fix: support Codex request_user_input in AskUserQuestion docs

[uncfreak1255-code]

Summary

• Treat Codex request_user_input / functions.request_user_input as an AskUserQuestion-equivalent surface in generated skill docs
• Regenerate host skill docs and update ship golden fixtures
• Fix gbrain-detect test PATH fixture so the bun shebang still resolves while real gbrain stays excluded

Verification

• bun run gen:skill-docs --host all --dry-run
• bun test test/gen-skill-docs.test.ts test/preamble-compose.test.ts test/skill-validation.test.ts
• bun test test/gbrain-detect-install.test.ts
• bun run test
• git diff --check

Notes

• Token-ceiling warnings remain for generated gstack-ship on some non-Codex hosts; separate cleanup candidate.

[trunk-io]

Merging to main in this repository is managed by Trunk.

• To merge this pull request, check the box to the left or comment /trunk merge below.

After your PR is submitted to the merge queue, this comment will be automatically updated with its status. If the PR fails, failure details will also be posted here

[uncfreak1255-code]

Closing: opened from wrong fork owner by mistake. Will reopen from correct fork.

[uncfreak1255-code]

Reopening: confirmed correct fork owner is uncfreak1255-code.

[uncfreak1255-code]

Closing: source fork owner is not the correct owner for this work.

[uncfreak1255-code]

Reopening: confirmed uncfreak1255-code is the correct fork owner.

[jbetala7]

Overlap flag: #1818 (opened 2026-05-31) edits the same two functions in the same two files as this PR - generateAskUserFormat() and generatePlanModeInfo() in scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-ask-user-format.ts and generate-completion-status.ts - and regenerates the same test/fixtures/golden/codex-ship-SKILL.md. They rewrite the same "Tool resolution (read first)" and "Skill Invocation During Plan Mode" paragraphs, so they will merge-conflict.

More important than the textual conflict: the two PRs ship contradictory failure-path rules for the same paragraph.

• This PR (fix: support Codex request_user_input in AskUserQuestion docs #1884): "If none of those three surfaces appears in your tool list, this skill is BLOCKED."
• Handle missing AskUserQuestion tools in Codex skills #1818: "If no callable AskUserQuestion-like tool appears in a Codex session, do NOT report BLOCKED by default. Use the normal chat fallback for interactive sessions. Report BLOCKED only when the run is non-interactive..."

Both PRs agree request_user_input is a valid AUQ surface (good - that part is not in conflict). Where they diverge is what happens when no surface is callable in an interactive Codex session: this PR says hard-BLOCK, #1818 says degrade to a chat-question fallback. Those can't both ship. Worth consolidating with #1818 on a single BLOCKED-vs-fallback policy before either lands. This PR's functions.request_user_input alias wording is a nice addition #1818 doesn't carry, so the merge likely wants this PR's surface naming + a single agreed failure-path rule.

[jbetala7]

Cross-referencing two things the thread hasn't surfaced yet (separate from the #1818 same-files overlap already noted above):

This is the docs half of #1066, and the code half is already open as #1101. #1101 adds toolRewrites: { AskUserQuestion: request_user_input } to hosts/codex.ts. Without that rewrite, Codex skills still ship the literal string AskUserQuestion in their schema-stripped bodies, so documenting request_user_input here doesn't make the tool callable on its own — the two halves want to land together against #1066.

Accuracy fix on the new wording: it tells the model to "treat request_user_input as the AskUserQuestion-equivalent surface" with no caveat, but per #1066 request_user_input is gated to Plan mode and is rejected in Codex Default mode unless default_mode_request_user_input is enabled (off by default). As written, the doc points the model at a surface that isn't callable in Codex's default mode — the exact silent-degradation #1066 reports. Worth noting the Plan-mode constraint (which is also where #1818's BLOCKED-vs-fallback policy belongs).

Net: the functions.request_user_input alias naming here is the cleanest of the three, but #1884 (naming) + #1101 (rewrite) + #1818 (failure-path policy) really want to be one consolidated change on #1066 rather than three conflicting ones — #1884 and #1818 already edit the same two resolver files and the same codex-ship-SKILL.md golden.

(Validated: the regen is complete — every origin/main SKILL.md carrying the old "two tools at runtime" wording is regenerated from the two resolver edits.)