CommandCodeAI / CommandCodeAI/command-code
Feature: publish a versioned ACP/host protocol for IDE and orchestration integrations
Ninguém assumiu esta issue ainda.
- Linguagem predominante
- Sem dados de linguagem
- Estrelas
- 4k
- Forks
- 350
- Métricas de merge de PRs
- Nenhum PR com merge em 30d
Descrição
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_questionresponses; - 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:
- local hard-deny and safety rules remain authoritative;
- locally pre-approved actions proceed normally;
- only an unresolved ask is emitted to the host as a correlated permission request;
- the host returns one of the offered decisions (allow once, scoped session allow when supported, deny, cancel);
- 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:
- ACP v1 + a Command Code capability profile;
- a Command Code-specific stdio protocol with equivalent guarantees; or
- both, sharing one public schema layer?
Guia de contribuição
Nenhum guia de contribuição indexado para este repositório
Primeiros passos
- Leia a issue inteira e depois o guia de contribuição do projeto.
- Comente na issue dizendo que vai assumir — evita que duas pessoas façam o mesmo trabalho.
- Faça um fork do repositório e trabalhe em uma branch.
- Abra um pull request que referencie o número da issue.
Direção de pesquisa
Comece examinando o ponto de entrada NDJSON headless existente e o prompt de permissão atual da TUI, depois compare-os com o ponto de entrada proposto command-code acp e com PermissionDecisionProvider/PermissionPromptBridge. Considera-se concluído quando a equipe tiver selecionado uma direção para o protocolo e definido os requisitos de handshake versionado, sessão, permissões, erros, esquema e conformidade; nenhum arquivo de implementação ou teste é identificado na issue.
Escrita pelo modelo de indexação a partir do texto da issue.
Avaliação
- Stack de tecnologia
- cli
- Domínio
- api, cli, security
- Tipo de issue
- Funcionalidade
- Dificuldade
- 5/5
- Tempo estimado
- Mais de uma semana
- Status de atividade
- Pouca atividade
- Clareza
- Razoavelmente clara
- Facilidade para iniciantes
- 25/100