Skip to content

test: prove workflow decisions through an independent MCP client (refs #848) - #877

Merged
joshrotenberg merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
test/848-workflow-client-proof
Oct 12, 2026
Merged

joshrotenberg merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
test/848-workflow-client-proof

Conversation

@joshrotenberg

@joshrotenberg joshrotenberg commented Oct 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The independent MCP client proof covered agreements but did not exercise workflow launch decisions. A Python standard-library client now discovers pending proposals through attention and approves or rejects them over both supported protocol versions.

The journey verifies exact retries, stale opposite decisions, missing and invalid authentication, routine authorization refusals, output schemas, tool errors versus JSON-RPC errors, and recovery in a fresh interpreter using retained proposal IDs. The isolated ExUnit wrapper verifies exactly one admitted run and never-attempted job, the original rejection reason, and no unrelated message dispatch. Documentation records the proof and its limits.

Validation: both protocol journeys under focused seeds 1, 12345 and 777; all five local gates; independent review. CI must pass on the updated PR head before merge.

Queues remain disabled. Retry comparison does not inject a transport failure, and client reconnection does not restart the server. #848 remains open for prompt/status/outcome journeys, actual server restart, attachments, remaining operator actions, stopping and delegation. No MCP schema or runtime behavior changes.

Refs #848.

@joshrotenberg
joshrotenberg marked this pull request as ready for review October 12, 2026 01:59
@joshrotenberg
joshrotenberg merged commit 472cc20 into main Oct 12, 2026
4 checks passed
@joshrotenberg
joshrotenberg deleted the test/848-workflow-client-proof branch October 12, 2026 02:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant