Adds an optional `justification` parameter to the `prefix_rule()`
execpolicy DSL so policy authors can attach human-readable rationale to
a rule. That justification is propagated through parsing/matching and
can be surfaced to the model (or approval UI) when a command is blocked
or requires approval.
When a command is rejected (or gated behind approval) due to policy, a
generic message makes it hard for the model/user to understand what went
wrong and what to do instead. Allowing policy authors to supply a short
justification improves debuggability and helps guide the model toward
compliant alternatives.
Example:
```python
prefix_rule(
pattern = ["git", "push"],
decision = "forbidden",
justification = "pushing is blocked in this repo",
)
```
If Codex tried to run `git push origin main`, now the failure would
include:
```
`git push origin main` rejected: pushing is blocked in this repo
```
whereas previously, all it was told was:
```
execpolicy forbids this command
```
Some effects of this change:
- New formatting changes across many files. No functionality changes
should occur from that.
- Calls to `set_env` are considered unsafe, since this only happens in
tests we wrap them in `unsafe` blocks
As described in detail in `codex-rs/execpolicy/README.md` introduced in
this PR, `execpolicy` is a tool that lets you define a set of _patterns_
used to match [`execv(3)`](https://linux.die.net/man/3/execv)
invocations. When a pattern is matched, `execpolicy` returns the parsed
version in a structured form that is amenable to static analysis.
The primary use case is to define patterns match commands that should be
auto-approved by a tool such as Codex. This supports a richer pattern
matching mechanism that the sort of prefix-matching we have done to
date, e.g.:
5e40d9d221/codex-cli/src/approvals.ts (L333-L354)
Note we are still playing with the API and the `system_path` option in
particular still needs some work.
