[danielpeng1]

buildSafeRecoverKeyParams turns derived Safe child keys into the params a coin's recover() expects. It threw for eddsaMpc wallets (SOL, ADA, etc.) and for XLM, so those couldn't be recovered. This adds both.

eddsaMpc (slot ④)

• Add an eddsaMpc branch. Signed mode re-encrypts the child shares under a throwaway passphrase; unsigned mode returns only the child common keychain. Both always set isTss: true and broadcast: false.
• Share one MpcSafeRecoverKeyParams<Slot> type and builder between ecdsaMpc and eddsaMpc. EcdsaMpcSafeRecoverKeyParams keeps its shape.
• Remove the runtime "not supported yet" fall-through, so a slot added without a branch is now a compile error.

XLM (slot ②, ed25519Multisig)

• Register xlm and txlm in the ed25519Multisig encoders. rootAddress is not derived (as with HBAR), so the caller still supplies it.

Tests

eddsaMpc

• sdk-core safe/recovery.ts: the MPC signed and unsigned tests now run for both ecdsaMpc and eddsaMpc.
• solSafeRecovery.ts and adaSafeRecovery.ts: derive, build, then run the real recover() with real MPS signing. Signed signatures verify under the derived key, unsigned sweeps spend from the derived address, and shares from the wrong account are rejected.

XLM

• sdk-core safe/recovery.ts: XLM/TXLM golden vectors (signed and unsigned).
• xlmSafeRecovery.ts: signed recovery through the lazy backup signer with both signatures verified, unsigned recovery with no encrypt or decrypt, and RecoveryKeyMismatchError when the derived keys aren't account signers.

Ticket: WCN-3914

[linear-code]

WCN-3914

[github-actions]

⚠️ Compatibility checks are failing on Node.js 27-nightly (experimental, non-blocking). This does not block merge, but it signals an incompatibility to fix before this release becomes supported.

View run

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This repository is configured for manual code reviews. Comment @claude review for a one-time review, or @claude review always to subscribe this PR to a review on every future push.

_{Tip: disable this comment in your organization's Code Review settings.}