feat: add bounded exact bookmark materialization

[briancl2]

Summary

• add ft materialize <id> --json for one exact archived X bookmark
• optionally refresh only that root, its bounded parent chain, every enumerated same-author continuation branch, and its quote through the existing signed-in GraphQL route
• optionally fetch only media enumerated from that exact in-memory record
• emit source/component depth, exact media hashes, and explicit unresolved/unavailable gaps without persisting a second thread corpus

Why this shape

Research systems need more than the bookmarked root: thread continuations, quote context, X Articles, outbound identities, and attached media can carry the decision-material content. This provides that source-owner boundary while remaining query-time and local-first.

Unlike a corpus-wide thread sync, this change adds no database migration, FTS column, scheduler, background job, classification, or LLM. --refresh does not modify the bookmark archive or index. Destination pages/PDFs and OCR/transcript/visual interpretation remain explicit gaps for their source owners rather than inferred content.

This is a deliberately thinner complement/alternative to #141 and addresses the exact-id use case behind #59. The TweetDetail parser and same-author continuation logic are based on Eric Litman's work in #141; the commit retains co-author attribution.

Safety

• exact numeric archived ID required
• no corpus-wide selection or persistence
• source-local file paths never appear in output
• authenticated refresh fails closed if no X session is available
• public replies are excluded from same-author thread continuations
• every recognized bottom/show-more cursor is queued within bounded pagination; unvisited branches keep enumeration incomplete
• tweet-free or focal-tweet-free timelines remain incomplete; malformed TweetDetail bodies become partial observations
• the configured delay applies between every exact X request
• previews and summaries cannot be admitted as recovered X Article bodies
• equivalent recovered X/Twitter Article aliases are deduplicated; ambiguous multiple-Article identity fails closed with every locator explicit
• a current X Article identity without recovered body keeps the result partial
• ordinary materialization overlays article and quote enrichment already retained in the existing index
• hop-2 outbound identities are material but never mislabeled as mandatory-direct
• unavailable roots preserve the archived record and expose the failure

Validation

Exact candidate head: 26fdc2d263b40f7940347cd22eb785ed9c75fc30 (tree 5c70c3af2f95905d43eb2b25e113838a26dbec37).

• npm run build — PASS
• focused changed-surface suite — 136/136 PASS
• full npm test — 593/593 PASS
• git diff --check — PASS
• all ten inline review threads have exact-head replies and are resolved
• the disjoint BMA compatibility audit found and repaired the hop-2 mandatory-direct mismatch before cutover

Fresh Codex review is requested on the current head. Upstream merge remains maintainer-owned, and downstream plans assume no merge for at least 48 hours.

[briancl2]

Final repaired head: 189cc1de9a64714782cc21ddbe91f05c80da982e (tree d0e74d7e92c7b94494cebfbf67931df95b475b26).

Validation:

• npm run build — PASS
• focused exact-ID/materialization/media suite — 62/62 PASS
• full npm test — 581/581 PASS
• git diff --check — PASS
• fresh exact-head CRITICAL/HIGH review — CLEAN

The review cycle repaired and froze fail-closed boundaries for pagination/cursor exhaustion, response-owned exact IDs, parent/continuation media, URL-keyed poster/video assets, and stale X Article currentness. This remains a bounded foreground read-only source-owner operation; it adds no bulk persistence, database migration, LLM, scheduler, or background research behavior.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 189cc1de9a

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[briancl2]

Superseding exact-head settlement: 24f99a4a6aaa920c6fa087e2591a2154dff4eecf (tree cac7d0f94394f37071f248c4e9e289a599bb5811).

The three findings from the prior review are repaired:

• every supported bottom/show-more cursor is queued within bounded pagination, and any unvisited branch keeps enumeration incomplete;
• a recognized tweet-free timeline remains partial;
• a recovered X Article is not also emitted as an unresolved outbound gap.

Validation is green: build, 66/66 focused tests, 586/586 full tests, diff hygiene, and a fresh exact-head CRITICAL/HIGH review with no findings. No source-local path leakage was found. The PR remains a bounded, foreground, non-LLM source-owner operation; upstream merge remains maintainer-owned.

[briancl2]

@codex review

Please review exact head 8fb4b6890ee82d60a86c966652946f21fbf8a2a6. In addition to the prior thread fixes, this head fails closed when a current root identifies an X Article but its body is unavailable, and suppresses every equivalent recovered X/Twitter article locator from unresolved outbound gaps. Build, focused 67/67, full 586/586, and diff hygiene pass.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8fb4b6890e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[briancl2]

@codex review

Please review exact head 6b85d6e84c67c1daac8cc3b865c192760867f730. The current head includes the prior cursor, empty-timeline, and X Article repairs, plus a contract-alignment fix: hop-2 outbound components are now mandatory_direct=false, matching the consuming BMA contract rather than being rejected at cutover. Build, focused 67/67, full 586/586, and diff hygiene pass.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6b85d6e84c

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[briancl2]

@codex review

Please review exact head 0dee3f98370adee0f4979d96b0c116c99f75ba78 (tree 20eef9765b19a27f963f9e5a84df19af79bcc996). This supersedes prior heads and repairs all six review threads plus the BMA hop-2 materiality mismatch found in the cross-repo compatibility audit.

Current evidence: build PASS; focused materialization/GraphQL/refresh suite 104/104 PASS; full suite PASS; diff hygiene clean. Please focus on article full-body admission, focal-tweet traversal binding, distinct-vs-equivalent article locators, cursor completeness, and the source-owner/BMA component contract.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 0dee3f9837

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[briancl2]

@codex review

Please review exact head 26fdc2d263b40f7940347cd22eb785ed9c75fc30 (tree 5c70c3af2f95905d43eb2b25e113838a26dbec37). This supersedes prior heads and repairs all ten review threads plus the BMA hop-2 materiality mismatch found by the cross-repo compatibility audit.

Current evidence: build PASS; focused changed-surface suite 136/136 PASS; full suite 593/593 PASS; diff hygiene clean. Please focus on raw-archive/index enrichment overlay, malformed TweetDetail fail-closed behavior, request throttling, ambiguous Article identity, full-body admission, focal/cursor completeness, and the source-owner/BMA component contract.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 26fdc2d263

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[briancl2]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1a418689fe

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".