openclaw - 💡(How to fix) Fix [Proposal]: Soft repeated file-reread loop detector in exec runtime to reduce quota burn and timeout failures [1 comments, 1 participants]

openclaw2026-04-08 20:18:52

ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

GitHub issue URL

Helpful · Quick feedback

GitHub stats

openclaw/openclaw#63352•Fetched 2026-04-09 07:54:55

View on GitHub

Comments

Participants

Timeline

Reactions

Author

garadun1-cmyk

Participants

garadun1-cmyk

Timeline (top)

commented ×1

Root Cause

Summary

Proposal: add a soft runtime detector for repeated read-only exec calls against the same file or same file pair within one turn. Goal:

reduce quota burn from zero-progress file reread loops
reduce timeout failures caused by these loops
keep normal debugging workflows intact by starting with warning-only behavior

Incident class this would address

In a real 2026.4.5 Telegram direct session, a troubleshooting turn drifted into repeated rereads of the same 1-2 files using slightly different readback commands ( l, sed, etc.). Observed pattern:

alternating rereads of the same file pair
no edit step
no synthesis step
no broadened evidence source
timeout before useful completion
next message then surfaced exhausted ChatGPT usage state The expensive part was not a single large final answer. It was the repeated read loop itself. In the failing late slice alone, the transcript showed roughly:
13 assistant tool-use messages
~767k input tokens
~1.317M cache reads
repeated readback over the same file pair

Why this seems worth fixing in runtime

Prompt policy helps, but it is not enough in long-lived sessions (especially chat/Telegram sessions with large tails). Once the agent drifts into same-file rereads, the runtime still allows the loop to continue until timeout or quota exhaustion. A small soft detector in the exec path would provide a second line of defense.

Recommended implementation direction

Best low-risk hook point

The least risky place appears to be the exec runtime path before the actual system.run invocation. This path already has enough normalized information to inspect:

unId

sessionKey
cwd
commandText
normalized argv / command planning context This makes it possible to intervene before another redundant read command is executed.

V1 scope: only obvious read-only commands

Start narrow and only classify obviously readback-oriented commands, for example:

sed -n ... file

l -ba file | sed -n ...

cat file
bounded g readback over a known file set Ignore everything else in v1.

Normalization idea

Normalize to something like:

command family (sed, l, cat, g-readback)
target file path(s)
collapse different line windows to the same file identity This is the key behavior needed for the observed incident class.

Suggested thresholds

Reasonable first pass:

same file reread count > 4 within one turn
or alternating rereads across the same file pair > 8

Intervention behavior

Do not hard-block first. Instead, return a synthetic warning/tool result like:

repeated reread loop detected for <file> / <file pair>
summarize what is already known, broaden context, edit, or stop This keeps the turn alive while nudging the model out of a zero-progress loop.

Why not hard-block immediately

A hard block is riskier because:

some valid debugging workflows revisit the same file a few times
false positives would be disruptive
a soft warning is enough to test whether the detector catches the bad pattern without harming normal work

Suggested rollout

Implement a small in-memory per-turn tracker keyed by unId (fallback sessionKey)
Only track obvious read-only commands in v1
Emit a warning-only synthetic result when the threshold is crossed
Log every detector trigger with:

unId

sessionKey
normalized file targets
threshold crossed
original command preview

Review false positives before considering stronger behavior

Why this proposal is complementary to existing fixes

This is not about provider buffering, commentary filtering, or compaction. It is a separate failure mode:

the agent is technically still making progress from the runtime's point of view
but operationally it is stuck in a high-cost same-file reread loop A small runtime guard here seems like a good safety-to-value improvement.

RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Summary

Proposal: add a soft runtime detector for repeated read-only exec calls against the same file or same file pair within one turn. Goal:

reduce quota burn from zero-progress file reread loops
reduce timeout failures caused by these loops
keep normal debugging workflows intact by starting with warning-only behavior

Incident class this would address

In a real 2026.4.5 Telegram direct session, a troubleshooting turn drifted into repeated rereads of the same 1-2 files using slightly different readback commands ( l, sed, etc.). Observed pattern:

alternating rereads of the same file pair
no edit step
no synthesis step
no broadened evidence source
timeout before useful completion
next message then surfaced exhausted ChatGPT usage state The expensive part was not a single large final answer. It was the repeated read loop itself. In the failing late slice alone, the transcript showed roughly:
13 assistant tool-use messages
~767k input tokens
~1.317M cache reads
repeated readback over the same file pair

Why this seems worth fixing in runtime

Recommended implementation direction

Best low-risk hook point

The least risky place appears to be the exec runtime path before the actual system.run invocation. This path already has enough normalized information to inspect:

unId

sessionKey
cwd
commandText
normalized argv / command planning context This makes it possible to intervene before another redundant read command is executed.

V1 scope: only obvious read-only commands

Start narrow and only classify obviously readback-oriented commands, for example:

sed -n ... file

l -ba file | sed -n ...

cat file
bounded g readback over a known file set Ignore everything else in v1.

Normalization idea

Normalize to something like:

command family (sed, l, cat, g-readback)
target file path(s)
collapse different line windows to the same file identity This is the key behavior needed for the observed incident class.

Suggested thresholds

Reasonable first pass:

same file reread count > 4 within one turn
or alternating rereads across the same file pair > 8

Intervention behavior

Do not hard-block first. Instead, return a synthetic warning/tool result like:

repeated reread loop detected for <file> / <file pair>
summarize what is already known, broaden context, edit, or stop This keeps the turn alive while nudging the model out of a zero-progress loop.

Why not hard-block immediately

A hard block is riskier because:

some valid debugging workflows revisit the same file a few times
false positives would be disruptive
a soft warning is enough to test whether the detector catches the bad pattern without harming normal work

Suggested rollout

Implement a small in-memory per-turn tracker keyed by unId (fallback sessionKey)
Only track obvious read-only commands in v1
Emit a warning-only synthetic result when the threshold is crossed
Log every detector trigger with:

unId

sessionKey
normalized file targets
threshold crossed
original command preview

Review false positives before considering stronger behavior

Why this proposal is complementary to existing fixes

This is not about provider buffering, commentary filtering, or compaction. It is a separate failure mode:

the agent is technically still making progress from the runtime's point of view
but operationally it is stuck in a high-cost same-file reread loop A small runtime guard here seems like a good safety-to-value improvement.

extent analysis

TL;DR

Implement a soft runtime detector to identify and warn about repeated read-only exec calls against the same file or file pair within one turn to prevent quota burn and timeout failures.

Guidance

Identify the exec runtime path as the best low-risk hook point to intervene before executing redundant read commands, utilizing available normalized information such as unId, sessionKey, cwd, commandText, and normalized argv.
Develop a normalization process to categorize commands into families (e.g., sed, l, cat, g-readback) and target file paths, collapsing different line windows to the same file identity.
Establish thresholds for detecting repeated read loops, such as same file reread count > 4 or alternating rereads across the same file pair > 8, and return a synthetic warning result when these thresholds are crossed.
Implement an in-memory per-turn tracker to monitor and log detector triggers, including unId, sessionKey, normalized file targets, threshold crossed, and original command preview.

Example

A potential implementation could involve creating a ReadLoopDetector class that tracks command executions and warns when thresholds are exceeded:

class ReadLoopDetector:
    def __init__(self, unId, sessionKey):
        self.unId = unId
        self.sessionKey = sessionKey
        self.command_history = {}

    def track_command(self, commandText, normalized_argv):
        # Normalize command and target file path
        command_family = self.normalize_command(commandText)
        target_file = self.normalize_file_path(normalized_argv)

        # Check if command is a read-only command
        if self.is_read_only_command(command_family):
            # Update command history and check for repeated read loop
            self.command_history[target_file] = self.command_history.get(target_file, 0) + 1
            if self.command_history[target_file] > 4:
                # Return synthetic warning result
                return self.warning_result(target_file)

    def warning_result(self, target_file):
        # Return warning message and log detector trigger
        warning_message = f"Repeated read loop detected for {target_file}"
        self.log_detector_trigger(warning_message)
        return warning_message

    def log_detector_trigger(self, warning_message):
        # Log detector trigger with relevant information
        log_info = {
            "unId": self.unId,
            "sessionKey": self.sessionKey,
            "target_file": target_file,
            "threshold_crossed": True,
            "original_command": warning_message
        }
        # Log log_info

Notes

This implementation focuses on detecting repeated read-only commands and warning about potential loops, rather than hard-blocking commands. The detector's effectiveness and potential false positives should be reviewed before considering stronger behavior.

Recommendation

Apply the proposed soft runtime detector to identify and warn about repeated read-only exec calls, as it provides a complementary safety-to

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works

Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.

Easy Fix

Was it a quick fix?

Time Saver

Did it save you time?

Blocking

Was it severely blocking?

Common Issue

Are others likely hitting this too?

Flaky / Intermittent

Is it intermittent?

Verified / Reproducible

Can you reproduce it reliably?

#docker error #permission error #memory optimization #batch processing #GPU compatibility

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

openclaw - 💡(How to fix) Fix [Proposal]: Soft repeated file-reread loop detector in exec runtime to reduce quota burn and timeout failures [1 comments, 1 participants]

Recommended Tools

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Root Cause

Summary

Incident class this would address

Why this seems worth fixing in runtime

Recommended implementation direction

Best low-risk hook point

The least risky place appears to be the exec runtime path before the actual system.run invocation. This path already has enough normalized information to inspect:

V1 scope: only obvious read-only commands

Normalization idea

Suggested thresholds

Intervention behavior

Why not hard-block immediately

Suggested rollout

Log every detector trigger with:

Why this proposal is complementary to existing fixes

Summary

Incident class this would address

Why this seems worth fixing in runtime

Recommended implementation direction

Best low-risk hook point

The least risky place appears to be the exec runtime path before the actual system.run invocation. This path already has enough normalized information to inspect:

V1 scope: only obvious read-only commands

Normalization idea

Suggested thresholds

Intervention behavior

Why not hard-block immediately

Suggested rollout

Log every detector trigger with:

Why this proposal is complementary to existing fixes

extent analysis

TL;DR

Guidance

Example

Notes

Recommendation

Still need to ship something?

RELATED_DISCOVERY

TRENDING