[dinakarjs]

Current closure refresh - 30 October 2026

Published head: 072fdb8. Tested tree: 2382a00c999199979b5880ff7f24cd584f9f0052. Current-main history is merged without rewriting earlier contributors' commits; DCO trailers are present on this refresh commit.

Unit suite: 2603 passed / 8 skipped; Ruff, strict mypy (77 files), configured Bandit pass. This remains the informative continuity review plan; eleven planned acceptance pairs are not marked executed.

The published tree equals the locally tested tree. Whitespace checks on the contribution delta against current main pass (existing CRLF documentation is preserved). Hosted current-head checks and independent maintainer acceptance remain separate; no merge, production deployment or hardware result is claimed. Earlier measurements below describe their original revisions. Prepared with OpenAI Codex.

---

What

Adds eleven planned independent-review acceptance pairs for policy-state continuity, related to #675. Preserves fresh audit incarnations and separates policy lookup from authenticated permission to resume.

Why

Supports Rajnish's existing design ownership and the maintainer's contract-first direction. It does not propose a competing implementation or close #675. Authorization, invalidation generations, concurrency boundaries, storage rollback and audit linkage remain design decisions.

Security impact

No runtime, persistence schema, credentials, signing or audit hash changes. Proposed review criteria expose the distinction between stored state and authorized continuity. All cases are explicitly unexecuted.

Test plan

• Relative links checked against base 3b2af0b; table structure, whitespace and informative wording checked.
• Fresh agent reader compared the session manager, state and store contracts; no additional conceptual blocker found.
• Recorded 30 October validation: 2,603 unit tests passed / 8 skipped; Ruff, strict mypy (77 files) and configured Bandit pass. This is prior validation, not a fresh run during description cleanup.
• Restart/replica/guard-removal acceptance experiments: future work after contract approval.

Literature and limits

RFC 9700 §4.14 is prior art for client/scope binding and replay/rotation; it does not select OAuth or a cMCP credential format. SQLite isolation informs transaction visibility/concurrency tests, not authorization or rollback resistance. The document records the exact source baseline and links Rajnish's analysis plus the maintainer ruling. Sources establish review questions, not implemented controls.

DCO sign-off

• I certify this contribution under the Developer Certificate of Origin; both commits carry sign-off.

Prepared with Codex.

Historical self-review correction — 20 October 2026

Head 684d34a3c7f968339ed358e539b9945e6a608bf4 replaces three repository-relative source links with immutable GitHub links. The original strict MkDocs build failed with exactly three outside-docs warnings; the corrected full strict build passes locally using the hash-locked docs/dev requirements and checkout source path. The CI-equivalent install also reports the existing mdformat/markdown-it-py lock conflict; this document edit does not change those locks or claim dependency consistency. No runtime behavior changed. That historical revision's pending checks are superseded by the successful current-head CI, Confinement reference, CodeQL and Documentation checks workflows. Independent review and continuity-contract decisions remain pending; all eleven planned acceptance pairs remain unexecuted.

[github-actions]

🟡 Contributor Check: MEDIUM

Check	Result
Profile	MEDIUM
Credential	LOW
Overall	MEDIUM

Automated check by AgenTrust Contributor Check.

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[dinakarjs]

Closure request to @rajnisht7 on synchronized head 072fdb8: current local unit/type/lint/security checks pass and the returned hosted technical checks pass; independent acceptance remains. Please settle the #675 resume-identity/credential authority and replay/concurrency/rollback contract before an implementation is selected. Persisted session data is not by itself authorization to resume it. The eleven acceptance pairs in this informative draft remain explicitly unexecuted; no competing runtime implementation or invented credential policy is introduced. Prepared with OpenAI Codex.

[dinakarjs]

@rajnisht7 @imran-siddique requesting a bounded disposition of this informative review plan at 072fdb8. Current-head CI, Confinement reference, CodeQL and Documentation checks all succeed.

The #675 ruling already settles two points: audit session IDs stay fresh, and policy continuity uses a separate key with authenticated principal/scope/authority; manifest identity alone is insufficient. I am not asking to reopen those decisions.

Please decide whether the eleven-pair informative matrix can receive document review/acceptance while the runtime contract remains held, or whether #793 should remain draft until Rajnish's contract is posted. For implementation follow-through, the needed pinned contract should identify:

• how resume authority is authenticated and bound to the logical scope, including anonymous deployments;
• how reset and attestation refresh invalidate old authority;
• the concurrency/atomic-update rule preserving the sensitivity ratchet and fresh audit incarnations;
• the missing/deleted/unavailable/rolled-back store outcomes, without inferring rollback resistance from SQLite.

My recommendation is to review the bounded acceptance matrix separately from selecting a resumption API, while keeping all runtime work and unexecuted acceptance claims on hold. Please select that review route or a continued draft hold, and point to the contract revision when available. I own the independent verification follow-through, not a competing runtime design. Prior local validation is documented; no new suite run is claimed. Prepared with OpenAI Codex.