Cross-provider subagent delegation fails (Codex → GOAT MiniMax)
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
Evaluación
- Dificultad
- 4/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 3-5 días
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 18/100
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Claridad
- Bastante claro
- Estado de actividad
- Activo
- Stack tecnológico
- nodejs
- Área
- ai, authentication
Línea de trabajo
The payload names createHarnessSession and runSubAgent, plus provider resolution and auth routing, as the places where the Director's provider is reused for the child. Start by reading those functions to see how a subagent's pinned model is matched to a provider, and reproduce with a custom subagent pinned to a model from another provider. Done means the child returns SUBAGENT_OK across providers, the original provider error surfaces on failure, and regression tests cover both same-provider and cross-provider delegation.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Descripción
Summary
Problem
I'm trying to use two different model providers within Command Code:
- Director: GPT-6.1 Sol using my existing ChatGPT/Codex subscription.
- Subagent: MiniMax M3 using my existing Command Code GOAT subscription.
Both models work independently, but the Director cannot delegate tasks to the MiniMax subagent.
I'd like to request an official fix for cross-provider subagent delegation.
Environment
- Command Code CLI: 1.88.2
- Node.js: v24.21.0
- Operating system: Ubuntu VPS
- OpenAI provider:
@byokkit/cmd-provider-openai0.1.5 - Subagent model:
MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M3
Steps to reproduce
- Connect ChatGPT/Codex and Command Code GOAT.
- Create a custom subagent with MiniMax M3 as its pinned model.
- Select GPT-6.1 Sol from the ChatGPT/Codex section as the main model.
- Ask Sol to delegate the task: "Reply exactly SUBAGENT_OK."
- The subagent immediately fails.
- Switch the main model to MiniMax M3 through Command Code and repeat. Delegation succeeds.
Actual result
The subagent fails before generating output or using tools.
The underlying error is:
HTTP 400 — Provider not available. Use Command Code provider.
Trace ID: 70c44b34dc2c73ba64de17906f21efaf
Command Code only displays: sub-agent stopped early: the run errored.
Investigation findings
Codex inspected the installed Command Code implementation.
It found that the subagent correctly selects MiniMax M3 but appears to reuse the Director's provider authentication and model transport.
This would explain why MiniMax → MiniMax works, while Sol/Codex → MiniMax/GOAT fails.
The custom-agent configuration also has no documented way to override the provider separately for the child.
These findings have not yet been confirmed by the Command Code maintainers.
Requested fix
Could you please investigate and fix this in an official Command Code release?
Ideally, each subagent should:
- Use the provider and authentication associated with its own selected model.
- Support delegation between ChatGPT/Codex and Command Code GOAT subscriptions.
- Return clear error messages when execution fails.
- Continue supporting existing single-provider configurations.
If this feature is intentionally unsupported, please consider adding it.
I would also appreciate confirmation of whether an official workaround already exists or a fix is planned.
Thank you!
Expected Behavior
The GPT-6.1 Sol Director, authenticated through my existing ChatGPT/Codex subscription, should be able to delegate tasks to a MiniMax M3 subagent using my Command Code GOAT subscription.
Each agent should use its own model provider and authentication. The MiniMax subagent should execute the task and return its result to the Director without requiring manual provider switching or an additional subscription.
Actual Behavior
Both models work independently, but cross-provider delegation fails before the subagent executes its first turn.
The underlying error is:
HTTP 400 — Provider not available. Use Command Code provider.
Command Code only displays:
sub-agent stopped early: the run errored
The child produces zero tokens and performs zero tool calls.
Investigation of the installed CLI indicates that the subagent selects the correct MiniMax model but inherits the Director's OpenAI/Codex provider authentication and transport.
MiniMax-to-MiniMax delegation works correctly.
Trace ID: 70c44b34dc2c73ba64de17906f21efaf
Steps to reproduce the issue
- Connect an existing ChatGPT/Codex subscription and a Command Code GOAT account using
/connect. - Create a custom subagent named
sub-agentwithmodel: MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M3andreasoningEffort: medium. - Select GPT-6.1 Sol from the ChatGPT/Codex section as the main model.
- Ask the Director: "Delegate to sub-agent. Do not use tools. Reply exactly SUBAGENT_OK."
- Observe that the subagent fails immediately with a generic run error.
- Switch the main model to MiniMax M3 through Command Code GOAT.
- Repeat the same delegation. The subagent succeeds and returns SUBAGENT_OK.
Command Code Version
1.88.2
Operating System
Linux
Terminal/IDE
Remote SSH terminal (Ubuntu VPS)
Shell
bash
Session file (optional)
No response
Fix prompt (optional)
Fix cross-provider subagent delegation in Command Code.
The Director uses GPT-6.1 Sol through the OpenAI/Codex subscription, while the subagent uses MiniMax M3 through Command Code GOAT.
The current implementation appears to reuse the Director's provider authentication and model transport when launching a subagent, even when the child has a different pinned model.
Please investigate createHarnessSession, runSubAgent, provider resolution, and authentication routing.
Expected fix:
- Resolve each subagent's provider and authentication independently.
- Preserve the Director's existing provider and subscription.
- Support direct Codex → GOAT delegation without a custom bridge.
- Surface the original provider error when a subagent fails.
- Preserve compatibility with existing single-provider delegation.
Add regression tests for both same-provider and cross-provider delegation.
Please implement this in an official release if technically supported, or clarify the intended limitation.
Additional context
No response
- Lenguaje dominante
- Sin datos de lenguaje
- Estrellas
- 4.2k
- Forks
- 377
- Merge medio
- 1 d 3 h
- PR fusionados (30 d)
- 6
Preparar el entorno
Este proyecto no incluye contenedor de desarrollo, Dockerfile ni guía de contribución, así que la configuración corre por tu cuenta: empieza por su README y consulta nuestra guía para la primera contribución para los pasos generales.
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Más de CommandCodeAI/command-code
-
Provider /v1/messages rejects role:"system" inside messages[] — Claude Code ≥ 2.1.154 incompatibleAbierto
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 75/100
CommandCodeAI/command-code#1085 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Feature request: auto-reconnect remote control (/rc) after restartPosiblemente ocupada @aliarain la tomó hace 20 días. Abiertop2
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 85/100
CommandCodeAI/command-code#992 · 1 comentario · 1 asignado ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
CommandCodeAI/command-code#933 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
CommandCodeAI/command-code#855 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
grep tool passes empty file type to ripgrepPosiblemente ocupada @ahmadbilaldev la tomó hace 19 días. Abierto
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
CommandCodeAI/command-code#655 · 1 comentario ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
Todos los issues de CommandCodeAI/command-code
Issues similares
-
enhancement
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 65/100
developmentwithyash/yaan#60 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
area/billing area/config comp/tui-gateway P2 provider/openrouter type/bug
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
NousResearch/hermes-agent#153086 · 1 comentario ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 74/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 2 días
-
ai-generated structs tech-debt
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 76/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día