This PR:
* Added the clippy.toml to configure allowable expect / unwrap usage in
tests
* Removed as many expect/allow lines as possible from tests
* moved a bunch of allows to expects where possible
Note: in integration tests, non `#[test]` helper functions are not
covered by this so we had to leave a few lingering `expect(expect_used`
checks around
This updates `CodexMessageProcessor` so that each notification it sends
for a `EventMsg` from a `CodexConversation` such that:
- The `params` always has an appropriate `conversationId` field.
- The `method` is now includes the name of the `EventMsg` type rather
than using `codex/event` as the `method` type for all notifications. (We
currently prefix the method name with `codex/event/`, but I think that
should go away once we formalize the notification schema in
`wire_format.rs`.)
As part of this, we update `test_codex_jsonrpc_conversation_flow()` to
verify that the `task_finished` notification has made it through the
system instead of sleeping for 5s and "hoping" the server finished
processing the task. Note we have seen some flakiness in some of our
other, similar integration tests, and I expect adding a similar check
would help in those cases, as well.
## Summary
Per the [latest MCP
spec](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-06-18/basic#meta),
the `_meta` field is reserved for metadata. In the [Typescript
Schema](0695a497eb/schema/2025-06-18/schema.ts (L37-L40)),
`progressToken` is defined as a value to be attached to subsequent
notifications for that request.
The
[CallToolRequestParams](0695a497eb/schema/2025-06-18/schema.ts (L806-L817))
extends this definition but overwrites the params field. This ambiguity
makes our generated type definitions tricky, so I'm going to skip
`progressToken` field for now and just send back the `requestId`
instead.
In a future PR, we can clarify, update our `generate_mcp_types.py`
script, and update our progressToken logic accordingly.
## Testing
- [x] Added unit tests
- [x] Manually tested with mcp client
This updates the MCP server so that if it receives an
`ExecApprovalRequest` from the `Codex` session, it in turn sends an [MCP
elicitation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/draft/client/elicitation)
to the client to ask for the approval decision. Upon getting a response,
it forwards the client's decision via `Op::ExecApproval`.
Admittedly, we should be doing the same thing for
`ApplyPatchApprovalRequest`, but this is our first time experimenting
with elicitations, so I'm inclined to defer wiring that code path up
until we feel good about how this one works.
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/openai/codex/pull/1623).
* __->__ #1623
* #1622
* #1621
* #1620
Previous to this change, `MessageProcessor` had a
`tokio::sync::mpsc::Sender<JSONRPCMessage>` as an abstraction for server
code to send a message down to the MCP client. Because `Sender` is cheap
to `clone()`, it was straightforward to make it available to tasks
scheduled with `tokio::task::spawn()`.
This worked well when we were only sending notifications or responses
back down to the client, but we want to add support for sending
elicitations in #1623, which means that we need to be able to send
_requests_ to the client, and now we need a bit of centralization to
ensure all request ids are unique.
To that end, this PR introduces `OutgoingMessageSender`, which houses
the existing `Sender<OutgoingMessage>` as well as an `AtomicI64` to mint
out new, unique request ids. It has methods like `send_request()` and
`send_response()` so that callers do not have to deal with
`JSONRPCMessage` directly, as having to set the `jsonrpc` for each
message was a bit tedious (this cleans up `codex_tool_runner.rs` quite a
bit).
We do not have `OutgoingMessageSender` implement `Clone` because it is
important that the `AtomicI64` is shared across all users of
`OutgoingMessageSender`. As such, `Arc<OutgoingMessageSender>` must be
used instead, as it is frequently shared with new tokio tasks.
As part of this change, we update `message_processor.rs` to embrace
`await`, though we must be careful that no individual handler blocks the
main loop and prevents other messages from being handled.
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/openai/codex/pull/1622).
* #1623
* __->__ #1622
* #1621
* #1620
