docs(readme): align Docker auth example with GOG_HOME pattern

[WadydX]

Summary

Aligns the README Docker auth example with the GOG_HOME pattern already documented in docs/install.md and docs/paths.md.

Closes #828

Problem

The README Docker example mounts only -v gogcli-config:/home/gog/.config/gogcli, but file-keyring tokens are stored under the data directory ($GOG_DATA_DIR/keyring/), not the config directory. Users following the README complete auth add inside the container, then lose their tokens when the container exits because the data directory was never persisted.

Change

• Replace the config-only volume with a GOG_HOME volume (gogcli-state:/persist/gogcli)
• Add -e GOG_HOME=/persist/gogcli to the docker run command
• Rename the volume from gogcli-config to gogcli-state for clarity

This matches the exact example already shown in docs/install.md (line 30–43).

Verification

• docs/install.md already uses this pattern: docker volume create gogcli-state + GOG_HOME=/persist/gogcli
• docs/paths.md confirms data (including file-keyring entries) lives under the data directory
• No code changes; docs-only PR

[clawsweeper]

ClawSweeper review: did not complete due to Codex infrastructure failure. Reviewed June 16, 2026, 9:16 AM ET / 13:16 UTC.

Summary
Review failed before ClawSweeper could summarize the requested change.

Reproducibility: unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Review metrics: none identified.

Merge readiness
Not assessed.
Failure reason: invalid structured output.

This is a ClawSweeper/Codex infrastructure failure, not a PR readiness or patch-quality verdict.
Keep any merge decision on the normal maintainer review path until ClawSweeper can complete a fresh review.

Risk before merge

• [P1] No close action taken because the review did not complete.

Maintainer options:

1. Decide the mitigation before merge
   Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.
2. Pause or close
   Do not merge this PR until maintainers decide whether the risk is worth taking.

Next step before merge

• Review did not complete, so no work-lane recommendation was made.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Retry the Codex review after fixing the execution failure.

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

Unclear. The review failed before ClawSweeper could establish a reproduction path.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Unclear. Retry the review first so ClawSweeper can evaluate the actual issue and fix direction.

AGENTS.md: unclear because the file could not be read completely.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against f371f43eaef3.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• failure reason: invalid structured output.
• codex failure detail: Codex review failed for this PR with exit 0 and wrote invalid JSON or schema-invalid output to /home/runner/work/clawsweeper/clawsweeper/artifacts/event/codex/830.json: decision.rootCauseCluster.currentItemRelationship fixed_by_candidate requires a canonical PR.
• codex stderr: No stderr captured.
• codex stdout: h issue view 828 --repo openclaw/gogcli --json number,title,body,author,labels,state,comments,url,createdAt,updatedAt","sha":null},{"label":"Feature history","detail":"The GOG_HOME/XDG path override work appears to date to commit 23e74af, and the current README/install/path docs were later present in the v0.28.0 release commit.","file":"docs/paths.md","line":1,"command":"git show -s --format='%H%n%cI%n%an%n%s' 23e74af && git show -s --format='%H%n%cI%n%an%n%s' 6bc67d7","sha":"23e74af31471cb26b74e5710032354872f34bc22"}],"likelyOwners":[{"person":"Peter Steinberger","role":"introduced behavior / recent docs owner","reason":"Git history ties the GOG_HOME/XDG path override feature and the current README/install/path docs to Peter Steinberger's commits, including the path feature commit and v0.28.0 release commit.","commits":[.

Likely related people:

• unknown: Codex failed before it could trace repository history. (role: review did not complete; confidence: low)

How this review workflow works

• 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.