add Codex tool permission approval UI#98
Conversation
GatewayJ
force-pushed
the
codex/implement-codex-tool-permission-ui
branch
from
109b530 to
32f1224
Compare
GatewayJ
changed the title
GatewayJ
force-pushed
the
codex/implement-codex-tool-permission-ui
branch
from
32f1224 to
1ecefb5
Compare
GatewayJ
force-pushed
the
codex/implement-codex-tool-permission-ui
branch
from
9012beb to
5cc3b7e
Compare
| r.Post("/login", h.handleCLIProxyAuthLogin) | ||
| }) | ||
| r.Post("/runtime/permissions/{request_id}/decision", h.handleRuntimePermissionDecision) | ||
| r.Post("/codex/permissions/{request_id}/decision", h.handleCodexPermissionDecision) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this PR is standardizing permission decisions under the runtime API, keeping a second codex/permissions endpoint preserves the old abstraction boundary and leaves two public routes for the same operation. Unless there is an external compatibility requirement, I would drop this route and keep runtime/permissions as the only API surface.
…-tool-permission-ui # Conflicts: # internal/api/bot_compat.go # internal/channel/codexbridge/bridge.go # internal/channel/codexbridge/bridge_test.go # internal/channel/codexbridge/render.go # internal/channel/codexbridge/sse_client.go # internal/im/bot_bridge.go # internal/im/service.go # web/app/src/hooks/workspace/useConversationController.ts # web/app/src/models/conversations.ts # web/app/tests/models/conversations.test.ts
GatewayJ
force-pushed
the
codex/implement-codex-tool-permission-ui
branch
3 times, most recently
from
a295022 to
d80e2f5
Compare
GatewayJ
force-pushed
the
codex/implement-codex-tool-permission-ui
branch
from
d80e2f5 to
6e176bd
Compare
| return codexPermissionActivityDecider{permission: decider} | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type codexPermissionActivityDecider struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This adapter feels a bit too high in the stack for cli/serve.go. It is already carrying Codex-specific activity decision semantics rather than pure server wiring, so I would move it down next to the Codex runtime implementation (for example under internal/runtime/codex) and have serve.go only construct or reference it. That keeps the CLI/bootstrap layer thin now, and still leaves room to generalize later if another agent runtime needs the same activity interface.
2 participants
Summary
Why
Codex tool calls were previously rendered as plain text, and ACP permission requests were automatically allowed by the backend. This PR makes tool activity machine-readable in the IM timeline and lets users approve or reject Codex permission requests from the Web UI.
Validation
go test ./internal/runtime/codex ./internal/channel/codexbridge ./internal/apipnpm --dir web/app testpnpm --dir web/app typecheckNote: pnpm reported the local Node version warning (
wanted >=22.13.0 <25, currentv26.0.0), but the test and typecheck commands completed successfully.