Add T3 Chat to the README

[Quicksaver]

• Link T3 Chat in the provider list
• Describe the Base and Overage usage buckets

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs real behavior proof before merge. Reviewed June 9, 2026, 5:08 AM ET / 09:08 UTC.

Summary
The PR adds T3 Chat to the README provider list, linking to the provider docs and noting its Base and Overage usage buckets.

Reproducibility: not applicable. for a README-only documentation PR. The review check is whether current source and docs support the added provider-list entry, which they do.

Review metrics: 1 noteworthy metric.

• Diff size: 1 file changed, +1/-0. The diff is limited to one README provider-list entry, so review hinges on link and wording correctness.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🐚 platinum hermit
Proof: 🌊 off-meta tidepool
Patch quality: 🐚 platinum hermit
Result: ready for maintainer review.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Rank-up moves:

• none.

Next step before merge

• [P1] No repair lane is needed because the patch is narrow and has no actionable review finding.

Security
Cleared: The diff only changes README text and adds no code, dependency, script, credential, workflow, or release path.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Merge the narrow README documentation addition through the normal maintainer path if checks remain clean.

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

Not applicable for a README-only documentation PR. The review check is whether current source and docs support the added provider-list entry, which they do.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes. Adding the missing README provider-list entry is the narrow maintainable solution because detailed T3 Chat docs and implementation already exist.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model gpt-5.5, reasoning high; reviewed against a4f278d91fe4.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add P3: This is a low-risk documentation-only provider-list update.
• add rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• add status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This is a documentation-only README change, so after-fix runtime proof is not required.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is a low-risk documentation-only provider-list update.
• rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This is a documentation-only README change, so after-fix runtime proof is not required.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• Repository policy read: AGENTS.md was read fully; for this documentation-only review its guidance supported keeping the review scoped and avoiding live provider/runtime checks. (AGENTS.md:1, a4f278d91fe4)
• Current README gap: Current main's README provider list includes MiniMax followed by Kimi and does not list T3 Chat, so the PR is not redundant. (README.md:90, a4f278d91fe4)
• Provider docs support wording: docs/providers.md lists T3 Chat as a browser-cookie web provider and says it shows the 4-hour Base bucket plus monthly Overage bucket. (docs/providers.md:254, a4f278d91fe4)
• Provider source support: T3ChatProviderDescriptor names the provider T3 Chat and labels its displayed windows as Base and Overage. (Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/T3Chat/T3ChatProviderDescriptor.swift:12, a4f278d91fe4)
• Usage mapping coverage: T3ChatUsageFetcherTests asserts that parsed customer data maps to Base as the primary window and Overage as the secondary window. (Tests/CodexBarTests/T3ChatUsageFetcherTests.swift:52, a4f278d91fe4)
• PR diff scope: The GitHub API file list shows exactly one README.md change, +1/-0, adding the T3 Chat provider-list line. (README.md:91, 0ba34f4723a4)

Likely related people:

• Quicksaver: Public commit history shows Quicksaver authored the merged T3 Chat provider commit that added implementation, docs, and tests. (role: feature introducer; confidence: high; commits: 4bf5ccbd9450; files: Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/T3Chat/T3ChatUsageFetcher.swift, docs/providers.md, Tests/CodexBarTests/T3ChatUsageFetcherTests.swift)
• steipete: The T3 Chat provider commit lists Peter Steinberger as co-author, and local blame attributes the current README/docs snapshot to the latest release commit. (role: adjacent owner; confidence: medium; commits: 4bf5ccbd9450, 920997c6a365; files: README.md, docs/providers.md)

What the crustacean ranks mean

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

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.

[steipete]

Landed as f91d779.

Tested:

• Codex autoreview against origin/main: clean, no accepted/actionable findings.
• git diff --check origin/main...HEAD: passed.
• GitHub CI: lint-build-test, both Linux CLI builds, and GitGuardian passed.

The README entry matches the existing T3 Chat provider docs and Base/Overage window labels. Thanks @Quicksaver!