是否折叠，而不是根据求解后的轨道宽度来判断；折叠时移除尺寸调整手柄，并在渲染点把 `collapsed` 作为 owner props 传给侧边栏插槽。折叠与展开带动画：frame 对 `grid-template-columns`（以及余下手柄的 `left`）应用 deepsuite 侧栏曲线过渡——`--ds-ease-in-out` 配 `--ds-transition-duration-slow`，两个变量由 ui-theme 的 base 表提供；拖拽期间和 `prefers-reduced-motion` 下过渡暂停。
+
+`SidebarRoot` 读取 owner 的 `collapsed` 属性，原地 morph 而非切换渲染：四个控件行持续存在并演变为控制栏——展开开关、新建会话、新建工作区、搜索，自上而下与展开态各行顺序一致——几何（行高、内边距、外边距、胶囊边框）走同一条曲线动画，行为与展开态对应控件对齐（搜索图标会展开侧边栏并聚焦搜索框）。宽态专属内容（品牌标识、文字标签、输入框、会话树）以 200ms 交叉淡出，折叠动画期间保持挂载，300ms settle 后卸载——随之退订会话列表并离开渲染树与可访问性树。搜索关键词由根组件持有，折叠往返后保留。
+
+## 曾考虑的替代方案
+
+- **在中心列上方渲染展开按钮**：不予采纳，因为这只能恢复开关，无法保留常驻设置区域，同时还会让侧边栏 UI 由两个包（package）分别持有。
+- **保留宽度为零的网格轨道，让控制栏溢出显示**：不予采纳，因为控制栏会与中心列重叠，还会使命中测试和响应式几何关系脱离网格布局。
+- **保持完整侧边栏树挂载，并通过裁切将其隐藏**：不予采纳，因为隐藏控件仍留在语义树中，而且会继续订阅和渲染，尽管折叠状态下只需要两个控件。
+
+## 后果
+
+- 折叠的侧边栏占用 56px，而不是把全部宽度让给中心列。展开时恢复持久化宽度与拖动行为。
+- 设置入口持续可见，但保留既有占位行为；本次改动不提供账户或设置页面。
+- 布局求解器测试固定紧凑宽度，侧边栏组件测试固定可见控件，基于真实构建产物的无密钥 Web 冒烟测试则通过组装后的客户端固定折叠与恢复行为。

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.md: a7d21987d4544246fd3c53864cedfc86279e9440
+2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.zh.md: f10184642b0c7869378802d3040ebf4dbe67d4e0

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Agent Note: demo:web builds the client plugin bundles
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+`dsh web` serves each web-client plugin's bundle from `GET /plugins/<id>/client.js`, resolving the path from the package's `exports["./client"]` (`lib/client.js`). Those bundles are produced only by the root `pnpm run build` (`tsc -b` then the per-package `tsdown.client.ts` configs); the Vite `build:web` step builds the frontend shell alone. `demo:web` and the README's Web UI instructions ran only `build:web`, so on a checkout without a prior full build every plugin bundle 404s, the client loader marks every plugin failed, and the boot screen shows "Failed to load plugins". The frontend shell built fine, hiding the missing artifact behind a runtime browser failure.
+
+## Decision
+
+`demo:web` runs `npm run build` before `npm run build:web`, so the plugin `lib/client.js` bundles exist before `dsh web` serves them. The README's Web UI section runs `pnpm run build && pnpm run build:web` for the installed `~/.dsh/source` checkout, which the installer never builds.
+
+## Verification
+
+After the full build, all eight `/plugins/<id>/client.js` endpoints return 200 and a headless Chromium load of `http://127.0.0.1:3080` renders the shell with no "Failed to load plugins" state.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**Build the bundles inside `dsh web` at startup.** The app runs from source via tsx and owns no build step; folding an artifact build into the server boot crosses the source/artifact separation and slows every launch.
+
+**Widen the tsdown root config to emit client bundles from `pnpm run build:web`.** `build:web` is the Vite frontend build; the client bundles are a separate tsdown pass over `lib/types`. Merging the two conflates the shell build with the package build and still leaves the root `build` as the only producer.
+
+## Consequences
+
+`demo:web` now pays the full `tsc -b && tsdown` cost on every invocation instead of only the Vite build. That is the price of a runnable web demo from a clean tree; a caller who already built can invoke `dsh web` directly.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Agent Note: demo:web 构建客户端插件的打包产物
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-23-demo-web-builds-client-bundles.md) | 中文
+
+## Problem
+
+`dsh web` 通过 `GET /plugins/<id>/client.js` 提供每个 web 客户端插件的打包产物，其路径由包的 `exports["./client"]`（`lib/client.js`）解析得到。这些打包产物只由根目录的 `pnpm run build`（先 `tsc -b`，再执行各包的 `tsdown.client.ts` 配置）生成；Vite 的 `build:web` 步骤只构建前端外壳。`demo:web` 与 README 的 Web UI 说明只运行了 `build:web`，因此在未预先完整构建的检出上，每个插件的打包产物都返回 404，客户端 loader 将所有插件标记为失败，启动界面显示 "Failed to load plugins"。前端外壳能正常构建，把缺失的产物掩藏在浏览器运行时的失败背后。
+
+## Decision
+
+`demo:web` 在 `npm run build:web` 之前先运行 `npm run build`，使插件的 `lib/client.js` 打包产物在 `dsh web` 提供它们之前已经存在。README 的 Web UI 小节针对已安装的 `~/.dsh/source` 检出运行 `pnpm run build && pnpm run build:web`，因为安装器从不构建它。
+
+## Verification
+
+完整构建后，全部八个 `/plugins/<id>/client.js` 端点均返回 200，无头 Chromium 加载 `http://127.0.0.1:3080` 能渲染出外壳，不再出现 "Failed to load plugins" 状态。
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**在 `dsh web` 启动时构建打包产物。** 该应用通过 tsx 从源码运行，本身没有构建步骤；把产物构建塞进服务器启动流程会越过源码与产物的分离，并拖慢每次启动。
+
+**扩大 tsdown 根配置，使 `pnpm run build:web` 也产出客户端打包产物。** `build:web` 是 Vite 前端构建；客户端打包产物是对 `lib/types` 的另一趟独立 tsdown 处理。把两者合并会混淆外壳构建与包构建，而且根目录的 `build` 仍是唯一的产出者。
+
+## Consequences
+
+`demo:web` 现在每次调用都要付出完整的 `tsc -b && tsdown` 代价，而不再只是 Vite 构建。这是从干净的代码树运行 web 演示所要付出的代价；已经完成构建的调用方可以直接调用 `dsh web`。

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.i18n.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+# Bilingual-pair consistency record (docs/i18n/README.md): the git blob hash of each
+# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
+# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
+#   pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write
+2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.md: f698c3cb0b73bf5c65b5d4b5b3f29de3080e0af6
+2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.zh.md: 0fba5c1d8f7beec7300dcd51e118a08d57d0e74f

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: Thinking rows use one disclosure target
+
+Status: implemented
+
+English | [中文](2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.zh.md)
+
+## Problem
+
+A collapsed reasoning entry presents `Think` and its one-line reasoning summary as one visual row, but an icon-only disclosure control leaves both visible labels inert. Applying title expansion to every tool row would instead break the generic tool-row contract, where the row opens details and only the leading control expands arguments.
+
+## Decision
+
+`ToolRow` exposes the opt-in `expandOnRowClick` policy. `ThinkRow` enables it so the title and reasoning summary form one accessible disclosure target; pointer clicks, Enter, and Space toggle the same component-local expanded state. Tool rows that do not opt in retain row-to-details selection and leading-control argument expansion.
+
+## Verification
+
+The component spec pins both Think click targets and the unchanged generic tool-row handoff. The keyless browser fixture loads the real sidebar and conversation bundles, opens an authored reasoning session, clicks the summary and title, and checks the disclosure state and expanded body.
+
+## Alternatives considered
+
+**Expand every tool row from its title.** Generic tool rows use row clicks for details selection, so sharing this behavior would conflate two controls.
+
+**Keep icon-only disclosure.** The smallest hit target remains disconnected from the labels that describe the hidden content.
+
+**Render separate title and summary buttons.** Two controls for one expanded state add duplicate focus stops and ambiguous semantics.
+
+## Consequences
+
+Thinking rows gain a larger pointer target and keyboard disclosure semantics without changing other tool interactions. The generic row component carries one optional policy because disclosure ownership differs between reasoning and tool calls.

.agents/notes/implemented/bug-fix/2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.zh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Agent Note: thinking 行使用单一展开目标
+
+Status: implemented
+
+[English](2026-07-23-thinking-row-disclosure-target.md) | 中文
+
+## 问题
+
+折叠的推理（reasoning）条目在同一视觉行中呈现 `Think` 和单行推理摘要，但仅图标可展开会让两个可见标签都无法交互。若让所有工具行均可通过标题展开，又会破坏通用工具行的契约：整行负责打开详情，只有前导控件负责展开参数。
+
+## 决策
+
+`ToolRow` 提供显式启用的 `expandOnRowClick` 策略。`ThinkRow` 启用该策略，让标题和推理摘要组成单一且无障碍的展开目标；鼠标点击、Enter 和 Space 都切换同一个组件本地展开状态。未启用该策略的工具行仍由整行完成详情选择，由前导控件展开参数。
+
+## 验证
+
+组件测试固定两个 Think 点击目标以及未改变的通用工具行交接行为。无密钥浏览器 fixture（测试前置数据）加载真实的侧边栏与会话 bundle，打开包含推理内容的既定会话，点击摘要与标题，并检查展开状态和展开后的正文。
+
+## 考虑过的替代方案
+
+**让每个工具行都可通过标题展开。** 通用工具行将整行点击用于详情选择，共享这一行为会混淆两个控件。
+
+**保留仅图标展开。** 最小的点击目标仍与描述隐藏内容的标签脱节。
+
+**把标题和摘要分别渲染为按钮。** 两个控件共享一个展开状态，会增加重复的焦点停靠点并产生含糊语义。
+
+## 后果
+
+thinking 行获得更大的鼠标点击目标和键盘展开语义，同时不改变其他工具交互。通用行组件承担一个可选策略，因为推理与工具调用的展开所有权不同。