{
 "number": 35835,
 "input_hash": "42a250107e72095d",
 "model": "openrouter/google/gemini-3.8-flash",
 "batch": false,
 "created": "2026-09-17T15:55:41+00:00",
 "provider": "Google",
 "stop_reason": "end_turn",
 "usage": {
  "input_tokens": 12519,
  "cache_creation_input_tokens": 0,
  "cache_read_input_tokens": 0,
  "output_tokens": 5377
 },
 "cost_usd": 0.029553,
 "error": null,
 "result": {
  "display": {
   "goal": [
    "Add test vectors to script_tests.json asserting failure error codes for SCRIPT_VERIFY_CONST_SCRIPTCODE."
   ],
   "reviewability": [
    "Ready to review."
   ],
   "agreement": [
    "Concept approval with discussion on related edge cases resolved (darosior)."
   ],
   "categories": [
    {
     "name": "tests",
     "why": [
      "P3 because it fills gaps in script error code coverage for SCRIPT_VERIFY_CONST_SCRIPTCODE.",
      "Asserts SCRIPT_ERR_SIG_FINDANDDELETE and SCRIPT_ERR_OP_CODESEPARATOR at the script interpreter level."
     ]
    }
   ]
  },
  "summary": "Adds six test vectors to script_tests.json exercising the SCRIPT_VERIFY_CONST_SCRIPTCODE flag. Four vectors assert specific failure error codes (SCRIPT_ERR_OP_CODESEPARATOR in executed and unexecuted branches, and SCRIPT_ERR_SIG_FINDANDDELETE in CHECKSIG and CHECKMULTISIG), while two control vectors verify passing behavior when the flag is omitted.",
  "problem": "Neither error code gated behind SCRIPT_VERIFY_CONST_SCRIPTCODE was asserted in script_tests.json: SCRIPT_ERR_SIG_FINDANDDELETE had no tests anywhere, and SCRIPT_ERR_OP_CODESEPARATOR was only covered as a mempool reject string in functional tests rather than at the script interpreter level.",
  "discussion": {
   "open_concerns": [],
   "resolved_concerns": [
    "darosior asked whether CVE-2024-38365 test cases exist; author clarified that FindAndDelete does not match suffix pushes in that scenario and agreed to address that case in a separate PR."
   ],
   "author_status": "active"
  },
  "reviewability": {
   "state": "Ready",
   "label": "Ready",
   "reason": "The diff is small and self-contained with passing CI and no conflicts."
  },
  "agreement": {
   "state": "Positive",
   "summary": "Concept ACK from darosior; follow-up question resolved",
   "reason": "darosior gave a Concept ACK and asked about coverage for a related btcd FindAndDelete bug, which the author answered, concluding that it belongs in a separate PR.",
   "evidence": [
    "darosior commented: 'Concept ACK. Speaking of const scriptcode quirks, do we have a test case for CVE-2024-38365?'",
    "jeanpablojp explained the difference and noted they would add that separately."
   ]
  },
  "dependencies": {
   "depends_on": [],
   "enables": []
  },
  "categories": [
   {
    "name": "tests",
    "member": true,
    "evidence": "Adds failure-path unit test vectors to src/test/data/script_tests.json.",
    "band": "P3",
    "reason_tag": "test coverage",
    "score": 0.35,
    "factors": {
     "security_stability": 0,
     "bug_severity": 0,
     "performance": 0,
     "user_value": 0,
     "leverage": 1
    },
    "rationale": "P3 because it improves coverage of consensus script evaluation edge cases that were previously unexercised at the script level. As the author notes, 'SCRIPT_ERR_SIG_FINDANDDELETE is not asserted by any test; SCRIPT_ERR_OP_CODESEPARATOR appears only as a mempool reject string in invalid_txs.py, never at the script level.'"
   }
  ],
  "confidence": "high",
  "uncertainties": [],
  "needs": [],
  "card": "This PR adds six test vectors to script_tests.json testing failure paths under SCRIPT_VERIFY_CONST_SCRIPTCODE. It addresses missing test coverage where SCRIPT_ERR_SIG_FINDANDDELETE had zero assertions across the codebase and SCRIPT_ERR_OP_CODESEPARATOR was only checked via mempool reject strings. It carries a Concept ACK from darosior with clean CI and no open objections."
 },
 "raw_text": null
}