[WRONG BRANCH] docs(devlog): withdraw unsafe OPENCODEX_HOME first-run verification procedure

[luvs01]

Motivation

• The devlog simultaneously warns that OPENCODEX_HOME alone does not isolate Codex/Grok/shell/system state and later recommends OPENCODEX_HOME=$(mktemp -d) ocx start as a positive verification, which is contradictory and can modify a developer's real configuration, so the unsafe guidance must be removed.

Description

• Replace the positive verification procedure in devlog/_fin/260726_announcements/031_guided_tour_draft.md with a withdrawal that states the OPENCODEX_HOME-only procedure is unsafe and that no positive first-run procedure should be documented until full isolation of Codex, Grok, shell/system-environment state and a non-default port are verified.
• This is a documentation-only change to the devlog file and does not modify runtime code or behavior.

Testing

• Ran git diff --check with no issues and bun run privacy:scan which passed.
• Verified the file change is staged and committed in the working tree (git status / commit present).
• Attempted to exercise the repository's make_pr helper but the local environment could not run it because mcp.server.fastmcp was unavailable and pip install was blocked by a network proxy; these are environment limitations and do not affect the doc change.

---

Codex Task

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@luvs01, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 41 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: a075febf-f183-42b0-a61e-2c2f23c36563

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 121f1ad and c98c0c9.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• devlog/_fin/260726_announcements/031_guided_tour_draft.md

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

✅ Deterministic PR hygiene checks passed.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: c98c0c95e6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Remove the unsafe command from the earlier section

When a reviewer follows this draft's manual-verification instructions, lines 91–107 still present OPENCODEX_HOME=$(mktemp -d) ocx start as the command that safely leaves the real configuration untouched, and lines 272–275 still direct readers back to it. Adding a withdrawal only here leaves the actionable unsafe procedure in place even though this same document explains that it can rewrite the real Codex, Grok, shell, and system-environment state; replace the earlier how-to section and its R3 reference with the withdrawal as well.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[github-actions]

⏳ DRAFT

• wrong target branch (main); retarget to dev.

What to do

• Retarget this PR to dev — all contributions go to dev.

Its title has been prefixed with [WRONG BRANCH].
This pull request was already a draft. Its draft status will be preserved after every issue above is resolved.