test(catalog): pin the custom-provider reasoning-summary opt-in (#1100)

[lidge-jun]

Summary

Pins the custom-provider half of the #1100 reasoning-summary contract, so PR #1119 can be closed without losing regression coverage.

The landed #1100 tests cover the built-in registry rows. They do not reach the custom-provider route, where an explicit modelSupportsReasoningSummaries opt-in has to survive the routed strip. Both existing custom-provider tests call buildCatalogEntries(null, ...), which takes the fallback branch and never runs normalizeRoutedCatalogEntry — so an ordering regression in the template path was invisible to every existing test.

That survival is ordering-dependent: normalizeRoutedCatalogEntry deletes the flag and applyCatalogModelMetadata restores it. Reverse them and every opted-in routed provider silently stops receiving reasoning.effort from Codex while the picker keeps advertising the ladder — the original #1100 symptom.

Three tests: the opt-in survives the template path, an absent opt-in stays conservative rather than claiming OpenAI-only summary delivery for an arbitrary endpoint, and the no-template fallback reaches the same answer by a different route (kept explicit so unifying the two construction paths is a visible change).

Supersedes the test portion of #1119, whose branch is ~1,800 commits behind dev. Authored originally there; preserved via Co-authored-by.

Verification

• bun test tests/codex-catalog.test.ts — 132 pass / 0 fail
• bun run typecheck — clean
• Ablation: swapping normalizeRoutedCatalogEntry and applyCatalogModelMetadata fails the new opt-in test plus the landed built-in test (6 pass / 2 fail); reverting restores 8 pass / 0 fail

Checklist

• Scope stays focused and avoids unrelated cleanup.
• Docs or release notes were updated when needed.
• Security-sensitive changes were reviewed for secrets, auth, and unsafe defaults.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Added regression coverage for reasoning-effort metadata across routed custom providers.
  • Verified that explicit reasoning-summary settings are preserved when supported.
  • Confirmed conservative behavior when summary support is not explicitly enabled.
  • Covered fallback behavior when no template is available.

[github-actions]

✅ Deterministic PR hygiene checks passed.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: cdca7479-a3de-41ab-a0f8-2d52b1e0a58c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 517f446 and 8bde6c4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• tests/codex-catalog.test.ts

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request adds three regression tests for reasoning-summary metadata on custom routed models. The tests cover explicit opt-in preservation, conservative disabling without opt-in, and no-template fallback behavior.

Changes

Routed reasoning metadata

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Reasoning metadata regression tests tests/codex-catalog.test.ts	Lines 2391–2426 verify that explicit summary support preserves the effort ladder and supports_reasoning_summaries: true. Lines 2428–2449 verify conservative disabling without opt-in. Lines 2451–2471 verify opt-in preservation in the no-template fallback.

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• lidge-jun/opencodex#949: Introduced routed normalization behavior covered by these regression tests.
• lidge-jun/opencodex#963: Added related catalog logic for preserving or disabling provider reasoning-summary metadata.
• lidge-jun/opencodex#965: Added related reasoning-summary metadata inheritance and fallback behavior.

Suggested reviewers: wibias, ingwannu

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the regression tests for custom-provider reasoning-summary opt-in behavior.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch codex/260808-1100-custom-optin-contract

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}