[david6666666]

When local optimization plateaus, the existing search policy now directs the agent to reconstruct useful work, dependencies, state ownership and constrained resources across the whole request path before proposing another experiment. Three decision cards cover admission versus preemption, allocation/reuse versus tiering, and pipeline bubbles versus communication/memory pressure. Missing diagnostic evidence calls for measurement or no change.

Refs #131. Issue acceptance and closure remain separate.

• Reuse optimization-search-policy, existing engine/hardware owners, Orca/Alpa material, and case.admission-drain-occupancy. Add five versioned cases: Sarathi chunk budgets, PagedAttention allocation, SGLang/vLLM prefix reuse, DistServe placement, and CUDA copy overlap.
• Preserve source observations, negative outcomes, explicitly hypothetical counterexamples, applicability, invariants, metrics, rollback, attribution and licensing boundaries. Imported evidence remains locally unverified.
• Integrate through existing navigation/matrices and actual reader/Collect fixtures. No inference runtime, schema, controller, GPU/model execution, or promotion changes.
• Update only the affected generated abstract. build_skill_index.py --skill optimization-search-policy scopes generation/checking to that record and shared navigation. All 59 unrelated JSON records are byte-for-byte identical to the PR base; the net diff is 24 files instead of 81. Complete content/hash validation remains per record, using each record's own source pin. Empty/unknown selectors fail, and obsolete projections for a moved skill require explicit removal.

Validation:

• Full CPU suite after reducing generated records: 994 passed, 1 skipped, 135 subtests passed (Python 3.12, Git 2.47.3, current checkout on PYTHONPATH).
• Final generator suite after empty-selector/backend-move fixes: 8 passed. These final changes affect only generator selection; the packaged knowledge bytes used by the full-suite and wheel checks are unchanged.
• Reader/index/selection checks for the scoped update: 45 passed.
• Ruff, changed-file pre-commit checks and scoped source-index consistency: passed.
• Rebuilt sdist/wheel and noneditable installed-package check outside the checkout with isolated Python and no PYTHONPATH: passed. Resources are readable without importing PyYAML.
• The one skipped test is the opt-in fresh-venv source-install smoke; the separate wheel installation check was executed.
• Independent read-only review verified both final selector fixes at 6eca16c190cfe4eca6b10be3646ea1589c204382; no remaining actionable findings.

Regeneration for the affected source:

python tools/build_skill_index.py --source-revision d0338d71010088a9382a03f10b087a4f5330c7d3 --skill optimization-search-policy
python tools/build_skill_index.py --source-revision d0338d71010088a9382a03f10b087a4f5330c7d3 --skill optimization-search-policy --check

All commits carry DCO sign-offs. CPU fixtures establish packaging and deterministic retrieval/selection contracts, not agent efficacy or speedup; the existing Skill Eval report-audit grader is unchanged. Complete required Collect context is 206,597 bytes in this snapshot; smaller budgets explicitly return context_limit and required_bytes rather than dropping prerequisites.

{
  "schema_version": 1,
  "head_sha": "6eca16c190cfe4eca6b10be3646ea1589c204382",
  "human_only": false,
  "material_ai_authors": [
    {
      "tool": "Codex",
      "model_id": "gpt-6-astra",
      "effort": "xhigh",
      "role": "author"
    }
  ]
}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-26T08:26:14.051108Z	373192a	Draft marked ready

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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[Dong1017]

LGTM for the bounded knowledge/generator change at head 6eca16c190cfe4eca6b10be3646ea1589c204382; no actionable source/software finding after reviewing all 24 changed paths against #131's accepted scope and existing discussions.

Reviewed the three diagnosis-first cards, five new versioned cases plus existing admission/drain observation, metadata/notices/matrices, reader/collect fixtures and installed-package assertions. Also reviewed generator --skill, full-regeneration compatibility, per-record source rendering, unknown/empty selectors and stale backend-move rejection. Canonical bytes are pinned to source d0338d7…; all 59 unrelated generated records are untouched. Sampled original Sarathi/PagedAttention/SGLang/DistServe/vLLM/CUDA sources support the stated prerequisites and negative outcomes; hypothetical reversals and candidate/not_run limits remain explicit.

All four Ready jobs, lint and current per-head policy pass. Skill Eval publisher fails HTTP 403 (log inspected); execution skipped.

Outstanding integration decision: #156 and #133 overlap as alternative #131 deliveries, including the same foundational guide path and different case sets. This LGTM is not a recommendation to merge both independently: select/reconcile the delivery before integration and refresh any changed head/projections. No new feature requirement is being added.

Integration boundary: inspected actual main 0c78a7e257dfaa3573b77581a39539e8a3a5da4c; the API base remains a4a0fbd62defe2bc53ab090e1fa50bd7139663a6. Their difference is four disjoint Flare #155 paths. This is a scoped source/software conclusion, not an all-workflows-green, model/hardware efficacy, issue acceptance or merge authorization. Separate Skill Eval publication remains failed and execution skipped; do not treat those as a successful evaluation. No model/device calls, installation or workflow dispatch was performed.