Best possible solution:

Use #95087 as the reviewed landing path and close this draft only after maintainer acceptance or merge; revive this branch only if maintainers want the narrower API slice.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable; this is a refactor/API PR rather than a bug report. Source inspection shows current main only supports path-shaped sessionFiles, while this branch adds a new identity-targeted sync contract.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

No as a standalone merge path right now. The combined successor is the better review unit because it includes the dependent QMD identity mapping and proof, but protected status means maintainers must own the final stack decision.

Full review comments:

• [P2] Document the identity sync contract — packages/memory-host-sdk/src/host/types.ts:44-53
  This adds public MemorySyncParams.sessions and deprecates sessionFiles, but the branch only updates generated API hashes. If this branch is revived instead of the combined successor, add SDK docs or migration notes for the identity fields, sessionKey, and canonical path compatibility before merge.
  Confidence: 0.86

Overall correctness: patch is incorrect
Overall confidence: 0.86

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 1f6ae32cabb9.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a normal-priority memory-core/plugin-SDK migration slice with bounded scope but real compatibility and session-state review needs.
• merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility: The PR changes a public plugin SDK sync shape and narrows deprecated path-based sessionFiles compatibility.
• merge-risk: 🚨 session-state: The new identity targets determine which session transcript memory sync refreshes and reindexes.
• rating: 🧂 unranked krab: Overall readiness is 🧂 unranked krab; proof is 🧂 unranked krab and patch quality is 🦐 gold shrimp.
• status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs real behavior proof before merge: The PR body lists tests only; before merging this branch directly, it needs redacted terminal output, logs, linked artifacts, or similar proof showing sync({ sessions }) and canonical sessionFiles behavior after the patch. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

PR surface:

Source +243, Tests +187, Generated 0. Total +430 across 18 files.

What I checked:

• Repository policy read and applied: Root policy treats protected-label gates, plugin APIs, and session state as compatibility-sensitive review surfaces; scoped SDK and extensions guides confirm these are plugin-facing public-contract paths. (AGENTS.md:27, 1f6ae32cabb9)
• Current PR is protected and still a draft: Live GitHub state reports this PR open, draft, mergeable, labeled maintainer, status: 📣 needs proof, merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility, and merge-risk: 🚨 session-state at head b2ce1bca6c311ec9af0c3308a342180c9f58d6fd. (b2ce1bca6c31)
• Current main lacks the identity sync API: On current main, MemorySearchManager.sync accepts reason, force, sessionFiles, and progress; there is no sessions, MemorySessionSyncTarget, or MemorySyncParams shape. (packages/memory-host-sdk/src/host/types.ts:110, 1f6ae32cabb9)
• Current main queues only path-shaped targeted sync: The current memory manager only enqueues targeted session sync from non-empty params.sessionFiles, so the central identity-targeted behavior is not already on main. (extensions/memory-core/src/memory/manager.ts:1002, 1f6ae32cabb9)
• Replacement PR is the live superseding path: Live GitHub state for refactor: add memory and QMD session identity mapping #95087 shows it is open, not draft, labeled proof: sufficient and status: 👀 ready for maintainer look, but also protected with maintainer; mergeability is currently unknown. (0c90ccb6c280)
• Replacement contains the memory sync identity API: The replacement head adds MemorySessionSyncTarget and MemorySyncParams.sessions, while keeping deprecated canonical sessionFiles compatibility. (packages/memory-host-sdk/src/host/types.ts:35, 0c90ccb6c280)

Likely related people:

• jalehman: They authored the merged adjacent SDK transcript identity target API and the open replacement PR that combines this memory sync slice with the QMD identity mapping. (role: recent Path 3 API contributor and stack context holder; confidence: high; commits: 7a0d36f3d0e1, b2ce1bca6c31, 0c90ccb6c280; files: packages/memory-host-sdk/src/host/types.ts, extensions/memory-core/src/memory/manager-sync-ops.ts, extensions/memory-core/src/qmd-session-artifacts.ts)
• Shakker: The available local shallow blame for the current memory SDK and memory-core sync surfaces points to the shallow boundary commit authored by Shakker, so this is a weak routing signal only. (role: current-main shallow boundary contributor; confidence: low; commits: c6386178973d; files: packages/memory-host-sdk/src/host/types.ts, extensions/memory-core/src/memory/manager.ts, extensions/memory-core/src/memory/manager-sync-control.ts)

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.