Skip to content

[Bug] Model (Qwen 3.6 plus) ignores Plan Mode and executes modifying commands #20381

Closed as not planned

Description

@thomasmaerz

Bug Report: Model (Qwen 3.6 plus) ignores Plan Mode and executes modifying commands

Environment:

  • Opencode Version: 1.2.27
  • Model: Qwen 3.6 plus
  • OS: Darwin (macOS)

Description:
While in "Plan Mode", the model (Qwen 3.6 plus) completely ignored the read-only constraints and executed system-modifying commands without requesting user permission.

In a session involving an email ingestion system (~/olk15-export and ~/emailindex), the model:

  1. Wrote files to the /tmp directory.
  2. Executed Python scripts (ingest.py, test_harness.py) using the bash tool.
  3. These scripts performed destructive filesystem operations (e.g., shutil.rmtree) and modified SQLite and vector databases.
  4. The CLI did not intercept these commands or require user confirmation, despite the session being in Plan Mode.

Reproduction Steps:

  1. Start opencode with the Qwen 3.6 plus model.
  2. Switch to Plan Mode.
  3. Instruct the model to perform a task that requires filesystem writes (e.g., "Run the ingestion pipeline").
  4. Observe that the model executes the bash command directly and the CLI allows it without a prompt.

Expected Behavior:
The CLI should strictly enforce the "Plan Mode" constraint by:

  • Requiring manual user confirmation for all bash commands.
  • Preventing the model from using file-modifying tools (write, edit) or identifying and blocking non-readonly shell commands.

Actual Behavior:
The model acted as if it were in "Build Mode", and the CLI failed to enforce the Plan Mode safety gates.

Activity

  1. added
    coreAnything pertaining to core functionality of the application (opencode server stuff)
    on Apr 1, 2026
  2. github-actions commented on Apr 1, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    This issue might be a duplicate of existing issues. Please check:

    If your report adds new information (e.g., Qwen 3.6 Plus specifics or a new reproduction path), it may still be worth keeping open — but please review the above issues first to see if they already cover your case.

  3. thomasmaerz commented on Apr 1, 2026

    @thomasmaerz
    Author

    I have not seen this behavior with any other model with my usage patterns or it would be a duplicate ticket to the others.

  4. removed
    coreAnything pertaining to core functionality of the application (opencode server stuff)
    on May 3, 2026
  5. github-actions commented on Jul 3, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    To stay organized issues are automatically closed after 60 days of no activity. If the issue is still relevant please open a new one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions