'/usr/bin/docker pull ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0' exited with code 1.

'/usr/bin/docker pull ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0' exited with code 1.

Argument of type 'LogRecordExporter' is not assignable to parameter of type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.

Property 'forceFlush' is missing in type 'FileLogExporter' but required in type 'LogRecordExporter'.

Argument of type '{ emit: Mock<Procedure>; }' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Logger'.

Class 'FileLogExporter' incorrectly implements interface 'LogRecordExporter'.

Process completed with exit code 1.

Process completed with exit code 1.

Process completed with exit code 1.

Argument of type 'LogRecordExporter' is not assignable to parameter of type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.\n Property 'exporter' is missing in type 'LogRecordExporter' but required in type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.\nnpm notice\nnpm notice New major version of npm available! 10.9.8 -> 12.0.2\nnpm notice Changelog: https://github.com/npm/cli/releases/tag/v12.0.2\nnpm notice To update run: npm install -g npm@12.0.2\nnpm notice"}]}}

Argument of type 'LogRecordExporter' is not assignable to parameter of type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'. Property 'exporter' is missing...`\n\nWait, these errors are about telemetry files, not about output styles. This is odd. The PR is about output styles. Hmm.\n\nWait — these errors might be pre-existing on the branch because of a dependency update, or... actually, let me think. The errors are:\n\n1. `FileLogExporter` missing `forceFlush` from the `LogRecordExporter` interface — this looks like an interface mismatch with `@opentelemetry/sdk-logs`. In some version of OpenTelemetry, `LogRecordExporter` requires `forceFlush`.\n\n2. The `Logger` type requires an `enabled` property — this also seems version-dependent.\n\n3. `BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions` requires an `exporter` property — in newer OTel versions, `BatchLogRecordProcessor`'s options require `exporter`.\n\nHmm, these look like a `@opentelemetry/sdk-logs` version bump, or something that changed the API. But wait — did the previous round's fix commit touch these files? The message says \"core rebuild failed on the agent-committed fix\". So the agent (previous round of me) committed a fix, and then verification failed with these errors.\n\nWait, but these telemetry errors are strange. Maybe the previous round merged in origin/main and that changed package versions? Let me look at the git log:\n\n- 90e4784e4a test(core): pin Learning style in ACP prompts\n- 3750333ada test(core): pin Learning output style modes\n- cfdbdc5e51 fix(core): align output style prompt consumers\n- 4c6a1b7431 test(core): pin the output-style layer where review round 1 found it unpinned\n- 2f0402cb5b fix(core): narrow keepCodingInstructions to the section it names\n- 9f30e3508c Merge upstream/main into feat/output-styles\n- 5dec0d9b15 feat(core): add the output-style layer to the system prompt\n- a8a855914b fix(review): run verifier probes in a private scratch worktree (#9207) (#9221)\n\nHmm, wait, a8a855914b is odd — \"fix(review): run verifier probes in a private scratch worktree (#9207) (#9221)\" — that's a commit from main.\n\nWait, actually \"core rebuild failed on the agent-committed fix\" — maybe there's a commit that got rejected and discarded. The feedback says \"Same-run verification repair: the previous commit was rejected by deterministic verification.\"\n\nHmm wait, but looking at git log, HEAD is 90e4784e4a which matches origin/feat/output-styles. The working tree is clean. So where is the rejected commit? Perhaps the workflow discarded it (reset the branch?) or the rejection happened in a separate verification workspace.\n\nActually, re-reading: \"core rebuild failed on the agent-committed fix\" — meaning the agent committed a fix and the verification gate rebuilt core and failed with those TS errors. The workflow is now asking me to repair: \"preserve the existing rejected commit and add one verified follow-up commit that fixes the supplied deterministic rejection.\"\n\nHmm wait, but if the rejected commit was discarded, then HEAD might have been rewound. Let me check: the feedback says \"Same-run verification repair: The previous commit was rejected by deterministic verification.\" And according to the GitHub Actions rules: \"When `Same-run verification repair` is included, preserve the existing rejected commit and add one verified follow-up commit that fixes the supplied deterministic rejection.\"\n\nSo there should be a rejected commit somewhere on the branch. But git log shows HEAD as 90e4784e4a \"test(core): pin Learning style in ACP prompts\" — is that the rejected commit? Hmm, it's a test commit. But the build error is in the telemetry files, which has nothing to do with pinning Learning style in the ACP prompt...\n\nWait — actually. Let me think about this. Maybe the errors are due to an OTel version bump that happened on the branch from a merge of upstream/main (9f30e3508c). Or maybe the previous round's fix changed something in telemetry? That would be odd for an output-styles PR.\n\nLet me actually reproduce the build failure locally f

Argument of type 'LogRecordExporter' is not assignable to parameter of type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.\n Property 'exporter' is missing in type 'LogRecordExporter' but required in type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.\nnode:internal/errors:983\n const err = new Error(message);\n ^\n\nError: Command failed: tsc --build\n at genericNodeError (node:internal/errors:983:15)\n at wrappedFn (node:internal/errors:537:14)\n at checkExecSyncError (node:child_process:916:11)\n at execSync (node:child_process:988:15)\n at file:///home/github-runner/actions-runner-hk-j6c03lyei7s809zq1s6t-9/_work/qwen-code/qwen-code/scripts/build_package.js:38:1\n at ModuleJob.run (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:343:25)\n at async onImport.tracePromise.__proto__ (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:681:26)\n at async asyncRunEntryPointWithESMLoader (node:internal/modules/run_main:117:5) {\n status: 1,\n signal: null,\n output: [ null, null, null ],\n pid: 1564634,\n stdout: null,\n stderr: null\n}\n\nNode.js v22.23.2\nnpm error Lifecycle script `build` failed with error:\nnpm error code 1\nnpm error path /home/github-runner/actions-runner-hk-j6c03lyei7s809zq1s6t-9/_work/qwen-code/qwen-code/packages/core\nnpm error workspace @qwen-code/qwen-code-core@0.21.11\nnpm error location /home/github-runner/actions-runner-hk-j6c03lyei7s809zq1s6t-9/_work/qwen-code/qwen-code/packages/core\nnpm error command failed\nnpm error command sh -c node ../../scripts/build_package.js\n````\n"}]}}

Process completed with exit code 1.

Argument of type 'LogRecordExporter' is not assignable to parameter of type 'BatchLogRecordProcessorOptions'.

Property 'forceFlush' is missing in type 'FileLogExporter' but required in type 'LogRecordExporter'.

Argument of type '{ emit: Mock<Procedure>; }' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Logger'.

Class 'FileLogExporter' incorrectly implements interface 'LogRecordExporter'.

'/usr/bin/docker pull ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0' exited with code 1.

'/usr/bin/docker pull ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0' exited with code 1.

Falling back from ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0 to latest GHCR semver ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.21.15; sandbox image version may differ from package version.

skipping review-thread resolution because the live PR head could not be proven equal to the deterministically verified commit

Falling back from ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0 to latest GHCR semver ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.21.15; sandbox image version may differ from package version.

Falling back from ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.22.0 to latest GHCR semver ghcr.io/qwenlm/qwen-code:0.21.15; sandbox image version may differ from package version.

skipping review-thread resolution because the live PR head could not be proven equal to the deterministically verified commit