This PR adds support for a model-based summary and risk assessment for
commands that violate the sandbox policy and require user approval. This
aids the user in evaluating whether the command should be approved.
The feature works by taking a failed command and passing it back to the
model and asking it to summarize the command, give it a risk level (low,
medium, high) and a risk category (e.g. "data deletion" or "data
exfiltration"). It uses a new conversation thread so the context in the
existing thread doesn't influence the answer. If the call to the model
fails or takes longer than 5 seconds, it falls back to the current
behavior.
For now, this is an experimental feature and is gated by a config key
`experimental_sandbox_command_assessment`.
Here is a screen shot of the approval prompt showing the risk assessment
and summary.
<img width="723" height="282" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4597dd7c-d5a0-4e9f-9d13-414bd082fd6b"
/>
This adds `parsed_cmd: Vec<ParsedCommand>` to `ExecApprovalRequestEvent`
in the core protocol (`protocol/src/protocol.rs`), which is also what
this field is named on `ExecCommandBeginEvent`. Honestly, I don't love
the name (it sounds like a single command, but it is actually a list of
them), but I don't want to get distracted by a naming discussion right
now.
This also adds `parsed_cmd` to `ExecCommandApprovalParams` in
`codex-rs/app-server-protocol/src/protocol.rs`, so it will be available
via `codex app-server`, as well.
For consistency, I also updated `ExecApprovalElicitRequestParams` in
`codex-rs/mcp-server/src/exec_approval.rs` to include this field under
the name `codex_parsed_cmd`, as that struct already has a number of
special `codex_*` fields. Note this is the code for when Codex is used
as an MCP _server_ and therefore has to conform to the official spec for
an MCP elicitation type.
This PR does two things because after I got deep into the first one I
started pulling on the thread to the second:
- Makes `ConversationManager` the place where all in-memory
conversations are created and stored. Previously, `MessageProcessor` in
the `codex-mcp-server` crate was doing this via its `session_map`, but
this is something that should be done in `codex-core`.
- It unwinds the `ctrl_c: tokio::sync::Notify` that was threaded
throughout our code. I think this made sense at one time, but now that
we handle Ctrl-C within the TUI and have a proper `Op::Interrupt` event,
I don't think this was quite right, so I removed it. For `codex exec`
and `codex proto`, we now use `tokio::signal::ctrl_c()` directly, but we
no longer make `Notify` a field of `Codex` or `CodexConversation`.
Changes of note:
- Adds the files `conversation_manager.rs` and `codex_conversation.rs`
to `codex-core`.
- `Codex` and `CodexSpawnOk` are no longer exported from `codex-core`:
other crates must use `CodexConversation` instead (which is created via
`ConversationManager`).
- `core/src/codex_wrapper.rs` has been deleted in favor of
`ConversationManager`.
- `ConversationManager::new_conversation()` returns `NewConversation`,
which is in line with the `new_conversation` tool we want to add to the
MCP server. Note `NewConversation` includes `SessionConfiguredEvent`, so
we eliminate checks in cases like `codex-rs/core/tests/client.rs` to
verify `SessionConfiguredEvent` is the first event because that is now
internal to `ConversationManager`.
- Quite a bit of code was deleted from
`codex-rs/mcp-server/src/message_processor.rs` since it no longer has to
manage multiple conversations itself: it goes through
`ConversationManager` instead.
- `core/tests/live_agent.rs` has been deleted because I had to update a
bunch of tests and all the tests in here were ignored, and I don't think
anyone ever ran them, so this was just technical debt, at this point.
- Removed `notify_on_sigint()` from `util.rs` (and in a follow-up, I
hope to refactor the blandly-named `util.rs` into more descriptive
files).
- In general, I started replacing local variables named `codex` as
`conversation`, where appropriate, though admittedly I didn't do it
through all the integration tests because that would have added a lot of
noise to this PR.
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/openai/codex/pull/2240).
* #2264
* #2263
* __->__ #2240
1. Added an elicitation for `approve-patch` which is very similar to
`approve-exec`.
2. Extracted both elicitations to their own files to prevent
`codex_tool_runner` from blowing up in size.
