CommandCodeAI / CommandCodeAI/command-code

Feature: publish a versioned ACP/host protocol for IDE and orchestration integrations

Open
#669 1 comment 1 reaction 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
No language data
Stars
4k
Forks
350
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Goal

I am preparing a Command Code integration for T3 Code and would prefer a supported public boundary rather than terminal parsing, project settings, or experimental Mods.

The existing headless NDJSON mode is already a strong one-way event/result stream. The missing piece for first-class IDE/orchestrator integrations is a bidirectional local host protocol: permissions, structured user input, cancellation, durable sessions, model discovery, capability negotiation, and attachment support.

Proposal

Publish a long-lived local stdio mode, for example:

command-code acp

It would implement ACP v1 over JSON-RPC and advertise a capability-gated commandcode.profile/v1 for Command Code-specific behavior.

The public contract should include:

  • protocol-version and capability handshake;
  • create/resume/fork/rollback/cancel session lifecycle with opaque stable IDs;
  • ordered session/turn/tool/subagent events with correlation IDs and sequence numbers;
  • request/response permissions before every gated side effect, including MCP tools;
  • structured ask_user_question responses;
  • JSON model discovery, model selection, modes, typed safe errors, and image attachments;
  • a published schema/types package, plus black-box conformance fixtures.

Permission bridge: reuse the existing engine

The request is not to create a parallel security model.

The public host boundary should abstract the existing “ask” prompt behind a native PermissionDecisionProvider / PermissionPromptBridge, with two implementations:

  • the existing TUI prompt;
  • an ACP/host implementation.

The required decision flow is:

  1. local hard-deny and safety rules remain authoritative;
  2. locally pre-approved actions proceed normally;
  3. only an unresolved ask is emitted to the host as a correlated permission request;
  4. the host returns one of the offered decisions (allow once, scoped session allow when supported, deny, cancel);
  5. timeout, disconnect, malformed response, stale/duplicate request ID, or cancellation denies the pending action.

In other words, host mode should behave like the existing fail-closed dont-ask policy plus an external, structured channel for the unresolved ask outcome. It must not write project settings or let a host override local deny rules.

This ask-routing must be native machinery: the current Mod API can add tools, hooks, and observers, but does not document interception of the underlying permission decision itself.

Security expectations

  • A lost connection, timeout, malformed response, stale request ID, or cancellation must deny the pending action and emit one terminal result.
  • Existing local deny rules remain authoritative.
  • A session-level approval is in-memory and scoped; it must not write project settings.
  • The protocol is local stdio only: no network listener and no credentials from an external orchestrator client.

This would let T3, IDEs, CI systems, and other clients integrate against a versioned contract while preserving the interactive TUI, Hooks, and Mods as separate local extension surfaces.

I can help validate the protocol with an independent T3 adapter and conformance suite when the source is available.

Would the team prefer:

  1. ACP v1 + a Command Code capability profile;
  2. a Command Code-specific stdio protocol with equivalent guarantees; or
  3. both, sharing one public schema layer?

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by examining the existing headless NDJSON entry point and the current TUI permission prompt, then compare them with the proposed command-code acp entry point and PermissionDecisionProvider/PermissionPromptBridge. Done means the team has selected a protocol direction and defined the versioned handshake, session, permission, error, schema, and conformance requirements; no implementation files or tests are identified in the issue.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
cli
Domain
api, cli, security
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.