Fail early when coilyco surfaces resolve neutral example ops config #942

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-07-10 04:46:49 +00:00 by coilyco-ops · 1 comment

coilyco-ops commented

2026-07-10 04:46:49 +00:00

Member

A coilyco read-only director surface can run ward ops forgejo against the neutral example guardfile without an early warning, then fail with misleading example-scope errors.

Observed from /workspace/agentic-os in director-codex-aq74 on 2026-07-10:

$ ward ops forgejo describe | sed -n '1,8p'
# ward ops forgejo

Spec-driven CLI. Every verb issues an HTTP request against the API base https://git.example.com/api/v1.

Authenticates with the "Authorization" header (scheme header-token), reading the token from ssm /example/forgejo/api-token.

$ ward ops forgejo tasks list coilyco-flight-deck agentic-os --limit 1
ward: argument owner="coilyco-flight-deck" is outside the allowed scope (restrict owner matches [example*])

The same surface had WARD_TARGET_OWNER=coilyco-flight-deck, WARD_TARGET_REPO=coilyco-flight-deck/agentic-os, WARD_FORGEJO_BASE=https://forgejo.coilysiren.me, and FORGEJO_TOKEN present. Because the intended operator surface was unusable, the CI triage had to fall back to raw Forgejo API curl calls.

Expected:

In a ward-managed coilyco surface, operator commands should resolve the selected coilyco config bundle, not silently use neutral example config.
If config resolution falls back to neutral/example config while WARD_TARGET_OWNER or WARD_TARGET_REPO is a non-example coilyco repo, fail early with a direct config-source diagnostic naming the selected config source and the expected WARD_CONFIG_REF path.
ward ops forgejo describe should make the active config source visible enough to catch this before a command fails on [example*].
Add regression coverage for a director/surface env with coilyco target metadata and missing/misresolved config.

#876 fixes a WARD_CONFIG_REF recursion/deadlock path during ops startup.
#940 adds ward doctor; this issue is about the everyday operator command UX failing fast instead of silently running neutral config.
agentic-os#399 tracks making the aos bundle available globally, but ward should still diagnose this mismatch clearly.

A coilyco read-only director surface can run `ward ops forgejo` against the neutral example guardfile without an early warning, then fail with misleading example-scope errors. Observed from `/workspace/agentic-os` in `director-codex-aq74` on 2026-07-10: ```text $ ward ops forgejo describe | sed -n '1,8p' # ward ops forgejo Spec-driven CLI. Every verb issues an HTTP request against the API base https://git.example.com/api/v1. Authenticates with the "Authorization" header (scheme header-token), reading the token from ssm /example/forgejo/api-token. $ ward ops forgejo tasks list coilyco-flight-deck agentic-os --limit 1 ward: argument owner="coilyco-flight-deck" is outside the allowed scope (restrict owner matches [example*]) ``` The same surface had `WARD_TARGET_OWNER=coilyco-flight-deck`, `WARD_TARGET_REPO=coilyco-flight-deck/agentic-os`, `WARD_FORGEJO_BASE=https://forgejo.coilysiren.me`, and `FORGEJO_TOKEN` present. Because the intended operator surface was unusable, the CI triage had to fall back to raw Forgejo API `curl` calls. Expected: * In a ward-managed coilyco surface, operator commands should resolve the selected coilyco config bundle, not silently use neutral example config. * If config resolution falls back to neutral/example config while `WARD_TARGET_OWNER` or `WARD_TARGET_REPO` is a non-example coilyco repo, fail early with a direct config-source diagnostic naming the selected config source and the expected `WARD_CONFIG_REF` path. * `ward ops forgejo describe` should make the active config source visible enough to catch this before a command fails on `[example*]`. * Add regression coverage for a director/surface env with coilyco target metadata and missing/misresolved config. Related: * #876 fixes a `WARD_CONFIG_REF` recursion/deadlock path during ops startup. * #940 adds `ward doctor`; this issue is about the everyday operator command UX failing fast instead of silently running neutral config. * agentic-os#399 tracks making the aos bundle available globally, but ward should still diagnose this mismatch clearly.

coilyco-ops commented

2026-07-10 04:47:17 +00:00

Author

Member

WARD-RESERVATION: held 🔒

reservation details

Holder: container engineer-codex-ward-942 on host kais-macbook-pro-2.local.

Reserved by ward agent --harness codex (reserved 2026-07-10T04:47:16Z). Concurrent ward agent runs are blocked until it finishes or the reservation goes stale (1h TTL). --force overrides.

Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved. The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a new issue, dispatched fresh. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494).

run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)

Resolved: coilyco-flight-deck/ward#942 · branch issue-942 · harness codex · workflow pull-requests
Run: engineer-codex-ward-942 · ward v0.555.0 · dispatched 2026-07-10T04:47:16Z
Comment thread: 0 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments).

Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.555.0).

— Codex, via ward agent

WARD-RESERVATION: held 🔒 <details><summary>reservation details</summary> Holder: container `engineer-codex-ward-942` on host `kais-macbook-pro-2.local`. Reserved by `ward agent --harness codex` (reserved 2026-07-10T04:47:16Z). Concurrent `ward agent` runs are blocked until it finishes or the reservation goes stale (1h TTL). `--force` overrides. **Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved.** The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a **new issue, dispatched fresh**. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494). <details><summary>run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)</summary> - **Resolved:** `coilyco-flight-deck/ward#942` · branch `issue-942` · harness `codex` · workflow `pull-requests` - **Run:** `engineer-codex-ward-942` · ward `v0.555.0` · dispatched `2026-07-10T04:47:16Z` - **Comment thread:** 0 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments). Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.555.0). </details> </details>  — Codex, via `ward agent`

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a pull request that will close it,

2026-07-10 05:02:30 +00:00

Fail fast on coilyco example ops config #947

coilyco-ops closed this issue

2026-07-10 06:15:25 +00:00