Merge verified approval recovery into beta status recovery

Retain the historical beta approval documentation alongside the reviewed approval guards. Product, test and build inputs match the verified approval recovery; the combined build, type checks and full unit suite pass.

Coven-Harness: Codex / gpt-6-astra

Author: BunsDev

apps/desktop/e2e/approvals.spec.ts

@@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ test("Settings scopes new rules, previews without saving, keeps inactive rules v
   await expect(preview()).toHaveAttribute("data-decision", "allow");
   await expect(preview()).toContainText("Exact match");
   await expect(preview()).toContainText("Preview only");
+  await page.getByLabel("Sample action").fill("npm test && rm -rf src");
+  await page.getByRole("button", { name: "Try it", exact: true }).click();
+  await expect(preview()).toHaveAttribute("data-decision", "ask");
+  await expect(preview()).toContainText("Allow became Ask because the command chains several commands.");
+  await expect(preview()).toContainText("Jev not consulted");
   expect(await storedRules()).toHaveLength(1);
   expect((await page.evaluate(() => window.modex!.invoke("state:get", undefined))).threads).toHaveLength(0);
   await page.getByLabel("Sample action").fill("npm build");
@@ -121,6 +126,8 @@ test("automatic allow and never persist compact receipts; ask and project isolat
       await approval.getByRole("button", { name: "Deny", exact: true }).click();
     } else {
       await expect(tid(approval, "approval-receipt")).toContainText(decision === "allow" ? "Allowed:" : "Refused by rule");
+      // No Jev in this environment: the allow had no destructive check, and its receipt says so.
+      if (decision === "allow") await expect(tid(approval, "receipt-meta")).toContainText("Jev not consulted");
       await expect(approval.getByRole("button", { name: "Approve", exact: true })).toHaveCount(0);
       await tid(approval, "item-toggle").click();
       await expect(tid(approval, "item-body")).toContainText("write the sample");
@@ -159,3 +166,27 @@ test("a safety-downgraded receipt explains why a human must answer", async () =>
   await expect(card.getByRole("button", { name: "Deny", exact: true })).toBeVisible();
   await expect(card.getByRole("button", { name: "Always", exact: true })).toHaveCount(0);
 });
+
+test("an allow rule covers one command: a chained shell command asks and says why", async () => {
+  const script = path.join(home, "chained-script.json");
+  fs.writeFileSync(script, JSON.stringify({ steps: [
+    { tool_calls: [{ name: "shell", arguments: { command: "echo one; touch chained.txt" } }] },
+    { content: "Finished." },
+  ] }));
+  await page.evaluate(async ({ script, repo }) => {
+    await window.modex!.invoke("settings:update", { mock_script: script, approval_gate: { enabled: true, threshold: 0.8, timeout_ms: 3000 }, approval_rules: [
+      { id: "echo", when: "print text", decision: "allow", project: repo, match: "shell: echo *", enabled: true },
+    ] });
+  }, { script, repo });
+  await page.keyboard.press("Meta+n");
+  await tid(page, "composer-input").fill("chain two commands");
+  await page.keyboard.press("Meta+Enter");
+  const card = items(page, "approval");
+  await expect(card).toHaveCount(1);
+  await expect(card).toHaveAttribute("data-decided-by", "ask");
+  await expect(currentRow(page)).toHaveAttribute("data-status", "waiting");
+  await expect(tid(card, "approval-reason")).toHaveText('Asked because: the command chains several commands; rule "print text" would have allowed it · Jev not consulted');
+  await card.getByRole("button", { name: "Deny", exact: true }).click();
+  await expect(currentRow(page)).toHaveAttribute("data-status", "idle");
+  expect(fs.existsSync(path.join(repo, "chained.txt"))).toBe(false);
+});

apps/desktop/src/main/engine/approvals/digest.ts

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ export interface DigestContext {
 }
 
 export const MAX_COMMAND = 500;
-const MAX_TITLE = 200;
+export const MAX_TITLE = 200;
 const MAX_PATHS = 20;
 const MAX_PATH = 300;
 export const REDACTED = "«redacted»";
@@ -91,11 +91,25 @@ function pathsOf(action: ApprovalAction): string[] {
   return out.slice(0, MAX_PATHS);
 }
 
+/** The title Jev sees, before clipping to MAX_TITLE. */
 function titleOf(action: ApprovalAction, command: string | undefined, paths: string[]): string {
-  if (TITLE_FROM_TOOL.has(action.tool)) return clip(`${action.tool === "Write" ? "write" : "edit"} ${paths[0] ?? ""}`.trim(), MAX_TITLE);
+  if (TITLE_FROM_TOOL.has(action.tool)) return `${action.tool === "Write" ? "write" : "edit"} ${paths[0] ?? ""}`.trim();
   // A title that repeats the command gets the scrubbed command, never the raw one.
-  if (command && action.title.includes(command)) return clip(action.title.replace(command, scrubSecrets(command)), MAX_TITLE);
-  return clip(scrubSecrets(action.title), MAX_TITLE);
+  if (command && action.title.includes(command)) return action.title.replace(command, scrubSecrets(command));
+  return scrubSecrets(action.title);
+}
+
+/**
+ * True when `digestAction` clips text Jev needs to judge the action: a command longer than
+ * MAX_COMMAND, or a title longer than MAX_TITLE. A title that is only the command line ("$ cmd"
+ * for Claude, the bare command for Codex) does not count when the command itself fits, because
+ * Jev then reads the whole command in `command`. Paths are not considered.
+ */
+export function digestClipped(action: ApprovalAction): boolean {
+  const raw = commandOf(action);
+  if (raw && scrubSecrets(raw).length > MAX_COMMAND) return true;
+  if (raw && (action.title === raw || action.title === `$ ${raw}`)) return false;
+  return titleOf(action, raw, pathsOf(action)).length > MAX_TITLE;
 }
 
 /** Builds the state Jev sees for one approval. Pure: same action, same digest. */
@@ -107,7 +121,7 @@ export function digestAction(action: ApprovalAction, ctx: DigestContext): Approv
     action: {
       backend: action.backend,
       tool: action.tool,
-      title: titleOf(action, rawCommand, paths),
+      title: clip(titleOf(action, rawCommand, paths), MAX_TITLE),
       ...(action.cwd ? { cwd_name: path.basename(action.cwd) } : {}),
       ...(action.escalation ? { escalation: true } : {}),
     },

apps/desktop/src/main/engine/approvals/gate.ts

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
-import type { ApprovalAnswer, ApprovalGateConfig, ApprovalReceipt, ApprovalRule, Mode, RuleDecision } from "../../../shared/types.js";
+import type { ApprovalAnswer, ApprovalDowngrade, ApprovalGateConfig, ApprovalReceipt, ApprovalRule, Mode, RuleDecision } from "../../../shared/types.js";
 import type { ApprovalAction } from "../backends/types.js";
 import { JevError, type JevQuestion, type JevTransport } from "../routing/jev.js";
-import { digestAction } from "./digest.js";
+import { digestAction, digestClipped } from "./digest.js";
 
 /**
  * The approval gate: answers an approval from the user's plain-language rules before it reaches a
@@ -13,14 +13,19 @@ import { digestAction } from "./digest.js";
  * 3. Rules without one go to Jev (one request, one noul per rule, plus `destructive`), capped at
  *    MAX_JEV_RULES. A rule applies when its noul ≥ threshold.
  * 4. Applying rules combine as never > ask > allow; nothing applies → ask.
- * 5. Safety downgrades no rule can override: allow on something Jev finds destructive (≥ 0.5) or on a
- *    sandbox/permission escalation → ask.
- * 6. Jev unavailable → only the deterministic result counts, and the receipt says so.
+ * 5. Safety downgrades no rule can override, labelled in this order: allow on a sandbox/permission
+ *    escalation, on something Jev finds destructive (≥ 0.5), on a command line that chains or
+ *    redirects commands, or on an action whose digest clipped text Jev needed → ask.
+ * 6. Jev needed (language rules, or the destructive check on a match allow) but not configured or
+ *    unavailable → only the deterministic result counts, and the decision and receipt say Jev was
+ *    not consulted.
  * 7. Aborted while deciding → the approval is answered "no".
  */
 
 export const MAX_JEV_RULES = 12;
 export const DESTRUCTIVE_THRESHOLD = 0.5;
+/** The reason recorded when Jev was needed and there is no transport to ask. */
+export const JEV_NOT_CONFIGURED = "Jev is not configured or unavailable.";
 
 export const DESTRUCTIVE_QUESTION: JevQuestion = {
   type: "noul",
@@ -56,8 +61,10 @@ export interface GateDecision {
   ms: number;
   /** Jev's `destructive` probability, when it was asked. */
   destructive?: number;
-  /** Why a rule's allow became an ask, or that Jev could not be consulted. */
-  downgraded?: "destructive" | "escalation" | "jev-unavailable";
+  /** Why a rule's allow became an ask. */
+  downgraded?: ApprovalDowngrade;
+  /** Jev was needed for this decision but was not consulted; independent of `downgraded`. */
+  jevNotConsulted?: true;
   /** Why Jev could not be consulted, when it could not. */
   jevError?: string;
   /** The turn stopped while the gate was deciding: the approval is answered "no". */
@@ -85,6 +92,7 @@ export function receiptFor(d: GateDecision): ApprovalReceipt | undefined {
     ms: d.ms,
     ...(d.destructive !== undefined ? { destructive: round(d.destructive) } : {}),
     ...(d.downgraded ? { downgraded: d.downgraded } : {}),
+    ...(d.jevNotConsulted ? { jevNotConsulted: true as const } : {}),
   };
 }
 
@@ -116,6 +124,37 @@ export function matchesRule(match: string, action: Pick<ApprovalAction, "tool" |
   return candidates.some((c) => re.test(c));
 }
 
+/** Tools whose approval runs a shell command line: Claude's Bash, Codex's command, the scripted engine's shell. */
+const COMMAND_TOOLS = new Set(["Bash", "command", "shell"]);
+
+/**
+ * Shell control operators and line breaks: `;`, `&` (so `&&`, `&`, `2>&1`), `|` (so `||`), backtick,
+ * `$(`, `<` and `>` (so `<(` and `>(`), CR and LF. Quoting is deliberately not parsed, so
+ * `grep "a|b"` counts too: a false positive only means a person is asked.
+ */
+const CHAINING = /[;&|`<>\r\n]|\$\(/;
+
+/**
+ * True when a command action's full command line (never the digest's clipped copy) chains,
+ * redirects or substitutes commands. An allow rule covers one command, so such a line is asked.
+ * Both the input's `command` and the title are checked; either one chaining is enough.
+ */
+export function chainsCommands(action: Pick<ApprovalAction, "tool" | "title" | "input">): boolean {
+  if (!COMMAND_TOOLS.has(action.tool)) return false;
+  const command = action.input?.command;
+  const lines = [action.title.replace(/^\$ /, ""), ...(typeof command === "string" ? [command] : [])];
+  return lines.some((line) => CHAINING.test(line));
+}
+
+/** Why an allow must be asked instead; the first reason wins the label. */
+function downgradeOf(action: ApprovalAction, destructive: number | undefined): ApprovalDowngrade | undefined {
+  if (action.escalation) return "escalation";
+  if (destructive !== undefined && destructive >= DESTRUCTIVE_THRESHOLD) return "destructive";
+  if (chainsCommands(action)) return "compound";
+  if (digestClipped(action)) return "incomplete";
+  return undefined;
+}
+
 /** Rules sent to Jev: project-scoped first, then newest (later in the list), at most MAX_JEV_RULES. */
 export function jevRules(rules: ApprovalRule[]): ApprovalRule[] {
   return rules
@@ -184,9 +223,11 @@ export async function decide(action: ApprovalAction | undefined, ctx: GateContex
   // so the destructive downgrade can apply to an exact-match allow too.
   const unmatched = jevRules(rules.filter((r) => !r.match));
   const wouldAllow = combine(hits)?.rule.decision === "allow";
+  const needsJev = unmatched.length > 0 || wouldAllow;
   let destructive: number | undefined;
   let jevError: string | undefined;
-  if (ctx.transport && (unmatched.length || wouldAllow)) {
+  if (needsJev && !ctx.transport) jevError = JEV_NOT_CONFIGURED;
+  else if (needsJev && ctx.transport) {
     const questions: Record<string, JevQuestion> = { destructive: DESTRUCTIVE_QUESTION };
     unmatched.forEach((r, n) => { questions[`rule_${n}`] = ruleQuestion(r); });
     const state = digestAction(action, { project: { name: ctx.project.name, branch: ctx.project.branch }, mode: ctx.mode });
@@ -206,12 +247,10 @@ export async function decide(action: ApprovalAction | undefined, ctx: GateContex
   if (signal?.aborted) return { decision: "ask", source: "none", ms: ms(), aborted: true };
 
   const best = combine(hits);
-  const base = { ms: ms(), ...(destructive !== undefined ? { destructive } : {}), ...(jevError ? { jevError, downgraded: "jev-unavailable" as const } : {}) };
+  const base = { ms: ms(), ...(destructive !== undefined ? { destructive } : {}), ...(jevError ? { jevError, jevNotConsulted: true as const } : {}) };
   if (!best) return { decision: "ask", source: "none", ...base };
   const decided: GateDecision = { decision: best.rule.decision, rule: best.rule, source: best.via, p: best.p, ...base };
-  if (decided.decision === "allow") {
-    if (action.escalation) return { ...decided, decision: "ask", downgraded: "escalation" };
-    if (destructive !== undefined && destructive >= DESTRUCTIVE_THRESHOLD) return { ...decided, decision: "ask", downgraded: "destructive" };
-  }
-  return decided;
+  // Never and Ask rules stand as they are; only a rule-driven allow can be downgraded.
+  const downgraded = decided.decision === "allow" ? downgradeOf(action, destructive) : undefined;
+  return downgraded ? { ...decided, decision: "ask", downgraded } : decided;
 }

apps/desktop/src/main/engine/approvals/policy.ts

@@ -1,21 +1,26 @@
-import type { ApprovalPolicy, ApprovalReceipt } from "../../../shared/types.js";
+import type { ApprovalDowngrade, ApprovalPolicy, ApprovalReceipt } from "../../../shared/types.js";
 import type { ApprovalAction } from "../backends/types.js";
 
+/** Downgrades Always allow must not override. */
+const HELD: ReadonlySet<string> = new Set<ApprovalDowngrade>(["destructive", "escalation", "compound", "incomplete"]);
+
 /**
  * A thread's standing answer to approvals, applied only where the rules gate would have left the
  * decision to a human (an explicit "Never" rule has already refused by then).
  *
  * - `ask`: nothing; the card appears.
  * - `always`: yes, unless the request wants more sandbox access, or we cannot tell what it wants
- *   (no structured action), or the rules gate sent it here (an Ask rule, or a destructive/escalation downgrade).
+ *   (no structured action), or the rules gate sent it here (an Ask rule, or a safety downgrade:
+ *   destructive, escalation, a chained command, or a command Jev could not see in full).
+ *   Jev not being consulted is not itself a reason to ask.
  * - `yolo`: yes to everything.
  */
 export function policyAnswer(policy: ApprovalPolicy | undefined, action: ApprovalAction | undefined, gated?: ApprovalReceipt): "yes" | null {
   if (policy === "yolo") return "yes";
   if (policy !== "always") return null;
   if (!action || action.escalation) return null;
   // A rule that said "ask" or a safety downgrade is the user's own caution; only YOLO overrides it.
-  if (gated && (gated.decision === "ask" || gated.downgraded === "destructive" || gated.downgraded === "escalation")) return null;
+  if (gated && (gated.decision === "ask" || (gated.downgraded !== undefined && HELD.has(gated.downgraded)))) return null;
   return "yes";
 }
 

apps/desktop/src/main/engine/approvals/preview.ts

@@ -52,5 +52,6 @@ export async function previewApproval(raw: unknown, ctx: Context): Promise<Appro
   const result = await decide({ backend: req.backend, tool, title, cwd: project.path, escalation: req.escalation,
     ...(tool === "Bash" || tool === "command" ? { input: { command: title.replace(/^\$ /, "") } } : {}),
   }, { rules, config: { ...ctx.config, enabled: true }, project: { root: project.path, name: project.name }, mode: req.mode, transport, model });
-  return { ...result, ...(setupError ? { jevError: setupError, downgraded: result.downgraded ?? "jev-unavailable" } : {}), gateEnabled: ctx.config.enabled, jevAvailable: transport !== null };
+  // A judge that failed to resolve is reported by name rather than as "not configured".
+  return { ...result, ...(setupError ? { jevError: setupError } : {}), gateEnabled: ctx.config.enabled, jevAvailable: transport !== null };
 }

apps/desktop/src/renderer/components/ApprovalRules.tsx

@@ -90,7 +90,9 @@ function PreviewReceipt({ result: r }: { result: ApprovalPreview }) {
     <div>{r.source === "match" ? "Exact match" : r.source === "jev" ? `Jev ${r.p?.toFixed(2) ?? ""}` : "No match"} · {r.ms} ms{r.destructive !== undefined ? ` · destructive ${r.destructive.toFixed(2)}` : ""}</div>
     {r.downgraded === "destructive" && <p>Allow became Ask because the action may be destructive.</p>}
     {r.downgraded === "escalation" && <p>Allow became Ask because only you can grant additional permissions.</p>}
-    {(!r.jevAvailable || r.downgraded === "jev-unavailable") && <p>Jev unavailable; only exact-match rules were considered.{r.jevError ? ` ${r.jevError}` : ""}</p>}
+    {r.downgraded === "compound" && <p>Allow became Ask because the command chains several commands.</p>}
+    {r.downgraded === "incomplete" && <p>Allow became Ask because Jev could not see the whole command.</p>}
+    {(!r.jevAvailable || r.jevNotConsulted) && <p>Jev not consulted; only exact-match rules were considered.{r.jevError ? ` ${r.jevError}` : ""}</p>}
     {!r.gateEnabled && <p>Preview only — the approval gate is off.</p>}
   </div>;
 }

apps/desktop/src/renderer/components/ThreadView.tsx

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ import { toolSummary } from "../../shared/tool-summary";
 import { Fragment, useEffect, useMemo, useRef, useState } from "react";
 import type { ApprovalPolicy, ApprovalReceipt, BackendId, FollowUp, Mode, ModelInfo, Project, Thread, ThreadItem, ThreadPatch, TurnFailure, TurnFix } from "../../shared/types";
 import { failureReport } from "../../shared/failures";
-import { askedBecause, receiptVia } from "../../shared/approval-receipt";
+import { askedBecause, jevNotConsulted, receiptVia } from "../../shared/approval-receipt";
 import { safeHref } from "../../shared/inline";
 import { parseWebSearch, splitSources, type SourceLink, type WebSearch } from "../../shared/sources";
 import type { AttachmentActions } from "../composer-attachments";
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ function ApprovalReceiptRow({ item, receipt: r }: { item: ApprovalEntry; receipt
   const [open, setOpen] = useState(false);
   const allowed = r.decision === "allow";
   const title = item.title ?? item.question;
-  const via = `${receiptVia(r)} · ${r.ms} ms${r.downgraded === "jev-unavailable" ? " · Jev unavailable" : ""}`;
+  const via = `${receiptVia(r)} · ${r.ms} ms${jevNotConsulted(r) ? " · Jev not consulted" : ""}`;
   return (
     <div className={`approval-receipt ${allowed ? "allowed" : "refused"} ${open ? "open" : ""}`} data-testid="item" data-item-kind="approval" data-answered="true" data-decided-by={r.decision}>
       <button className="receipt-head" data-testid="item-toggle" onClick={() => setOpen((v) => !v)} aria-expanded={open}>
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ function ApprovalReceiptRow({ item, receipt: r }: { item: ApprovalEntry; receipt
             {r.source === "policy"
               ? `Approved because this thread is set to "${r.when}".`
               : <>{allowed ? "Approved once" : "Denied"} by your rule "{r.when}" ({receiptVia(r)}, {r.ms} ms){r.destructive !== undefined ? `; Jev put the chance that it is destructive at ${r.destructive.toFixed(2)}` : ""}.
-                {r.downgraded === "jev-unavailable" ? " Jev was unavailable, so only rules with an exact match could apply." : ""}</>}
+                {jevNotConsulted(r) ? " Jev was not consulted (not configured or unavailable), so only rules with an exact match could apply and nothing was checked for destructive effects." : ""}</>}
           </div>
         </div>
       )}