OpenAI Privacy Filter Prompt Defaults

Codex·GPT-5.5·

peyton-alt·3mo ago·35min·1 Checkpoint·7 file changes·+59/-12·451.8K tokens

Using github to inspect the recently merged PRs and then I’ll verify the push prompt behavior against the local code/tests.

I’m going to anchor this to the current checkout first, then compare local code against the merged GitHub changes so the answer is about what will actually run on push.

This checkout is on main, but it’s behind origin/main, so I’m fetching before inspecting the merged PRs. I’ll avoid changing branches until I know whether the relevant code is already present locally.

Fetch completed; origin/main moved forward. Next I’m checking the recent merged PR metadata and the exact files changed by the privacy-filter work.

The GitHub connector has PR fetch tools but no recent-PR search in the exposed subset, so I’ll use gh api for the list and the connector for any specific PR patch details.

The recent log shows two relevant merged PRs on origin/main: #1214 (feat/openai-privacy-filter) and #1246 (feat/opf-batching). I’m narrowing now to their merged code path and the pre-push hook behavior.

The PR text says the intended contract clearly: OPF runs only at push time, gated by an interactive Yes/No/Always prompt, with ENTIRE_OPF=yes|no override. I’m now checking whether the merged code actually enforces that instead of trusting the PR description.

The implementation gates all OPF work behind redact.OPFEnabled(), so “opt in” means no prompt at all unless redaction.openai_privacy_filter.enabled is true. For enabled repos, I’m checking the decision function and tests now.

One subtlety: the repo’s committed .entire/settings.json on origin/main does not enable OPF, so the default state is truly no prompt. The prompt is only reachable after a user/repo opts in with redaction.openai_privacy_filter.enabled: true.

Your checkout itself does not yet contain those merged files, so I’m not going to run tests against HEAD. I’ll extract origin/main to a temporary directory and run the focused OPF prompt tests there.

I’ll use /private/tmp/entire-opf-main.Y8Tr0o as the throwaway source tree for the merged origin/main state.

The stats line up: #1214 added the prompt/pre-push architecture, and #1246 only changes batching/performance around that rewrite. I’m unpacking and running the targeted tests now.

Focused verification will cover the pure prompt decision table, persistence of “Always”, settings parsing/validation, and the OPF rewrite/batching regression tests.

The first test command is still running after shell startup emitted two profile parse errors; I’m waiting for the actual Go result before treating that as meaningful.

The targeted merged-code tests passed. I’m doing one last check of the hook wiring so I can separate “every git push invokes the hook” from “OPF prompts only after the user enables it.”

The pre-push hook script is wired as entire hooks git pre-push "$1" without || true, so Git will invoke Entire on each push when hooks are installed and Entire is enabled. The OPF prompt still depends on OPF being enabled.

I found two merged PRs directly tied to this work: #1214 for the OPF pre-push architecture and #1246 for batching. I’m checking whether there are any other merged OPF/privacy-filter PRs in the same cluster before I wrap this up.

Yes. I can see the OPF stack:

#1214, feat(redact): OpenAI Privacy Filter with pre-push architecture, merged to main on June 18, 2026.
#1246, perf(redact): batch OPF inference across unpushed commits, merged earlier the same day.
#1236, the prompt/pre-push sub-PR, was merged into the OPF feature branch and is included in #1214.

Confirmed behavior: OPF is opt-in. origin/main does not enable it in committed .entire/settings.json, so users will not see prompts by default. Once redaction.openai_privacy_filter.enabled: true is set, the pre-push hook resolves the OPF decision on each push. With default prompt_default empty/ask, interactive pushes prompt every time. Yes and No are one-push choices; Always persists prompt_default: "always" and stops future prompts by auto-running OPF.

Caveats: no prompt if OPF is disabled, Entire/hooks are disabled, push_sessions is disabled, ENTIRE_OPF=yes|no is set, prompt_default is always/never, or the push is non-interactive. Non-interactive enabled OPF auto-runs and prints a stderr progress notice.

I verified this against extracted origin/main with focused tests: go test ./cmd/entire/cli/strategy ./cmd/entire/cli/settings ./redact -run 'OPF|PrivacyFilter' -count=1 and pre-push/prompt-focused strategy tests also passed.

Using superpowers:brainstorming and superpowers:test-driven-development because this changes hook decision behavior and tests; I’ll keep it focused on the OPF prompt path and test noise.

I’m going to first confirm where the merged OPF code lives relative to this checkout. Your local main is behind origin/main, so I’ll avoid merging into it and use the remote state or a temporary worktree if changes are needed.

The relevant code is only on origin/main, not this local HEAD. The small design I’m going to apply is: treat prompt_default: "never" before "always" in the decision code/tests/docs, and add a test-only writer hook so PrePush tests can discard the non-interactive OPF progress line instead of printing to stderr.

Because the local branch lacks the merged OPF files, I’m going to make this on a new branch from origin/main rather than dragging the ahead/behind local main into it.

No uncommitted changes are present, so switching to a new branch from origin/main won’t overwrite local edits.

I’ll write the failing test first around the noisy PrePush path, then make the smallest production change to let tests discard that progress writer.

I’m adding a narrow failing test that proves PrePush writes the non-interactive OPF notice to an overridable writer. That gives tests a clean way to discard it without changing user-facing output.

Now I’m running that single test to verify it fails for the expected reason before touching production code.

The failing test confirms the missing hook. I’m adding the writer indirection now and setting the strategy test package default to discard OPF progress output.

I’ll finish the small ordering cleanup at the same time: skip-style prompt_default: "never" before auto-run always in code, tests, and docs text.

The production default is still os.Stderr; only tests replace it with io.Discard. I’m updating the docs/settings wording so the order matches the requested skip-then-always precedence wording.

I found a few places where the value order was still ask/always/never. I’m making those ask/never/always so the docs and validation messages read the same way as the code.

The code and docs edits are in. I’m rerunning the single test that failed, then the focused OPF prompt/settings tests.

That test is still running; it may be spending time in PrePush setup/push plumbing rather than OPF. I’m waiting before making any further changes.

The new test passes in under a second, so there’s no obvious hang from this path. I’m running the focused strategy/settings/redact OPF tests next.

Focused OPF tests passed cleanly. I’m checking the diff and formatting now; then I’ll run the smallest broader package test that covers these files.

The diff is scoped to the OPF decision path, test wiring, and docs. I’m doing one more consistency pass for prompt-default ordering before formatting.

I’m formatting the touched Go files now.

Formatting completed without output. I’m rerunning the targeted tests after formatting, then I’ll run the full affected packages.

Targeted tests passed after formatting. I’m running the full affected package tests now; this should catch any global-test interaction from discarding OPF progress output.

The full package run is still going; strategy tests are the slow part here, not OPF inference. I’ll wait for the result before deciding whether lint is necessary.

Full affected package tests passed. I’m checking lint rules for package globals before I decide whether the writer variable needs a local nolint or a different shape.

git diff --check is clean. The lint config path isn’t .golangci.yml in this branch, so I’m locating it before running lint checks.

The active lint set does not include gochecknoglobals, so the package writer override is consistent with existing package globals. I’m making the test helper accept testing.TB before the final lint/test pass.

I’m rerunning the affected package tests after that helper cleanup.

The package test run is still in progress; I’ll let it finish before starting lint so the signal stays clean.

Still running at the 30s mark, which is normal for this strategy package based on the prior run. I’ll give it another window rather than interrupt it.

Affected package tests passed again, with strategy taking about 44 seconds. I’m running lint now to catch any style issue from the new test hook.

Lint is running through the project’s mise task; Go lint is the long step.

Lint passed. I’m doing a final diff/status check and then I’ll summarize exactly what changed and what passed.

Whitespace checks are clean. I’m reading the final status once more so the close-out is accurate.

Implemented on branch fix/opf-prompt-test-noise from origin/main.

Changed prompt_default ordering to ask, never, always in the resolver, settings validation text, tests, and docs. Env still wins first, and non-interactive default/ask still auto-runs OPF.

For test noise, PrePush now uses an overridable opfPrePushProgressWriter, defaulting to os.Stderr in production. Strategy tests set it to io.Discard, and there’s a regression test proving it can still be redirected and observed.

Verified:

go test ./cmd/entire/cli/strategy -run TestPrePush_OPFProgressUsesConfiguredWriter -count=1
go test ./cmd/entire/cli/strategy ./cmd/entire/cli/settings ./redact -run 'OPF|PrivacyFilter' -count=1
go test ./cmd/entire/cli/strategy ./cmd/entire/cli/settings ./redact -count=1
mise run lint

I did not run full mise run check.

Using superpowers:requesting-code-review and code-reviewer because you asked for a review pass on the current diff. I’ll inspect the review workflow and then run a focused review against these changes.

I’ll use a separate reviewer context rather than reviewing my own diff inline. First I’m resolving the exact base/head for the current branch and locating the subagent tool.

The branch has uncommitted working-tree changes on top of origin/main, so the reviewer will use git diff origin/main rather than a commit range. I’m dispatching a read-only review now.

Reviewer Turing is running against the working-tree diff. While it runs, I’ll leave the code untouched and wait for findings.

Reviewer found one low issue: a settings test case table still orders always before never. I’ll apply that small fix and rerun the focused settings/OPF tests.

The finding is valid: it’s a documentation/test-order mismatch, not behavior. I’m changing only that table order.

I’m applying that test-table reorder now.

The reviewer’s item is fixed. I’m rerunning the focused settings test first, then the same affected package set.

The diff now reflects the requested ordering in the test table. I’m waiting for the settings test result.

The focused settings test passed. I’m rerunning the affected package tests and lint since the review fix touched tests.

The affected package tests are running again; I’ll wait this out before lint.

Still running at 30 seconds, consistent with the prior strategy package timing.

Affected package tests passed after the review fix. I’m running lint again for a fresh final signal.

Lint is in the Go lint phase now.

Ran the reviewer. It found one low issue: settings_test.go still ordered the prompt_default cases as ask, always, never. I fixed that to ask, never, always.

Reviewer did not find behavioral issues with env precedence, production stderr output, or the test suppression approach.

Fresh verification after the review fix:

go test ./cmd/entire/cli/settings -run TestLoadFromBytes_OPFSettings_PromptDefault -count=1
go test ./cmd/entire/cli/strategy ./cmd/entire/cli/settings ./redact -count=1
mise run lint

All passed. I closed the review subagent.

Using github:yeet, committer, and pr-prep because you asked to commit, push, open a PR, and link/create trail context. I’ll run the repo’s required pre-commit check before committing.

I’m going to treat your request as the “push and create PR” path directly. Before committing, I’ll run mise run check because this repo requires it before every commit.

Scope is clean and limited to the OPF prompt/test-noise change. gh is installed and authenticated. Starting the required full check now; this may take a few minutes.

mise run check is in progress. The lint substeps have started; the race/integration test leg is likely the long one.

Lint and formatting completed inside check; tests are still running.

No new output yet; the race test suite is still active.

The main Go/race suite is progressing and many packages have passed; integration packages are still running.

The race/integration suite passed and the Vogon canary has started as part of test:ci.

mise run check passed, including lint, race/integration tests, Vogon canary, and roger-roger canary. I’m checking whether formatting/build artifacts changed anything before staging.

The full check did not introduce extra tracked changes. I’m staging only the seven intended files and committing them as one scoped commit.

git add hit the sandbox restriction on writing .git/index.lock. I’m rerunning the same staging command with approval because committing requires writing Git metadata.

The staged set is exactly the intended seven files. I’m committing with a concise redaction-scoped message.

The commit is running through hooks now.

Commit 1c559e15e is created and the branch is clean/ahead by one. I’m pushing it with upstream tracking next.

The branch push is in progress.

Push succeeded and the pre-push hook synced checkpoints. I’m preparing the PR body and then I’ll create the draft PR.

I’m creating the PR as a draft, with a concise body covering the behavior change, test-noise suppression, and validation.

The GitHub connector could not create the PR due to integration permissions, so I’m falling back to gh pr create with the same draft title/body.

gh pr create is running.

Draft PR created: https://github.com/entireio/cli/pull/1464. I’m inspecting the trail command shape now so I can link/create the trail correctly.

trail create takes branch/title/body/status and the branch is already pushed, which matches the trail requirements. I’m creating a trail for this branch with the PR-focused title/body.

Trail creation is running against the Entire service.

Trail created with ID 019edbf7-9c2b-7d25-90c2-8e338bb50f0c. I’m checking the trail details/link and whether the PR body needs the trail link added manually.

trail show says the local ./entire auth context is missing even though trail create returned success. I’m checking the auth/context state and rerunning GitHub PR inspection with network approval.

GitHub confirms PR #1464 is open as draft. The PR body doesn’t include an Entire trail link yet. Since trail create succeeded only in the escalated environment, I’m checking Entire auth/trail state with the same permission context before updating the PR.

Trail is #606, so the conventional link is https://entire.io/gh/entireio/cli/trails/606. I’m going to prepend that trail block to the PR body.

I’ll write the updated PR body to a temp file and use gh pr edit --body-file so the Markdown and existing Cursor summary are preserved exactly.

Temp PR body is ready. I’m updating PR #1464 with the trail link block.

The PR body update completed. I’m doing the final status checks now: branch cleanliness, PR metadata, and trail details.

Committed, pushed, opened draft PR, and created the trail.

Commit: 1c559e15e fix(redact): order OPF prompt defaults
Branch: fix/opf-prompt-test-noise
PR: https://github.com/entireio/cli/pull/1464
Trail: https://entire.io/gh/entireio/cli/trails/606

Validation passed:

mise run check
Includes lint, race/integration tests, Vogon canary, and roger-roger canary

Working tree is clean and the PR body includes the trail link.