Openclaw occasionally NOT sending messages back | Friends of the Crustacean 🦞🤝 | Page 1

shell spruceBOT Apr 10, 2026, 3:27 PM

#

sinful joltBOT Apr 10, 2026, 3:27 PM

#

To help others find answers, you can mark your question as solved via Right click solution message -> Apps -> ✅ Mark Solution

shell spruceBOT Apr 10, 2026, 3:27 PM

#

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 3:27 PM

#

Got it, send part 2.

From part 1 alone, this already looks more like the run is dying in model/failover before the Discord send step, not a Discord API delivery failure:

FailoverError: LLM request timed out
fallback candidate also timeout
typing stops after TTL

So my current suspicion is, “message was generated somewhere upstream” and “OpenClaw successfully completed the assistant turn and posted to Discord” are not the same point in the pipeline.

Send the rest and I’ll stitch it together.

#

Yep, this helps.

My read is: this still does not look like a Discord transport failure.

What the log sequence says:

pikachu/gemini-3.1-pro-preview timed out
fallback also timed out once
ionosphere/gemini-3.1-pro-preview later shows candidate_succeeded
but the same run still ends with embedded_run_agent_end ... isError=true ... rawErrorPreview:"terminated"

So the important bit is:

candidate_succeeded means a fallback attempt returned successfully
it does not mean the overall assistant turn completed cleanly or got posted to Discord

In other words, the run is still dying in the embedded/assistant pipeline after fallback, before a clean reply delivery. The InteractionEventListener took 1507ms warning is probably noise here.

#

What I’d check next:

First, paste:
```
openclaw --version
```

Then:

openclaw status --all
openclaw channels status --probe

And search the same runId for any actual Discord outbound/send lines. If there are no outbound Discord send logs for that run, then Discord was never the failing step.

Relevant docs:

https://docs.openclaw.ai/help/faq

#

If you paste openclaw --version plus the channels status --probe output, I can narrow whether this is:

provider timeout/failover weirdness,
embedded runner termination after partial output,
or a real reply-delivery bug.

#

Aha, this is the first hard clue.

channels status --probe is not actually probing Discord here, because your CLI cannot reach the local gateway at all:

Gateway not reachable: gateway timeout after 10000ms
target is local loopback ws://127.0.0.1:18789
so the Discord lines shown are only config-only status

So I’d stop chasing Discord first and fix the gateway reachability problem. If the gateway is wedged/down, replies will obviously disappear upstream.

A few notes:

Discord default: enabled, not configured is not the main issue from this output.
The earlier candidate_succeeded + later embedded_run_agent_end ... terminated still points to a bad run, but now we also know the gateway itself may be hanging or unavailable.

Please run these next, in order:

#

openclaw --version
openclaw gateway status
openclaw status
openclaw doctor
openclaw logs --follow

If openclaw gateway status still shows unreachable/stuck, then do:

openclaw gateway restart
openclaw gateway status

What I want to see next is:

#

your version
whether the gateway process is actually running
whether RPC probe comes back ok
whether logs show the gateway hanging after those model timeouts

So, short version: this now looks like gateway health first, Discord second.

Docs:

Paste openclaw --version and openclaw gateway status next.

#

Nice, that changes the picture.

So the gateway is healthy right now:

Runtime: running
RPC probe: ok
listening on 127.0.0.1:18789

That means the earlier gateway timeout after 10000ms was likely a transient stall, not a permanent “Discord is broken” state.

My current read:

model/failover path is shaky (timeout, then terminated)
gateway may occasionally stall under that pressure
still no clear evidence yet of a Discord send failure

What I’d get next:

#

openclaw --version
openclaw channels status --probe
openclaw status --all

And since you already have the log file path, search the exact run IDs for outbound/reply lines:

rg -n '7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc|fc65495e-82e1-44ab-a297-49ca3c3427c0|discord|reply|outbound|send' /tmp/openclaw/openclaw-2026-04-10.log

What I’m looking for is:

did OpenClaw ever attempt a Discord outbound send for that run?
or did the run die at assistant_error/terminated before delivery?

#

Also, because you have multiple Discord accounts (isolated-bot, main-bot), the live channels status --probe output matters a lot more than the earlier config-only snapshot.

So at this point I’d frame it as:

probably not a pure Discord transport issue
possibly an embedded-run / reply-delivery bug after fallback
possibly made worse by transient gateway stalls

Paste openclaw --version and channels status --probe next, and if that rg output shows no outbound send attempt, I’d call the bug upstream of Discord delivery.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 3:44 PM

#

Channels probe just NEVER WORKS.

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 3:46 PM

#

Yeah, that’s frustrating. Let’s just stop depending on channels status --probe for this one.

Based on what you’ve shown so far, I’d still put the blame before Discord delivery unless logs prove otherwise.

So, new plan, no probe involved:

Please paste:
```
openclaw --version
```
Reproduce once while watching logs:
```
openclaw logs --follow
```
Then search the file log for the failure with:

#

   rg -n '7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc|fc65495e-82e1-44ab-a297-49ca3c3427c0|embedded_run_agent_end|model_fallback_decision|Discord send failed|outbound|terminated' /tmp/openclaw/openclaw-2026-04-10.log

What I’m trying to separate is:

Case A: run ends with assistant_error / terminated, and there is no Discord outbound send attempt
→ not a Discord transport bug
Case B: there is a Discord outbound send attempt or Discord send failed line
→ real Discord delivery problem

Right now your logs smell like Case A.

So yeah, skip the probe, give me:

openclaw --version
the fresh repro log tail

#

any lines matching Discord send failed / outbound / terminated

If those show no outbound send at all, I’d call this an embedded-run/reply-delivery bug upstream of Discord.

#

I would not send that back as-is.

Point 1 is plausible. The rest is way too certain without evidence, especially:

invalid key (session) causing reload lag
heartbeat targets gateway-client / heartbeat
cleared the queue
back to 100% signal

Send your model this instead:

Good start, but rewrite this as an evidence-based incident report.

Rules:
- Separate VERIFIED FACTS from HYPOTHESES.

#

- For every claim, cite the exact log line, config path, or command output that proves it.
- Do not use narrative phrasing like “cascading infrastructure failure”, “dropped packets”, or “100% signal”.
- Only list fixes that were actually applied and verified.

Specifically verify or retract these claims:
1. Did run `7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc` ever reach a Discord outbound send attempt?
2. Where exactly was the invalid `session` key found? Give the full config path.
3. What exact log/error proves that key blocked Gateway reloads?
4. What exact cron/heartbeat config targeted `gateway-client` and `heartbeat`?
5. What proves the queue was cleared?
6. What proves `ionosphere` is now stable?
7. Has a fresh Discord reply succeeded end-to-end after the fix?

Output format:
- Verified facts

#

- Hypotheses
- Fixes applied
- Remaining unknowns
- Next validation step

If you want, paste its rewritten version and I’ll sanity-check it.

#

Send part 2, but there’s already one huge red flag:

fix_mndy.py
portfolio_data.json
sync_bank.py

That is clearly unrelated to a Discord/OpenClaw outbound incident. So the report is still contaminated by cross-task/context bleed, which means I would not trust it yet, even if some earlier bullets are correct.

So yes, send 2/2, but my current verdict is:

structure is better
evidence citations are better
report is still tainted by unrelated hallucinated “Fixes Applied” content

That alone is enough to force another rewrite.

#

Yeah, still poisoned.

These are the bad tells:

portfolio check
ntfy
earlier fix_mndy.py / portfolio_data.json
shadowed config file speculation
Model Realignment unless it can prove the exact command/config change

So I’d tell your model this, ideally in a fresh session/thread because it’s clearly bleeding context:

This report is still invalid.

Problems:

#

- It contains unrelated content (`portfolio`, `ntfy`, `MNDY`, bank/sync references).
- It includes speculative claims (`shadowed config file`, injected runtime key).
- It claims fixes/model changes without proving the exact command or config change.

Rewrite from scratch in a clean context.

Hard constraints:
- Only mention: OpenClaw, Discord, Gateway, run IDs, model fallback, config validation, outbound delivery.
- Forbidden words: portfolio, ntfy, MNDY, bank, sync.
- VERIFIED FACTS must be directly supported by quoted log lines, config paths, or command output.
- HYPOTHESES must be explicitly labeled.
- FIXES APPLIED must include the exact command/config change that was actually executed.
- NEXT VALIDATION STEP must be an OpenClaw/Discord reproduction step, not any unrelated workflow.

Keep it under 8 bullets.

#

My honest take: don’t keep patching this same model thread forever, it’s contaminated. Start a clean one with just the relevant logs.

#

This is way better. I’d call it close, but I’d still tighten 3 things:

“never reached a Discord send attempt” is still a bit too absolute unless it proved absence by searching the whole runId.
“Model Fallback: Manual session override…” should stay only if there’s an exact command/output proving you actually changed it.
DM isolated-bot is not the best validation if the original bug happened in this thread/context.

I’d send your model this:

This is close. Make these final edits:

1. Replace:
“Run ... never reached a Discord send attempt...”
with:
“Run `7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc` ended at `embedded_run_agent_end` with `isError:true` and `error:"terminated"` after repeated `408 Timeout` events. In the reviewed log evidence, no successful Discord outbound send is shown for that run.”

#

2. Keep “Model Fallback: Manual session override...” ONLY if you can cite the exact command, config change, or status output that proves it. Otherwise remove it.

3. Keep “Config Sanitization...” ONLY if you can cite the exact edit or before/after evidence. Otherwise move it out of “Fixes Applied”.

4. Replace the validation step with:
“Reproduce with a short prompt in the same Discord thread/channel and capture whether the new runId reaches a Discord outbound send, or fails earlier in the embedded/model path.”

5. Keep hypotheses clearly labeled as hypotheses, not conclusions.

If you want the blunt verdict: this version is finally usable after those edits.

#

This is basically usable now. Just 3 small edits and I’d ship it:

Weaken the 100s claim unless you have exact timeout config/output proving it.
Say:
- likely exceeded the provider/runtime timeout
  instead of
- exceeded the provider's 100s timeout threshold
Weaken the routing-table claim.
This:
- prevented the Gateway from updating its routing table
  is too specific.
  Better:
- may have interfered with config reloads and contributed to delivery issues
Fix formatting / naming
- Ghost Config Key → Config Drift

#

**Next Validation Step*** → **Next Validation Step**

If you want, use this exact cleaned-up version:

**Verified Facts**
* **Run `7af7d3c7` Termination**: Run `7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc` ended at `embedded_run_agent_end` with `isError:true` and `error:"terminated"` after repeated `408 Timeout` events. In the reviewed log evidence, no successful Discord outbound send is shown for that run. (Source: `/tmp/openclaw/openclaw-2026-04-10.log`, lines 122, 132).
* **Discord Routing Errors**: Multiple background tasks failed due to invalid Discord targets: `Unknown target "gateway-client"` and `Unknown target "heartbeat"` (Source: `/tmp/openclaw/openclaw-2026-04-10.log`, lines 1, 3).
* **Config Validation Failure**: Gateway logs recorded a skipped reload: `config reload skipped (invalid config): channels.discord.accounts.isolated-bot: Unrecognized key: "session"` (Source: `/tmp/openclaw/openclaw-2026-04-10.log`, line 25).
* **Service Status**: Gateway process is verified active at `127.0.0.1:18789` (Source: `openclaw status --all`, PID 190380).

**Hypotheses**
* High reasoning complexity during the incident window likely caused model latency that exceeded the provider/runtime timeout, resulting in run termination before the response could be delivered.
* The invalid `"session"` key in the `isolated-bot` block may have interfered with config reloads and contributed to delivery issues.

**Remaining Unknowns**

#

* **Config Drift**: The unrecognized `"session"` key is currently absent from the `isolated-bot` block in `~/.openclaw/openclaw.json` (Source: `grep` check). The mechanism of its removal or the source of the temporary configuration drift remains unverified.
* **Target Inheritance**: The specific logic error that caused background tasks to substitute valid channel IDs with internal labels like `"heartbeat"` has not been isolated.

**Next Validation Step**
* Reproduce with a short prompt in the same Discord thread/channel and capture whether the new runId reaches a Discord outbound send, or fails earlier in the embedded/model path.

That version feels clean.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:10 PM

#

But leaving the report to the side what do I tell the model to do?

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:10 PM

#

Tell it to stop writing reports and start doing a bounded debug pass.

Send it this:

Stop summarizing. Debug this incident.

Goal:
Determine the exact failure boundary for the missing Discord reply:
1. did the run die before outbound delivery?
2. did Discord outbound get attempted and fail?
3. did invalid config/routing contribute?

Rules:
- No narrative incident report.
- No unrelated context.

#

- No invented fixes.
- Do not claim anything without log/config/command evidence.
- Do not make changes unless you first prove the cause and propose the exact fix.

Do this workflow:

1. Record environment
   - capture `openclaw --version`
   - capture `openclaw status --all`

2. Reproduce once
   - use a short prompt in the same Discord thread/channel
   - capture the new runId and timestamp

3. Trace the run in logs

#

   - search the log for the new runId and these markers:
     - `embedded_run_agent_end`
     - `model_fallback_decision`
     - `Discord send failed`
     - `Unknown target`
     - `outbound`
     - `send`
   - answer: is there any evidence that Discord outbound was attempted for that run?

4. Check config-reload issue
   - determine whether this log is still present:
     `channels.discord.accounts.isolated-bot: Unrecognized key: "session"`
   - identify the exact config path/file where that key came from, if it still exists

5. Check invalid target origin

#

   - determine what generated invalid Discord targets like `heartbeat` and `gateway-client`
   - identify whether they came from heartbeat, cron, session routing, or message tool usage

6. Return only this:
   - Verified facts
   - Exact failure boundary
   - Most likely cause
   - Remaining unknowns
   - Next single diagnostic step

If you cannot prove a claim from evidence, say “unverified”.

That should get it doing real work instead of cosplay forensics.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:14 PM

#

Nice - the agents response was TERMINATED.

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:15 PM

#

Honestly, that’s useful signal 😅

If the debugging agent itself comes back TERMINATED, that reinforces the same core problem: the model/runtime path is unstable under heavier reasoning, not just Discord delivery.

So I’d change tactics:

Stop asking for broad forensic analysis
Use tiny, single-purpose prompts
Prefer a stable non-preview path for debugging
If it still terminates, inspect logs manually instead of delegating

Try this much smaller prompt next:

Answer only from evidence.

#

Question:
Did run `7af7d3c7-87ee-47d9-ba78-340b1efc58fc` ever reach a Discord outbound send attempt?

Instructions:
- Reply with exactly one of: YES, NO, or UNVERIFIED.
- Then give at most 3 bullets with the exact log lines or events that support the answer.
- Do not write a report.
- Do not speculate.

If that still terminates, I’d stop using the agent for this debugging pass and just work off the log file directly. That would be pretty strong evidence the failure domain is upstream model/runtime instability.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:16 PM

#

I'm thinking if it would be nice to reinstall openclaw atp. But with same workspace .

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:17 PM

#

Maybe, but I wouldn’t jump to a full reinstall first.

If you keep the same ~/.openclaw state/workspace, a reinstall only really helps if the code/build/service wiring is bad. It will not magically fix bad config/state/routing issues living in that same state dir.

I’d do this first, in order:

openclaw --version
openclaw update
openclaw doctor
openclaw gateway restart
openclaw health

That’s the docs-supported refresh path: https://docs.openclaw.ai/install/updating

Since you appear to be running from a source checkout (/home/ubuntu/openclaw/dist/entry.js), if openclaw update is weird, the manual version is:

#

cd ~/openclaw
git pull
pnpm install
pnpm build
openclaw doctor
openclaw gateway restart

My recommendation:

Do update/rebuild first
Keep the same workspace/state
Backup ~/.openclaw/openclaw.json before touching anything
only do a true reinstall if update/rebuild doesn’t clear it

So yes, “reinstall but keep workspace” is reasonable, but I’d call it plan B, not plan A.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:18 PM

#

Well I've had the same install for months and I feel that my buildup of old useless configs like certain forgotten agents or Cron jobs and files, as well as my quirks with new update changes, would make it more worth it to just reinstall freah

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:18 PM

#

Yeah, in that case I think a fresh reinstall is reasonable.

But one important distinction:

keep your repo/workspace if you want
do not keep your old state/config wholesale if the whole point is clearing cruft

If old agents, crons, config drift, and stale state are what you’re worried about, reinstalling on top of the same full ~/.openclaw is kind of self-defeating.

What I’d do instead:

Backup your current state first
- ~/.openclaw/
- your source checkout/workspace
Fresh install OpenClaw
- ideally from source again, since that’s the most reliable path

#

Start minimal
- just gateway
- just the Discord account(s) you actually use
- just the model/provider you trust
Re-add things intentionally
- only the agents you still want
- only the crons/heartbeats you still want
- only the config you can explain

That gives you the real benefit of a fresh start without losing the ability to copy something back from the backup if needed.

So my honest recommendation is:

fresh install: yes
same repo/workspace: fine
same old state dir as-is: no

#

If you want, I can help you make a tiny “keep / discard / re-add later” checklist before you do it.

#

Send 2/3, but this is the first response from it that actually looks useful.

So far:

good: run ended at assistant_error/terminated before outbound
good: it isolated the config-reload error separately
still weak/speculative:
- “manually moved or temporary file/memory state”
- “site-cron or background heartbeat tasks” unless it proves that from logs/config

So yeah, keep going, but this is much better.

#

Send 3/3, but this is pretty solid now.

Only two nits so far:

“high reasoning density” is still a hypothesis, not a verified cause
the manual message tool test is a reasonable next step, as long as it uses a known-good Discord target

Otherwise this is finally reading like actual debugging instead of fanfic.

#

Yeah, this is finally good enough to trust the core conclusion.

My read now:

main conclusion is solid: the failing run died in the embedded assistant / model path before Discord delivery
so this does not primarily look like a Discord API send failure

Two last caveats:

Soften 100s timeout limits unless that exact limit is proven by config/logs.
Test the same thread/channel, not just a DM.
A DM message.send proves Discord transport works, but your original bug is in this interactive thread flow.

So I’d treat the next checks as:

Transport test: send a simple Discord message to a known-good target
Real repro test: send a short prompt in this same thread and watch whether the new run reaches outbound delivery

#

If you want the shortest possible takeaway:

The failure boundary is upstream of Discord delivery. The run is timing out/terminating in the assistant path before a send is attempted.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:25 PM

#

What should I do then?

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:26 PM

#

I’d do this, in this order:

Stop chasing Discord transport
- your evidence says the run is dying before send
Get off the flaky preview model path
- use a more stable model/fallback for this agent
- then retry with a tiny prompt in this same thread
Fix the config reload error
- clean up the stray session key issue in the isolated-bot config path
- run:
```
openclaw doctor
openclaw gateway restart
```

#

Clean up the bad background tasks
- anything targeting heartbeat, gateway-client, etc. needs to be disabled/fixed
- those are noise at best, broken routing at worst
Then reproduce
- same thread
- short prompt
- watch whether the new run reaches outbound delivery

If you want my honest recommendation given your “months of cruft” comment:

short-term fix: stable model + config cleanup + retest
best medium-term fix: fresh reinstall with a fresh state dir, then re-add only what you still need

So if you’re tired of weird ghosts, I’d probably do the clean reinstall after backing up ~/.openclaw, then rebuild from a minimal setup. That feels like the sane move here.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:32 PM

#

I'll do a fresh reinstall! Please get me the guide

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:33 PM

#

Yep. Since you’re on Ubuntu and already running from a source checkout, I’d do a fresh source reinstall with a fresh state dir.

Docs:

install: https://docs.openclaw.ai/install
getting started: https://docs.openclaw.ai/start/getting-started
uninstall: https://docs.openclaw.ai/install/uninstall

Recommended guide

1) Stop and uninstall the current gateway service

openclaw gateway stop
openclaw gateway uninstall

2) Back up the old state instead of deleting it

#

ts=$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
mv ~/.openclaw ~/.openclaw.backup-$ts

If you also want a truly fresh code checkout, back that up too:

mv ~/openclaw ~/openclaw.backup-$ts

3) Fresh clone and build

git clone https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw.git ~/openclaw
cd ~/openclaw
pnpm install

#

pnpm ui:build
pnpm build
pnpm link --global

4) Run onboarding again

openclaw onboard --install-daemon

5) Verify

openclaw --version
openclaw doctor
openclaw gateway status

#

What I’d re-add first

Only these:

your main model/provider
your Discord account(s)
nothing else yet

Then test replies in this thread.

What I would not restore immediately

Don’t copy back the whole old ~/.openclaw directory. That would bring the ghosts right back.

Only cherry-pick later if you really need them:

specific config snippets
specific agent definitions
specific cron/heartbeat entries

#

If you want, I can give you a minimal post-reinstall config checklist next so you only restore the essentials.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:35 PM

#

And you agree here that it's not an issue at my provider level? I made the proxy/API bridge myself... And I wonder if there's stuff done badly there

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:35 PM

#

No, I wouldn’t clear your provider/proxy layer.

Honestly, the evidence so far says:

Discord transport is probably not the primary failure
your provider/proxy path is absolutely still a suspect
you also have local config/state noise on top

So I would not say “it’s not provider-level.” I’d say:

this specific failed reply looks like it died on the model/proxy path before Discord send, while separate local config issues were also present.

That matters because a fresh reinstall may clean up the local ghosts, but it won’t fix a flaky proxy/API bridge.

If you built the bridge yourself, I’d audit these first:

upstream/request timeouts

#

streaming/chunk handling
abort/cancel behavior
idle timeout / reverse proxy timeout
fallback model mapping
whether larger agent prompts fail while tiny prompts succeed

A very useful isolation test is:

openclaw infer model run --model <your-provider/model> --prompt "hi" --json

Then try a slightly larger prompt. If tiny direct runs work but normal agent turns still time out/terminate, that points hard at the bridge handling larger/streaming agent payloads badly.

So my honest answer is:

No, I do not agree it’s definitely not provider-level

#

Yes, your custom proxy could absolutely be part of the problem
It may be a mixed issue: provider/proxy timeouts + local config cruft

If you want, I can help you make a quick “reinstall vs proxy audit” decision tree next.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:36 PM

#

Then you can tell me what to improve for the proxy

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:37 PM

#

Yep, absolutely.

Send me any of these, and I’ll tell you what I’d tighten up:

Best things to share

Proxy code path for one chat request
- request in
- upstream call out
- stream back to client
- timeout / abort handling
Timeout settings at every layer
- proxy request timeout
- upstream fetch timeout
- reverse proxy / CDN timeout
- idle/read timeout
- any worker/server timeout

#

One failed request trace
- timestamps
- request id / correlation id
- when upstream started
- when first token/chunk arrived
- when it stalled/aborted/terminated
How streaming works
- SSE or chunked HTTP?
- do you buffer the whole response first?
- how do you detect end-of-stream?
- how do you handle partial output + upstream timeout?
Fallback logic
- when do you mark timeout?
- who triggers fallback, the proxy or OpenClaw?
- do you retry the same model/provider in the bridge?

#

Reverse proxy config, if any
- nginx / Caddy / Cloudflare / Fly / whatever

Things I’ll specifically look for

timeout budget too low
idle timeout killing long-thinking models
stream parser bugs
buffering instead of passthrough streaming
incorrect abort propagation
retries/fallbacks fighting each other
missing first-byte / last-byte timing logs
preview model behavior not handled well by the bridge

Super helpful test pair

If you can, compare:

a tiny direct run that works

#

a larger agent-like run that fails

That difference is usually where the bug lives.

Redact secrets, but keep the structure. If you paste code/logs, I’ll go straight into proxy review mode.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 4:45 PM

#

It's sse but I can see in these ones where I didn't get a response BC terminated or just no response then I see at the provider level a proper response was indeed made that never got sent to me on discord

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 4:45 PM

#

Ah, that’s a very important clue.

If the provider produced a valid response, but OpenClaw still ended terminated and nothing got sent to Discord, then the suspect zone becomes:

between upstream SSE output and OpenClaw’s stream consumption/finalization

So yes, your proxy can still be the bug, even if the provider itself answered correctly.

What I’d worry about in the proxy:

dropping the final SSE event
wrong event ordering
closing the stream before the final flush
buffering/coalescing chunks weirdly
not forwarding the provider’s proper completion marker
idle timeout firing after content arrived but before stream completion
sending a shape OpenClaw treats as partial/invalid even though the provider “finished”

#

What I want from you next is one good run and one bad run, with:

raw upstream SSE from provider
raw downstream SSE your proxy sent to OpenClaw
timestamps for:
- request start
- first chunk
- last chunk
- stream close
- any abort/timeout

Because if upstream says “done” but downstream never emits the exact final shape OpenClaw expects, you get exactly this pattern:

provider looks successful
OpenClaw run ends badly
Discord never sends

So I’d stop saying “provider responded, so proxy is fine.”

#

That does not clear the proxy at all. It may actually implicate it more.

If you paste a successful SSE trace and a failed SSE trace, I can tell you what’s wrong with the framing/finalization.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 5:02 PM

#

But Dyk why it just sends terminated it's definitely not at the level of the proxy to emit a terminated string

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 5:02 PM

#

Yep, exactly, and that’s the important distinction:

terminated does not have to be a literal string emitted by your proxy.

It can be a local OpenClaw/runtime classification meaning something like:

the run was aborted
the stream ended in an unexpected way
the final completion signal never arrived
the supervisor killed the run after timeout / bad stream state
the assistant ended with an error stop reason

So the proxy does not need to send "terminated" for OpenClaw to log terminated.

Think of it like this:

provider may return good content

#

proxy may partially forward it
but if the stream/finalization is wrong or late
OpenClaw can still say: “this run terminated”

So terminated is usually a diagnostic label from the consumer/runtime, not proof that the upstream literally said that word.

That’s why I’m still suspicious of the handoff boundary:

SSE completion
stream close semantics
timeout/abort propagation
final event ordering

So no, I don’t think “proxy never emits the word terminated” clears the proxy. It really doesn’t.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 5:03 PM

#

Yeah but it would help to know what exactly and where in openclaw causes that terminated string to appear

#

I'ma do the reinstall please tell me would it be best to just get rid of the whole workspace and that would get rid of everything? I mean to back it up and delete it

#

Guess you had the same issue krill....

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 5:10 PM

#

I checked the code, and the important bit is:

OpenClaw’s embedded path does not hardcode the literal terminated.

What happens is:

Abort/error gets created or preserved
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-runner/run/attempt.ts:1341
- makeAbortError(signal) does this:
  - if signal.reason is already an Error, it preserves reason.message
  - otherwise it synthesizes "aborted"
- So if you see terminated, that was already the abort/error message, not something this function invented.
That error ends up on the assistant message
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-runner/run/attempt.ts:2021
- it picks lastAssistant from the run snapshot.

#

The lifecycle logger prints that assistant error
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-subscribe.handlers.lifecycle.ts:50
  - const rawError = lastAssistant.errorMessage?.trim();
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-subscribe.handlers.lifecycle.ts:54
  - const errorText = (friendlyError || lastAssistant.errorMessage || "LLM request failed.").trim();
rawErrorPreview is just a redacted/truncated copy
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-error-observation.ts:103
- buildApiErrorObservationFields(rawError) does not invent new text, it only parses/redacts/truncates.
Friendly formatting also does not invent terminated
- /home/exedev/clawd/openclaw-repo/src/agents/pi-embedded-helpers/errors.ts:937
- formatAssistantErrorText(...) rewrites known patterns, otherwise it returns the raw string.

So the precise answer is:

If your log shows rawErrorPreview: "terminated" or the lifecycle error as terminated, that string was already present in lastAssistant.errorMessage or the preserved abort reason before the logger touched it.

#

The strongest source-level clue is this:

OpenClaw’s own synthetic abort fallback is "aborted", not "terminated".
Therefore terminated almost certainly came from upstream of the lifecycle logger, likely an abort/error reason passed into the embedded runner, not from a hardcoded OpenClaw log string.

If you want, I can trace one level deeper next and find where lastAssistant.errorMessage gets populated in the stream/session layer.

#

Not just the workspace.

If you only delete the repo/workspace, you do not remove most of the accumulated state. The big stuff usually lives in:

~/.openclaw ← this is the important one
- config
- auth
- sessions
- agents
- cron/automation state
- local workspace data under the state dir

So for a real clean reset, I’d do this:

Back up and move aside ~/.openclaw
Optionally back up and move aside your repo checkout too
Reinstall from a fresh clone

#

Do not restore the old ~/.openclaw wholesale

So my recommendation is:

Yes, back up the whole repo if you want
but definitely back up and remove ~/.openclaw
use mv, not immediate deletion

Safest version:

openclaw --version
openclaw gateway stop
openclaw gateway uninstall
mv ~/.openclaw ~/.openclaw.backup-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
mv ~/openclaw ~/openclaw.backup-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)   # if that's your repo path

#

Then reinstall fresh.

Two important gotchas:

if you used a custom OPENCLAW_STATE_DIR or profiles like ~/.openclaw-<profile>, back those up too
if your custom proxy/API bridge lives outside the OpenClaw repo, this won’t remove that

Docs:

If you want, I can give you the exact minimal fresh-reinstall command list for Ubuntu/source checkout next.

#

Yeah, a little cursed 😅

Key sentence in case mine vanished too:

Deleting just the repo is not enough.
For a real clean reset, back up and move aside ~/.openclaw as well.

If you want the shortest safe path:

openclaw --version
openclaw gateway stop
openclaw gateway uninstall
mv ~/.openclaw ~/.openclaw.backup-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
mv ~/openclaw ~/openclaw.backup-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)   # if that's your repo path

#

Then fresh clone + build + onboard.

If you want, I can paste the full fresh Ubuntu/source reinstall checklist in one message.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 5:21 PM

#

Should I reinstall the os too to get everything fresh or this stuff is good enough

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 5:21 PM

#

No, I would not reinstall the OS. That’s overkill here.

For your case, a fresh enough reset is usually:

fresh ~/.openclaw
fresh OpenClaw repo checkout
fresh minimal config
re-add only one provider/model + your Discord bot
no old crons/extra agents at first

An OS reinstall only makes sense if you also have system-wide weirdness like:

unrelated services breaking
Node/pnpm/systemd badly messed up across multiple apps
disk/filesystem corruption
you just want to nuke the whole machine for other reasons

#

Also, if your custom proxy/API bridge is buggy, an OS reinstall will not fix that logic bug.

So my recommendation:

Fresh OpenClaw state + fresh repo, yes. Fresh OS, no.

Docs:

If you want, I can give you the minimum reinstall sequence plus the minimum post-reinstall config so you don’t accidentally re-import the cruft.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 5:52 PM

#

Oh man I just might have found something. When the terminated stuff was there the llm was returning an issue of rate limiting. Now the question is why didn't it get passed on properly to openclaw that there is a rate limit and or why didn't it deal with it as it should.

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 5:52 PM

#

Oh, that’s a really good clue.

If the upstream/model was actually returning a rate limit, but OpenClaw ended up seeing/logging terminated, then the likely problem is:

the real rate-limit signal got lost or transformed before OpenClaw classified it

And that matters because OpenClaw’s fallback/retry logic only works if it sees something recognizable like:

HTTP 429
rate limit text
provider-specific overload/rate-limit payload
a parsed error body it can classify

If instead the bridge/proxy turns that into:

closed stream
aborted request

#

generic terminated connection
empty/no final SSE error event

then OpenClaw can only react to that broken outer symptom, not the original rate limit.

So yes, the new question becomes:

Why did the proxy not forward the provider’s rate-limit status/body cleanly?
Did it rewrite a 429 into a terminated/aborted stream?
Did the final SSE error event/body get dropped?
Was the HTTP status changed to 200 and then the stream died later?

From the source side, this matches what we saw:

OpenClaw classifies based on the error text/status it actually receives
if the error text that reaches it is just terminated, it will not magically infer “rate limit”

#

So I’d update the suspicion to:

very likely proxy/bridge error propagation bug
not just “provider rate limited”, but “provider rate limited and the bridge surfaced it incorrectly”

Best next step is to capture one failed request at the proxy with:

upstream status code
upstream response/error body
what the proxy returned to OpenClaw
whether the stream closed early
whether the last SSE error chunk was forwarded

If you want, paste one failed trace and I’ll help compare provider 429 vs what OpenClaw actually received.

#

Yep, this is the smoking gun.

That error is very clearly a rate limit / quota exhaustion:

code: 429
reason: 'QUOTA_EXHAUSTED'
message includes quota reset time

And from OpenClaw’s source, this should classify as rate limit if it actually receives it:

errors.ts: rate-limit matching includes quota and 429
errors.ts: HTTP 429 => rate_limit
formatAssistantErrorText(...) would normally surface a rate-limit-style message

So if OpenClaw logged terminated instead, the likely issue is:

this exact error never reached OpenClaw in its real form

#

My guess now is your bridge/proxy is doing something like:

gemini-cli throws TerminalQuotaError
child process / stream dies
wrapper reports that as generic termination
OpenClaw only sees the outer terminated/aborted shell, not the inner 429 quota error

So yes, I think the question is now much sharper:

Why is your wrapper collapsing a structured 429/quota error into a generic terminated failure?

If your bridge is using gemini-cli under the hood, the fix is probably:

capture stderr + exit code
detect TerminalQuotaError / code: 429 / QUOTA_EXHAUSTED
return a structured 429 or structured error payload
do not just let the stream/process die and bubble up as “terminated”

#

So honestly, this now looks more like bridge error propagation than OpenClaw failover logic.

If you want, send the part of your bridge that:

spawns/runs gemini-cli
reads stdout/stderr
maps failures into HTTP/SSE responses

That’s probably exactly where this is getting lost.

shell spruceBOT Apr 10, 2026, 6:15 PM

#

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 6:58 PM

#

krill did you see the resposne above from the bot? we made it so that openclaw agents dont really read the posts from other bots

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 6:58 PM

#

Nope, not unless it got pasted into the thread for me.

If bot messages are filtered from agent context, then I only see:

your messages
anything explicitly quoted/pasted
tool output I fetched myself

So if there’s something important in that bot reply, paste it here and I’ll look at it.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 6:59 PM

#

well, how weird they implemented a bot to interact with you then 😭

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 6:59 PM

#

Yeah, it’s a bit goofy 😭

But I get why they do it, bot-to-bot loops and weird prompt injection stuff can get messy fast.

So practically, if another bot says something important, the safest path is still:

paste the relevant part here, and I can reason about it normally

Annoying, but safer.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 7:25 PM

#

InteractionEventListener timed out after 120000ms for event INTERACTION_CREATE

oh man what does this mean?

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 7:27 PM

#

That means a Discord interaction event got stuck in the gateway listener for more than 120 seconds.

More specifically:

it is not a normal message event
it is an INTERACTION_CREATE event, so think:
- slash command
- button click
- select menu
- modal submit

Where it comes from:

Carbon logs it in EventQueue.js
OpenClaw sets that listener timeout to 120000 ms by default for Discord

So the practical meaning is:

#

OpenClaw’s Discord interaction handler did not finish its listener-stage work within 2 minutes, so Carbon timed it out.

Important nuance:

this is a Discord event handling timeout
not necessarily the same as the full agent/model run timing out
it usually points to the interaction path getting stuck, blocked, or waiting too long on something

Common causes:

interaction handler waiting on slow external work
queue/backpressure
a promise never resolving
component/slash-command path hanging
error path not completing cleanly after some upstream failure

Also, if your original bug was around normal chat replies, this line may be related but separate unless the failing flow involved buttons/slash commands.

#

So my read is:

something in the Discord interaction pipeline hung for 120s

If you want, I can help you distinguish whether this is:

a red herring, or
the actual place where your Discord-side flow is stalling.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 7:46 PM

#

well well i made two fixes:

60s no model response = seamless retry for same response turn
error codes transmitted back in case of issues in proper format

and fo now the terminated stuff is gone xD

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 7:47 PM

#

Oh hell yes, that sounds exactly like the right fix 🎉

Those two changes address the most likely failure modes:

idle/no-response retry prevents dead stream stalls
proper error code propagation lets OpenClaw classify things like 429/rate-limit correctly instead of seeing generic garbage like terminated

So if terminated is gone now, that’s a strong sign the bridge/proxy layer was the real culprit.

I’d just watch for 3 things now:

Does a real 429/rate-limit now surface cleanly?
Does OpenClaw fallback/retry behave better now?
Any duplicate replies from the 60s seamless retry?

If it stays stable after a few more failures/retries, I’d consider this basically confirmed. Glad you caught it 😄

#

If this fixed it, please right-click the solution message → Apps → ✅ Mark Solution so it gets indexed on Answer Overflow.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 7:48 PM

#

i jinxed it, terminated is back.

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 7:49 PM

#

Ah, damn. That’s frustrating.

But it does tell us something useful:

you fixed one failure path, but terminated is still coming from another branch

So now I’d suspect one of these is still bypassing your new error-formatting path:

child process exits unexpectedly
stream/socket closes before your wrapper formats the error
timeout/abort path fires outside the normal error handler
retry branch falls through to a generic terminate path
response already started, then later dies

At this point, the fastest way forward is to instrument every exit path in the bridge for one failed request:

Log these for the same request id

#

request start
upstream call start
first chunk received
last chunk received
error caught
retry triggered
child/process exit code + signal
socket/stream close / end / error
exact payload returned to OpenClaw

Especially important

If you’re spawning something under the hood, log:

exit code
signal
stderr tail
whether your structured error formatter ran

#

whether headers/body were already partially sent

Because if terminated is back after your formatting fix, that usually means:

the request is dying in a path where your formatter never runs

So I wouldn’t read this as “your fix failed”.
I’d read it as:

good, we narrowed it down, there’s still an unhandled termination path

If you want, paste one failed trace after these new fixes and I’ll help map which branch is still leaking terminated.

knotty musk Apr 10, 2026, 10:36 PM

#

21:10:51+00:00 error diagnostic {"subsystem":"diagnostic"} lane task error: lane=main durationMs=20935 error="FailoverError: LLM request timed out."
21:10:51+00:00 error diagnostic {"subsystem":"diagnostic"} lane task error: lane=session:temp:slug-generator durationMs=20940 error="FailoverError: LLM request timed out."
21:10:51+00:00 error llm-slug-generator {"subsystem":"llm-slug-generator"} Failed to generate slug: FailoverError: LLM request timed out.
at handleAssistantFailover (file:///home/ubuntu/openclaw/dist/pi-embedded-Vw-lS5ti.js:26057:11)
at file:///home/ubuntu/openclaw/dist/pi-embedded-Vw-lS5ti.js:34436:39
at file:///home/ubuntu/openclaw/dist/command-queue-hc3EtTE6.js:119:22

any idea what happening here twin

outer prairieBOT Apr 10, 2026, 10:36 PM

#

Yep, this one is a bit more specific.

What it is

session:temp:slug-generator is not your main chat reply.
It’s OpenClaw doing a tiny extra LLM call to generate a session slug / filename.

Source path:

src/hooks/llm-slug-generator.ts

That helper literally runs its own embedded agent call with:

sessionKey: "temp:slug-generator"
timeoutMs: 15_000

What the log means

This part:

#

Failed to generate slug: FailoverError: LLM request timed out.

means the auxiliary slug-generation LLM call timed out in the embedded runner.

But the important part is this:

lane=main ... FailoverError: LLM request timed out.
lane=session:temp:slug-generator ... FailoverError: LLM request timed out.

So it was not just the slug helper.
Your main lane also timed out around the same moment.

My read

This points back to the same general area as before:

provider / proxy / stream path is still intermittently stalling or not completing in time

#

Not really a Discord send issue.

Why the timing looks weird

The lane duration is ~20.9s even though the slug generator timeout is 15s because there’s usually some extra overhead around:

queueing
failover handling
cleanup
wrapper/error propagation

Bottom line

I’d treat the slug-generator error as a symptom, not the root cause.

The real signal is:

multiple LLM calls timed out at once, including the main one

#

So this still smells like an upstream model/bridge reliability issue.

If you want, I can help you separate:

main-turn timeouts
slug-generator side noise
true Discord delivery failures

because right now those are getting mixed together in the logs.

knotty musk Apr 12, 2026, 2:18 AM

#

when does this get triggered?

You are an assistant that summarizes texts concisely while keeping the most important information

outer prairieBOT Apr 12, 2026, 2:19 AM

#

That exact prompt gets triggered by TTS auto-summary, not normal chat.

Source:

src/tts/tts-core.ts

It runs when all of these are true:

TTS is enabled
the reply is too long to speak directly
summary is enabled
OpenClaw decides to summarize the text first, then generate audio

Docs flow:

long reply
messages.tts.summarize: true
use summaryModel or agents.defaults.model.primary
then feed the summary into TTS

#

So in short:

It is triggered when OpenClaw is trying to shorten a long reply for text-to-speech.

Not the normal assistant reply path.

Docs:

https://docs.openclaw.ai/tools/tts

If you want, I can tell you the exact config key that turns that behavior on/off.

knotty musk Apr 12, 2026, 4:51 AM

#

does my openclaw when receiving reasoning_content send it back for the next api call/request?

outer prairieBOT Apr 12, 2026, 4:52 AM

#

Short version:

Not usually as raw reasoning_content, no.

What OpenClaw does is more like:

if a provider streams reasoning_content, OpenClaw parses it into internal thinking/reasoning blocks
on later requests, it may:
- ignore/drop them
- sanitize them
- or replay normalized reasoning metadata if that specific provider/protocol requires it

Important nuance

In the OpenResponses prompt builder, reasoning items are explicitly ignored when building the next prompt.
But for OpenAI Responses/Codex-style replay, OpenClaw can replay reasoning on follow-up turns because those APIs may require it for tool-call continuity.
For some providers, OpenClaw even strips thinking blocks on follow-up calls because they cause errors.
For MiniMax on the Anthropic-compatible path, OpenClaw disables implicit thinking by default specifically to avoid leaked reasoning_content.

#

So the accurate answer is:

OpenClaw does not blindly send back raw reasoning_content on the next call.
It normalizes it internally, then provider-specific replay/sanitization rules decide whether any reasoning metadata is sent again.

Relevant source/docs:

src/agents/openai-transport-stream.ts
src/gateway/openresponses-prompt.ts
src/agents/pi-embedded-runner/run/attempt.ts
https://docs.openclaw.ai/tools/thinking
https://docs.openclaw.ai/reference/transcript-hygiene
https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/minimax

If you want, I can answer the narrower version too:

“for your exact provider/path, yes or no?”

knotty musk Apr 12, 2026, 4:53 AM

#

wait i checked my openai compatible sdk does get back reasoning content. how can i prevent that from happening?

outer prairieBOT Apr 12, 2026, 4:53 AM

#

Yep, if your OpenAI-compatible backend is still returning reasoning_content, the safest answer is:

disable reasoning on the request side, and strip it on the proxy/response side if the backend still leaks it

In OpenClaw

Turn thinking off:

per session: /think off
or config default: agents.defaults.thinkingDefault: "off"

For payload behavior:

native OpenAI/Azure OpenAI: OpenClaw can keep reasoning: { effort: "none" }
proxy-style OpenAI-compatible /v1 routes: OpenClaw treats disabled reasoning as omit the reasoning field entirely

So if you still get reasoning_content on an OpenAI-compatible route, that strongly suggests:

#

your backend/provider is emitting it anyway

In your proxy/backend

Strip these from streamed deltas before returning them:

delta.reasoning_content
delta.reasoning
delta.reasoning_text

And avoid forwarding reasoning-enabling request params in the first place.

Practical rule

If you want zero reasoning content to come back:

set thinking/reasoning off
don’t send reasoning params upstream
strip reasoning fields from the response stream

#

Because some “OpenAI-compatible” backends are not actually strict-compatible here and will leak reasoning fields unless you sanitize them.

Docs/source that support this:

https://docs.openclaw.ai/tools/thinking
https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/openai
src/agents/openai-responses-payload-policy.ts
src/agents/openai-transport-stream.ts

If you want, I can give you the exact response-sanitizing snippet pattern for SSE/OpenAI-style deltas.

knotty musk Apr 12, 2026, 4:55 AM

#

how do we strip the reasoning? when openclaw sends an api request?

outer prairieBOT Apr 12, 2026, 4:55 AM

#

Yep, if you want to strip it on the outgoing request, do it right before your proxy forwards OpenClaw’s JSON upstream.

For OpenAI-compatible requests

Remove reasoning-related request fields from the payload:

const body = JSON.parse(requestBody);

// kill OpenAI-style reasoning knobs
delete body.reasoning;

// if your compat layer also accepts other variants
delete body.thinking;

// optional: if nested/odd compat shims add extra reasoning settings
if (body.text && typeof body.text === "object") {

#

  delete body.text.reasoning;
  delete body.text.thinking;
}

Then forward the cleaned body upstream.

Important

That only prevents requesting reasoning.

If the backend still returns reasoning_content anyway, then you must also strip it from the response stream:

delete chunk.choices?.[0]?.delta?.reasoning_content;
delete chunk.choices?.[0]?.delta?.reasoning;

#

delete chunk.choices?.[0]?.delta?.reasoning_text;

In OpenClaw itself

The closest built-in behavior is:

set /think off
for proxy-style OpenAI-compatible routes, disabled reasoning is treated as omit reasoning from payload
for native OpenAI, OpenClaw may send reasoning: { effort: "none" }

So if your own proxy sits in front, the practical answer is:

sanitize both sides

strip reasoning from the outbound request

strip reasoning_content from the inbound streamed response

#Openclaw occasionally NOT sending messages back

Recommended guide

1) Stop and uninstall the current gateway service

2) Back up the old state instead of deleting it

3) Fresh clone and build

4) Run onboarding again

5) Verify

What I’d re-add first

What I would not restore immediately

Best things to share

Things I’ll specifically look for

Super helpful test pair

Log these for the same request id

Especially important

What it is

What the log means

My read

Why the timing looks weird

Bottom line

Important nuance

In OpenClaw

In your proxy/backend

Practical rule

For OpenAI-compatible requests

Important

In OpenClaw itself