[jayhemnani9910]

Summary

The Codex reader takes reasoning text only from payload.rawContent (src/session-flow/adapters/codex.ts:569). Codex does not write that field. Its protocol type is { type: "reasoning", summary: Array<{ type: "summary_text", text }>, content?: Array<{ type: "reasoning_text" | "text", text }>, encrypted_content }, and the readable part is in summary. Every Codex reasoning item therefore reads back as an empty thinking block: Claude Code gets "thinking": "" and Cursor gets an empty <thinking> block.

This PR reads rawContent first (what writeSession emits, so Codex to Codex round trips do not change), then content, then summary, with summary parts separated by a blank line.

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature causing existing behavior to change)
• Documentation only
• Refactor / internal cleanup

Test Plan

• npx tsc --noEmit passes
• npm run lint passes
• npx vitest run passes (10796 pass; the same 6 tests fail on main here: two submodule-checkout cases that need git >= 2.54 (local 2.53), one hooks-reconcile-scope real-shell case, and three Cursor tests that need a sqlite3 CLI this machine does not have)
• Added/updated tests for the change

New test in session-cmd.test.ts: one reasoning item with two summary_text parts and one with both summary and content must read back as the joined summary and as the content. On main both read back as "".

Real CLI with a throwaway HOME, migrating one of my Codex sessions with teamai session migrate <id> -s codex -t claude-code -y:

0.28.0-beta.5:  58 thinking blocks, 0 with text
this branch:    58 thinking blocks, 52 with text (the other 6 have an empty summary in the rollout)

Related Issues

Follow-up to #593.

Notes for Reviewers

Reasoning items with only encrypted_content and an empty summary still become an empty thinking block, as before.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[github-actions]

No findings in the specified diff.

The PR description includes sufficient testing: type checking, lint, unit tests, and a representative real-CLI Codex → Claude Code migration showing restored reasoning text. The remaining empty blocks are explained by empty summaries in the source session.

Review was read-only; I did not run, build, or install PR code.