[codex] isolate config tests and remove legacy release archive

[LDMB123]

Summary

Isolates config CLI tests from the operator home data directory and removes the checked-in legacy v0.6.2 macOS release archive now that the same archive and checksum exist on the GitHub release.

The branch was rebased onto current origin/main (37391ce, [email protected]) before landing validation.

Goal (Cherny pattern)

SUCCESS_CRITERION: MCPorter config CLI tests pass with isolated config/data homes, the redundant checked-in release archive is removed without losing release evidence, and the local mcporter CLI reports the npm latest version.
VERIFY_COMMAND: pnpm exec vitest run tests/cli-config-command.test.ts && pnpm run check && mcporter --version
ROLLBACK_COMMAND: git revert HEAD --no-edit
TIMEBOX: PT2H

Validation

• GitHub release readback for v0.6.2 confirmed mcporter-macos-arm64-v0.6.2.tar.gz and mcporter-macos-arm64-v0.6.2.tar.gz.sha256 are both uploaded release assets.
• Release asset digest for mcporter-macos-arm64-v0.6.2.tar.gz: sha256:f10d87f12794933b1f0d9b793e955342905a19fdc79a89df2e18d9654f7ba9f2.
• npm view mcporter version returned 0.12.0.
• /opt/homebrew/bin/mcporter --version and mcporter --version both returned 0.12.0 after npm install -g --prefix /opt/homebrew mcporter@latest.
• pnpm exec vitest run tests/cli-config-command.test.ts passed on rebased PR head 1373c7e.
• pnpm run check passed on rebased PR head 1373c7e.
• ~/.agents/skills/codex-prepush/codex-prepush.sh origin/main passed with no HIGH/CRITICAL findings.

Proof

$ pnpm exec vitest run tests/cli-config-command.test.ts
RUN v4.1.8 /Users/louisherman/Projects/mcporter
PASS tests/cli-config-command.test.ts (22 tests) 59ms

Test Files  1 passed (1)
Tests       22 passed (22)
Duration    344ms
exit: 0

$ pnpm run check
> [email protected] check /Users/louisherman/Projects/mcporter
> pnpm format:check && pnpm lint:oxlint && pnpm typecheck

All matched files use the correct format.
Found 0 warnings and 0 errors.
tsgo --project tsconfig.json --noEmit
exit: 0

$ npm view mcporter version
0.12.0
$ /opt/homebrew/bin/mcporter --version
0.12.0
$ mcporter --version
0.12.0

$ ~/.agents/skills/codex-prepush/codex-prepush.sh origin/main
codex-prepush: no HIGH/CRITICAL findings - push allowed
exit: 0

Notes

Submitted from the LDMB123/mcporter fork because direct push to openclaw/mcporter is not permitted for this token.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed June 12, 2026, 9:50 AM ET / 13:50 UTC.

Summary
The PR initializes an empty config for one CLI suggestion test and removes redundant tracked v0.6.2 macOS release artifacts.

Reproducibility: not applicable. this is test and repository cleanup, and the relevant isolation behavior is clear from the source path and passing focused run.

Review metrics: 2 noteworthy metrics.

• Repository reduction: 22,727,187-byte binary and 101-byte checksum removed. The source checkout shrinks materially while the immutable published release assets remain available.
• Validation scope: 22 focused tests plus 125 passing CI test files. The contributor and CI exercised both the changed test area and the broader suite.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🦞 diamond lobster
Proof: 🦞 diamond lobster
Patch quality: 🦞 diamond lobster
Result: ready for maintainer review.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Next step before merge

• [P2] No repair is needed; this clean implementation PR only needs ordinary maintainer merge review.

Security
Cleared: The patch removes a historical binary and checksum and adds test-only setup, with no new dependency, executable source, secret, permission, or supply-chain input.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Merge the focused fixture isolation and complete the established removal of generated release archives from source control.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable; this is test and repository cleanup, and the relevant isolation behavior is clear from the source path and passing focused run.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes. The two-line fixture setup narrowly prevents host config imports from affecting the test, and deleting the redundant archive follows established release hygiene.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 37391ce70b3f.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add proof: sufficient: Contributor real behavior proof is sufficient. The PR body provides after-change focused test and check output, broader CI results, exact release-asset digest readback, and installed CLI version verification.
• add rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• add status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Sufficient (terminal): The PR body provides after-change focused test and check output, broader CI results, exact release-asset digest readback, and installed CLI version verification.
• remove rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool: Current PR rating is rating: 🦞 diamond lobster, so this older rating label is no longer current.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is low-risk deterministic-test and repository-hygiene work with no urgent runtime impact.
• rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Sufficient (terminal): The PR body provides after-change focused test and check output, broader CI results, exact release-asset digest readback, and installed CLI version verification.
• proof: sufficient: Contributor real behavior proof is sufficient. The PR body provides after-change focused test and check output, broader CI results, exact release-asset digest readback, and installed CLI version verification.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• Test isolation path: The add command loads or creates the targeted config before writing; initializing that config ensures the suggestion test cannot inherit discovered operator imports and alter its candidate set. (src/cli/config/add.ts:78, 37391ce70b3f)
• Published release copy: The v0.6.2 GitHub release retains the macOS archive with digest f10d87f12794933b1f0d9b793e955342905a19fdc79a89df2e18d9654f7ba9f2 and its checksum sidecar. (dist-bun/mcporter-macos-arm64-v0.6.2.tar.gz.sha256:1, 37391ce70b3f)
• Established cleanup pattern: Earlier commits removed tracked v0.6.2 and v0.6.6 package archives and added ignore rules, so this change completes an existing repository-hygiene direction. (.gitignore:4, 9aef37b07799)
• Current PR state: GitHub reports head 1373c7e cleanly mergeable into current main with no review comments; the supplied CI excerpt reports 125 passing test files and successful checks. (1373c7ec6244)
• Feature provenance: Blame ties the current config CLI test setup and close-match test to the v0.12.0 preparation commit, while archive history traces the binary to the v0.6.2 packaging commit. (tests/cli-config-command.test.ts:346, 023314cf31cd)

Likely related people:

• steipete: Introduced the current config CLI tests and original v0.6.2 artifacts, then authored the prior release-archive cleanup commits. (role: feature introducer and recent area contributor; confidence: high; commits: 023314cf31cd, 869b8ff2bcef, 9aef37b07799; files: tests/cli-config-command.test.ts, dist-bun/mcporter-macos-arm64-v0.6.2.tar.gz, .gitignore)
• feniix: Repository shortlog identifies Sebastian Otaegui as the other contributor in the config command implementation area. (role: adjacent config contributor; confidence: medium; files: src/cli/config-command.ts, src/cli/config)

What the crustacean ranks mean

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

How this review workflow works

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

[LDMB123]

@clawsweeper re-review

Proof has been added to the PR body: release asset readback, focused config test output, pnpm run check output, and CI log excerpts.

[clawsweeper]

🦞🧹
ClawSweeper re-review requested.

I asked ClawSweeper to review this item again.
Action: item re-review queued (workflow sweep.yml, event repository_dispatch).
Result: the existing ClawSweeper review comment will be edited in place when the review finishes.

Re-review progress:

• State: Failed
• Detail: The targeted re-review did not finish cleanly. Check the workflow run for details.
• Run: https://github.com/openclaw/clawsweeper/actions/runs/27383748515
• Updated: 2026-06-11T23:27:08.243Z