[codex] repair portfolio operating state

[saagpatel]

Summary

• add verified Notion Local Portfolio page IDs for GithubRepoAuditor, Grotto, Pressfield, and supplementary personal-ops
• update portfolio catalog state for mcp-trust, cross-provider-egress-guard, fable-outputs, and archive GhostRoutes after local git corruption was confirmed
• teach the context contract to recognize Quickstart headings and cover it with a regression test

Verification

• uv run --with ruff python -m ruff check src tests
• uv run --with pytest python -m pytest tests/test_project_registry.py tests/test_notion_export.py tests/test_portfolio_context_contract.py tests/test_run_instructions_audit.py tests/test_portfolio_truth.py::test_cli_portfolio_truth_respects_path_overrides -q
• .venv/bin/python -m src.cli report saagpatel --portfolio-truth --portfolio-truth-include-security
• .venv/bin/python -m src.run_instructions_audit output/portfolio-truth-latest.json

Notes

Generated portfolio outputs were refreshed locally but remain gitignored. Missing Notion rows/page IDs and GhostRoutes on-disk repair remain separate decision lanes.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

GithubRepoAuditor/config/portfolio-catalog.yaml

Line 641 in 44f6825

IncidentWorkbench:

Restore path contracts for duplicate project names

Dropping the path-qualified ITPRJsViaClaude/IncidentWorkbench and FunGamePrjs/OrbitForge contracts while the bare active entries remain regresses any workspace where those reference/staging copies still exist. _unresolved_duplicate_display_names() treats a duplicate display name as unresolved unless every member has a catalog entry whose detail is its exact path, so the next portfolio truth snapshot will warn about IncidentWorkbench/OrbitForge duplicates and the older copies will also lose their maintenance/archive disposition. Keep the path-specific entries until the corresponding directories are actually removed.

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".