In this analysis
A service completion signal and an accepted task artifact answer different questions and should remain separately inspectable.
A managed agent can finish its run while the requested deliverable remains unsuitable for use. The Agents API beta made this boundary more important because execution progress and task judgment now cross an API boundary. The application needs a review object that exists independently of the agent’s final message.
The launch inherited an artifact-oriented history
The May 16, 2025 Codex announcement connected cloud work to reviewable software changes. The February 11, 2026 primitives supported execution and generated outputs. The September 10, 2026 Agents API beta packaged a managed harness for developers. That sequence explains why a service outcome and an accepted application artifact should remain separate objects.
Define what the recipient actually receives
Consider an illustrative inventory of repository configuration files. The requester needs a table connecting each service to its effective configuration and unresolved exceptions. A fluent paragraph saying the repository was reviewed is not the deliverable.
The acceptance artifact should preserve source identity, covered scope and the specific output. This does not require a large report. A compact table can be sufficient if another reviewer can identify missing coverage and resolve a disputed row back to the inspected file.
A completion signal answers a narrower question
A service-level completion can indicate that its execution reached an outcome. It does not establish that the application’s private inventory is exhaustive or that every inferred relationship is correct. Those properties depend on task-specific evidence.
Keep the service state as one input to acceptance. Do not discard it, but do not let it replace content checks. A partial inventory can still be useful when its omissions are explicit; an apparently complete inventory with hidden gaps is a different product outcome.
Build a fixture with a deliberate exception
Prepare a small repository containing a standard configuration and an unusual generated configuration. Define expected coverage before the run. Ask the agent to produce the inventory, then inspect whether the exceptional path is represented or explicitly unresolved.
Resolve selected rows to the source files. Check whether the final message points to the actual artifact rather than paraphrasing an earlier draft. The fixture tests coverage and provenance, separating a missing file from a wrong interpretation of an available file.
Keep acceptance outside self-description
An agent’s explanation can help a reviewer locate evidence, but it cannot independently certify its own work. Preserve the criteria and source fixture so later model or harness updates can be judged against the same requirement.
The retrospective lesson is that managed execution increases the value of a concrete handoff. An accepted artifact connects service activity to the user’s intended outcome without pretending that a completed run guarantees useful work.