Skip to content

fix(approvals): honor resolved status before policy checks - #4183

Merged
seratch merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/authoritative-tool-approval-status
Aug 5, 2026
Merged

fix(approvals): honor resolved status before policy checks#4183
seratch merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/authoritative-tool-approval-status

Conversation

@seratch

@seratch seratch commented Aug 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This pull request fixes tool approval handling so stored approve and reject decisions remain authoritative across initial execution, resume planning, Realtime calls, and native and sandbox apply-patch operations.

It carries forward the bug identified and initially addressed in the now-closed #3937. Because that PR had fallen behind current main and did not cover newer concurrent checker, guardrail, and resume paths, this maintainer-authored follow-up reimplements the fix against current main while preserving Henry Su's contribution through commit co-authorship.

Resolved decisions now skip unnecessary dynamic approval checks, and decisions recorded while a checker or pre-approval guardrail is suspended are re-read before execution or interruption registration. Resume planning preserves unmatched pending approvals, avoids stale re-interruptions, and retains new approvals emitted by execution-time policy reevaluation. Tool input safety guardrails remain independent, and there are no public API or serialized-state changes.

Treat stored approval decisions as authoritative across execution, resume planning, Realtime, and multi-operation apply-patch paths.

Co-authored-by: Henry Su <henrysu4707@gmail.com>

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 36f90ea4e5

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/agents/run_internal/tool_execution.py
Comment thread src/agents/run_internal/tool_execution.py
@seratch

seratch commented Aug 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review again

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 36f90ea4e5

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

Reviewed commit: 36f90ea4e5

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@seratch
seratch merged commit 6e4cec5 into main Aug 5, 2026
9 checks passed
@seratch
seratch deleted the fix/authoritative-tool-approval-status branch August 5, 2026 00:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant