test(agents): committed-rename recovery challenge pack

[Audacity88]

Summary

• Base branch: master (all contributions)
• What changed and why:
  • Adds an Olympus fail-to-pass pack for shared recovery of an agent rename that has already committed, covering the CLI, gateway map-key handlers, and RPC.
  • artifacts/test.patch adds the harness and hidden tests. artifacts/solution.patch is the reference fix and is not applied on this branch.
  • Rebased onto current master (fb116d612). The original issue pin c1e79a774 is the parent of that master commit. The only commit this work adds is the artifacts/ pack.
• Scope boundary: Does not change runtime behavior on this branch. Knowledge-graph rename ownership is out of scope of the solution patch. The pack does not edit generated locale files other than the English CLI catalogue inside the solution patch.
• Blast radius: None until a consumer applies solution.patch. That patch changes CLI, gateway, and RPC agent rename/create so they share one recovery record.
• Linked issue(s): Related upstream issue 10373 ([Bug]: Share committed agent-rename recovery across CLI and gateway zeroclaw-labs/zeroclaw#10373). This pack does not close that issue.
• Labels: none applied

Testing (required)

How you can test (when useful)

• Reviewer testing requested? Yes
• Interface(s) exercised: cli (zeroclaw agents rename / agents create), gateway config map-key rename and create, RPC config/map-key-rename and config/map-key-create
• Setup / preconditions: repository root at this branch; Rust 1.96; cargo registry already fetched (cargo fetch --locked)
• Steps to run:
  1. git apply artifacts/test.patch
  2. ./test.sh --output_path /tmp/junit-base.xml base and confirm a non-zero exit
  3. git apply artifacts/solution.patch
  4. ./test.sh --output_path /tmp/junit-new.xml new and confirm exit 0
• Expected on this branch (after): step 2 fails assertions (exit 1, 12 failures). Step 4 passes (exit 0, 12 tests, 0 failures).
• Prior behavior on master (before): without solution.patch, the CLI reports a committed rename as an invalid or missing alias, and an unreadable follower does not block recreating the retired alias.

How I tested

./test.sh --output_path /tmp/junit-base.xml base
git apply artifacts/solution.patch
./test.sh --output_path /tmp/junit-new.xml new
git apply --check artifacts/test.patch
git apply --check artifacts/solution.patch

• CI checks relied on and why they cover this change: none yet; this is a draft challenge pack. Local test.sh covers the CLI binary plus the gateway lib tests named committed_rename.
• Known CI coverage gap, if any: docker build -f artifacts/Dockerfile . was not run. The fail-to-pass test.sh runs were on the original pin, before the rebase onto fb116d612. After the rebase, both patches still apply (git apply --check).
• Commands run and tail output:
  • On the original pin: ./test.sh ... base → exit 1, JUnit tests="12" failures="12"; ./test.sh ... new → exit 0, JUnit tests="12" failures="0"
  • On fb116d612: git apply --check succeeded for both patches. Their path sets are disjoint (7 solution files, 5 test files).
• Beyond CI, what did you manually verify? Base vs new harness on the pin, and patch application on updated master. Did not re-run the suite or boot the Dockerfile image after the rebase.
• Visual interface evidence: N/A. No user-visible layout or rendered interface changed in the committed tree.
• Tested revision, interface, and evidence path: cursor/committed-rename-recovery-4295 rebased onto fb116d612
• Screenshot or exact-output evidence: N/A
• Action or changed state and observed result: applying only test.patch made all 12 harness tests fail on the pin; applying solution.patch as well made all 12 pass. Both patches still apply on updated master.
• If any command was intentionally skipped, why: full cargo test and ./dev/ci.sh all were skipped because the harness targets are the changed surface. The suite was not re-run after the rebase because master's new commit does not touch the rename handlers. Docker image build was skipped.

Security & Privacy Impact (required)

• New permissions, capabilities, or file system access scope? No
• New external network calls? No
• Secrets / tokens / credentials handling changed? No
• PII, real identities, or personal data in diff, tests, fixtures, or docs? No
• Prompt injection or untrusted model-visible text introduced/changed? No
• If any Yes, describe the risk and mitigation:

The committed tree only adds the challenge pack. The unapplied solution patch reads and writes recovery state under the existing data directory and does not add a network surface.

Compatibility (required)

• Backward compatible? Yes
• Config / env / CLI surface changed? No
• Rust/MSRV/toolchain floor changed? No
• If backward compatibility is No or either surface/floor question is Yes: exact upgrade steps for existing users:

This branch does not apply solution.patch. Applying that patch changes rename/create behavior for the CLI, gateway, and RPC as described in artifacts/task_prompt.txt.

Rollback (required for medium/high-risk PRs)

Low-risk PRs: git revert <sha> is the plan unless otherwise noted.

git revert of the artifacts commit removes the pack. No feature flag.