Avoid shell execution in ReadFileTool ranged reads

[petrmarinec]

Link to Issue or Description of Change

1. Link to an existing issue (if applicable):

• Related: Avoid shell execution in ReadFileTool ranged reads #5267

2. Or, if no issue exists, describe the change:

Problem:
ReadFileTool handles ranged reads by building cat -n '{path}' | sed -n ... from the caller-supplied path, while full reads use environment.read_file(path) and Python slicing. Shell metacharacters in path are therefore interpreted by the shell in the ranged-read branch instead of being treated as a literal file path.

Solution:
Remove the shell-based ranged-read branch and reuse the existing Python file-read logic for all reads. This keeps ranged output behavior while eliminating the shell dependency from ReadFileTool.

Testing Plan

Unit Tests:

• I have added or updated unit tests for my change.
• All unit tests pass locally.

Passed locally in Linux Docker (python:3.11-bookworm):

• pytest tests/unittests/tools/test_environment_tools.py tests/unittests/tools/environment_simulation
• pytest tests/unittests/tools
• Result: 1519 passed

Manual End-to-End (E2E) Tests:

• On unmodified origin/main, a ranged ReadFileTool call with a crafted path wrote a proof file in the working directory.
• After this patch, the same call returns File not found: ... and no proof file is written.

Checklist

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
• I have performed a self-review of my own code.
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes.
• I have manually tested my changes end-to-end.
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules.

Additional context

This is a small fix that removes the shell-based ranged-read implementation and makes ReadFileTool use the same direct file-read path for both full reads and ranged reads.

[rohityan]

Hi @petrmarinec , Thank you for your contribution! We appreciate you taking the time to submit this pull request. Your PR has been received by the team and is currently under review. We will provide feedback as soon as we have an update to share.

[rohityan]

Hi @wukath , can you please review this.