yetone
c3e673b061
One email in two Team workspaces is saved as "me@example.com · Team" and "me@example.com · Team · <workspace>" (codexName). codexAccount still named the account Codex is on by codexUser alone, "me@example.com · Team". With Codex signed in to the second seat, its candidate used the second seat's credentials under the first seat's name. Everything keyed on Account.User then read the first seat's records: Smart's allowance (98% used, so the seat with 2% left was ranked last), rests and sticks (restKey/who), the usage cap, per-account proxy and model list, a gateway key's account list (LoginID), OwnPaused, and the Routing page's name. - codexLiveName (logins.go): codexName over the saved logins, shared by liveLogin and codexAccount, so the provider's Account.User is the saved name. - SessionIdentities: a saved Codex identity goes by its saved name, and the one from auth.json by that of the saved one of its workspace and member, so a session of the second seat is told as that seat's. - providers-accounts.md: the Codex naming rule. Stored records: nothing keyed under a name that goes away. The first seat keeps "email · Team"; the second seat's rests, caps, proxy, model list and usage are already under its saved name, written while it wasn't the one in use. Records written under the first seat's name while the second was in use can't be told apart now. Rests run out and readings are read again, so none is migrated. Tests: TestCodexTeamSeatsOfOneEmailWeighedApart (gateway): Team A 98%, Team B (Codex on it) 2% with its week renewing first, another email 20%. On the old code it fails with "sent to ws-other; want the seat Codex is on" (and, with its name check, "goes by \"me@example.com · Team\""). With session_identity.go reverted, TestCodexWorkspaceSessionIdentities (provider) fails with "the seat Codex is on: [me@example.com · Team]". Run: gofmt -l (clean); go vet, GOOS=linux and GOOS=windows go vet -tags nogui on provider, gateway, usage; go build -tags nogui ./... on darwin, linux, windows; go test -tags nogui ./internal/provider ./internal/gateway ./internal/usage under a temp HOME with pinned caches: all ok. Not tried with real accounts: no two Team seats of one email are available here.
Subsystem design references
These pages describe current responsibilities, runtime paths, state, and contracts. Start with the subsystem relevant to your task, then follow its source links to verify the implementation you change.
| Subsystem | Reference |
|---|---|
| Built-in subscriptions moving to plugins | Provider and plugin ownership |
| Plugins that run on the gateway's requests and replies | Gateway middleware |
| Claude subscription turns across Claude Code runs | Claude subscription bridge |
| How the gateway picks a provider, key or account, and falls back | Gateway routing and fallback |
| Connecting an agent's config to the gateway, drift, disconnect, WSL twins | Agent wiring |
| Providers, keys, subscription accounts, refresh and allowance | Providers and accounts |
| Instructions, MCP servers, skills and RTK written into agents | Library |
Tray, panel, window, magpie web and the page's JSON API |
GUI app shell |
A subsystem can span several packages or repositories. Its reference describes the behavior those parts provide together; it does not need to list every function.
Maintain a reference
Update the owning reference in the same PR when a change alters a documented responsibility, interface, state transition, runtime path, compatibility rule, or failure behavior. An internal refactor that preserves these contracts does not require a prose change.
Keep each fact in one reference and link to it from agent instructions or other pages. Link to source files and named symbols rather than copying implementation details that change frequently. Explain field meanings and constraints that signatures alone do not express.
For a new reference, include the responsibilities and boundaries, source of truth, main runtime paths, state transitions, important constraints, and existing verification commands. Include failure and compatibility behavior where relevant. Document current behavior separately from proposed changes; the proposal belongs in its issue or PR.
Describe a PR's semantic changes
For each affected subsystem, explain the observable change with its trigger and before/after behavior. Include changes to interfaces, state, compatibility, and failure behavior when relevant. Link the affected reference, implementation, and verification evidence. State when a refactor preserves the documented behavior.
For example, a change to plugin adoption should explain which migration state and account condition trigger it, which implementation handles requests before and after adoption, and which test exercises that transition.
This is an author-provided explanation that a reviewer verifies against the diff and surrounding code. It is not an automatically proven compatibility verdict.
Review a change
- Identify the affected subsystem and the actual runtime path, including plugin or built-in ownership.
- Compare the claimed before/after behavior with the base and head implementation. Trace relevant callers and state transitions beyond the changed lines.
- Check that changed contracts appear in the owning reference and that source links still resolve.
- Check that the cited tests or runtime evidence exercise the claimed behavior. Report checks that were not run.
A documentation update alone does not prove the implementation. Existing tests and runtime evidence remain necessary for behavior changes.