# Review by Andrej Karpathy (Round 4)

Here's my review as Andrej Karpathy:

---

## Review Summary

**VERDICT: approve**

All 22 functional requirements from the PRD are fully implemented. The CI fix (`colonyos[ui]` in dev extras + web-build CI job) addresses the blocking issue. The interactive features (config editing, run launching, artifact previews, proposals/reviews pages) are well-architected with proper security controls.

### Key Strengths
- **Auth design is solid**: Bearer token with `secrets.compare_digest()`, gated behind `COLONYOS_WRITE_ENABLED` — follows the Jupyter token pattern
- **Prompt handling is architecturally correct**: Deliberately not sanitizing prompts at execution time (only at display time) avoids silently altering user intent — this is the right call for an AI agent tool
- **Path traversal defense-in-depth**: Double validation (directory prefix + `is_relative_to()`) on artifact serving
- **RunLauncher includes cost warning confirmation** — good human-in-the-loop for expensive operations
- **All tests pass**: 56 Python server tests, 66 frontend tests across 11 test files

### Findings (all LOW/INFO)
1. **[server.py:148]**: Lazy import lacks explanatory comment (carry-over from previous round)
2. **[server.py:60-65]**: `_config_to_dict()` blocklist needs maintenance comment
3. **[server.py:130-156]**: Sanitization inconsistency between list/detail endpoints
4. **[AuthTokenPrompt.tsx:15-17]**: Network error optimistically assumes token valid
5. **[api.ts:107]**: `fetchArtifact` doesn't encode individual path segments
6. **[test_server_write.py:207-240]**: Rate limit test is implementation-coupled

No blocking issues. The carry-over findings from the previous decision gate are minor technical debt. Ship it.