docs: make technical prose concrete
This commit is contained in:
Turtle
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-06-15-code-mode.md
|
||||
2026-06-15-code-mode.md: 5ad7be9506c2356f90050b86d85aa77f602946ce
|
||||
2026-06-15-code-mode.zh.md: 1902c6ba86b6b8d3fecd06c417347a9c082f67b4
|
||||
2026-06-15-code-mode.md: 51c53c56f5755d56f49d8e5166a1ceeef0ffc202
|
||||
2026-06-15-code-mode.zh.md: dbf8d409dea152b39d215f5dd636989c3f4fa0bb
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Tool presentation belongs to the registry that owns tool visibility: implementin
|
||||
|
||||
Three decisions, each elaborated in its own section below:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Code Mode is a first-class presentation mode of `ToolRegistry`** (`dsh-tools`), selected by a validated `mode` config: `'native'` (the default, contributing the visible capability schemas), `'code'` (the registry contributes only its reserved `run_code` transport plus a generated SDK `.d.ts` in the system prompt), or `'both'` (native schemas and the transport + SDK). The registry shapes its canonical contribution at the source; the cooperative prompt-assembly result remains authoritative, and the logged request header records exactly that returned presentation.
|
||||
1. **Code Mode is a first-class presentation mode of `ToolRegistry`** (`dsh-tools`), selected by a validated `mode` config: `'native'` (the default, contributing the visible capability schemas), `'code'` (the registry contributes only its reserved `run_code` transport plus a generated SDK `.d.ts` in the system prompt), or `'both'` (native schemas and the transport + SDK). The registry constructs its canonical contribution at the source; the cooperative prompt-assembly result remains authoritative, and the logged request header records exactly that returned presentation.
|
||||
2. **Code execution is a capability seam** — `packages/code-runtime/` contains the Service Definition package `@deepseek-ai/dsh-code-runtime`, which owns `ctx.codeRuntime` ([capability seams](../architecture/2026-06-13-capability-seams.md); Consumer = `dsh-tools`, with core-consumes-a-seam precedent in `agent-loop` → `dsh-llm`). The runtime knows nothing about tools: it is handed a program and named async bindings, runs the program, and reports `{ value, logs, error? }`. Language and substrate are backend properties, so a future Python or container backend is another Service provider package, not a redesign.
|
||||
3. **The shipped implementation is `@deepseek-ai/dsh-code-runtime-worker`**: one fresh Node worker thread per run, executing the model's TypeScript after type-strip, with bindings bridged over the message port, an empty environment, configurable heap/output/time caps, and hard termination. Its trust posture is bash-equivalent by design — no unsafe-acknowledgement flags — because the harness already ships `dsh-bash-local`, which executes arbitrary model-written shell commands with strictly *more* ambient authority.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -120,11 +120,11 @@ Deployments switching to `'code'` must update any native-only `toolOrder`. Assem
|
||||
|
||||
**The worker is not a hard security boundary.** Deliberate and documented (§Trust posture): posture equals the existing bash tool, containment exceeds it, gating uses the same approval and sandbox policies. Deployments needing more need a future `isolation: 'container'` backend — tracked as the seam's designed extension, not a TODO on this design.
|
||||
|
||||
**`stripTypeScriptTypes` is marked experimental.** It is the same engine (amaro/swc) behind Node's own native `.ts` execution, exposed as an API across this repo's whole engines range. Mitigations: the runtime's unit suite pins the behaviors relied on (position preservation, erasable-only rejection message shape loosely), the call sits behind one private function, and `amaro`/`sucrase` are drop-in replacements if the API shifts. The erasable-only subset is a model-facing contract line, and the error path is a working feedback loop, not a dead end.
|
||||
**`stripTypeScriptTypes` is marked experimental.** It is the same engine (amaro/swc) behind Node's own native `.ts` execution, exposed as an API across this repo's whole engines range. Mitigations: the runtime's unit suite checks position preservation and the required parts of the erasable-only rejection message, the call sits behind one private function, and `amaro`/`sucrase` are direct replacements if the API shifts. The erasable-only subset is a model-facing input restriction, and the error tells the model how to correct the program.
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompt cost of the SDK, especially under `'both'`.** The `.d.ts` can rival the native schemas it complements; `'both'` carries two representations. Prefix stability + provider caching amortize per-session cost; the mode is per-deployment; the Agent Note makes no unconditional-savings claim. Measured guidance (when to prefer which mode) is explicitly post-ship learning.
|
||||
|
||||
**Registry scope growth.** `dsh-tools` absorbs codegen, a tool, a bridge, and an event. Contained by module boundaries inside the package (`ts-types.ts`, `code-mode.ts` beside `schema.ts`/`json-schema.ts`/`presentation.ts`) and by the seam: everything substrate-shaped lives behind `ctx.codeRuntime`.
|
||||
**Registry scope growth.** `dsh-tools` absorbs codegen, a tool, a bridge, and an event. Package modules separate these responsibilities (`ts-types.ts` and `code-mode.ts` beside `schema.ts`, `json-schema.ts`, and `presentation.ts`), while `ctx.codeRuntime` owns all code-runtime-specific implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Large lossless JSON values can exhaust memory.** Tool bindings snapshot lossless JSON before dispatch and return canonical JSON resolutions whole. The runtime validates both sides of the worker port and applies no per-binding byte cap; structured-clone cost and process or worker memory are the practical bounds. The combined outer-output ledger for logs, the completion value, and a failure diagnostic is the only byte-capped boundary.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Cloudflare 的 [Code Mode](https://blog.cloudflare.com/code-mode/) 提出了一
|
||||
|
||||
三项决策，各自在下方独立小节中展开：
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Code Mode 是 `ToolRegistry`（`dsh-tools`）的一等呈现模式**，通过经校验的 `mode` 配置选择：`'native'`（默认，贡献可见能力 schema）、`'code'`（注册表仅贡献其保留的 `run_code` 传输通道加一份生成的 SDK `.d.ts` 到系统提示词中）或 `'both'`（原生 schema 加传输通道 + SDK）。注册表在源头塑造其权威贡献；协作式提示词组装的结果仍具权威性，记录在日志中的请求头精确反映该返回的呈现。
|
||||
1. **Code Mode 是 `ToolRegistry`（`dsh-tools`）的一等呈现模式**，通过经校验的 `mode` 配置选择：`'native'`（默认，贡献可见能力 schema）、`'code'`（注册表仅贡献其保留的 `run_code` 传输通道加一份生成的 SDK `.d.ts` 到系统提示词中）或 `'both'`（原生 schema 加传输通道 + SDK）。注册表在源头构建其权威贡献；协作式提示词组装的结果仍具权威性，记录在日志中的请求头精确反映该返回的呈现。
|
||||
2. **代码执行是一个能力 seam**——`packages/code-runtime/` 包含 Service Definition 包 `@deepseek-ai/dsh-code-runtime`，拥有 `ctx.codeRuntime`（[能力 seam](../architecture/2026-06-13-capability-seams.md)；Consumer = `dsh-tools`，core 消费 seam 的先例见 `agent-loop` → `dsh-llm`）。运行时对工具一无所知：它接收一段程序和命名的异步绑定，执行程序，报告 `{ value, logs, error? }`。语言和基底是后端属性，因此未来的 Python 或容器后端只是另一个 Service provider 包，而非重新设计。
|
||||
3. **交付的实现是 `@deepseek-ai/dsh-code-runtime-worker`**：每次运行 spawn 一个全新的 Node worker 线程，对模型的 TypeScript 进行 type-strip 后执行，绑定通过消息端口桥接，环境为空，堆/输出/时间上限可配置，并支持硬终止。其信任姿态在设计上等同于 bash——无需 unsafe-acknowledgement flag——因为 harness 已经交付了 `dsh-bash-local`，后者以严格*更高*的环境权限执行模型编写的任意 shell 命令。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -120,11 +120,11 @@ SDK 指示模型编写一个所加载运行时语言的异步函数体（默认
|
||||
|
||||
**Worker 不是硬安全边界。** 有意为之且已文档化（§信任姿态）：姿态等同于既有的 bash 工具，约束能力强于它，门禁使用相同的审批与沙箱策略。需要更强隔离的部署需要未来的 `isolation: 'container'` 后端——作为 seam 设计的扩展点跟踪，而非本设计的 TODO。
|
||||
|
||||
**`stripTypeScriptTypes` 标记为 experimental。** 它与 Node 自身原生 `.ts` 执行背后的引擎（amaro/swc）相同，在本仓库的整个引擎范围内作为 API 暴露。缓解措施：运行时的单元测试套件固定了所依赖的行为（位置保持、可擦除限制的拒绝消息形状宽松匹配），调用位于一个私有函数之后，且 `amaro`/`sucrase` 是 API 变化时的直接替代品。仅可擦除子集是面向模型的约定线，错误路径是一个可工作的反馈循环，而非死胡同。
|
||||
**`stripTypeScriptTypes` 标记为 experimental。** 它与 Node 自身原生 `.ts` 执行背后的引擎（amaro/swc）相同，在本仓库的整个引擎范围内作为 API 暴露。缓解措施：运行时的单元测试套件会检查位置保持和可擦除限制拒绝消息中的必需部分；调用位于一个私有函数之后，且 `amaro`/`sucrase` 可在 API 变化时直接替换它。仅可擦除子集是面向模型的输入限制，错误消息会告诉模型如何修正程序。
|
||||
|
||||
**SDK 的提示词成本，尤其在 `'both'` 下。** `.d.ts` 可能与它补充的原生 schema 体量相当；`'both'` 携带两种表示。前缀稳定性 + 提供方缓存摊销了每会话成本；mode 是每部署的；本 Agent Note 不做无条件节省的声明。何时优先使用哪种模式的量化指导明确属于上线后学习。
|
||||
|
||||
**注册表 scope 增长。** `dsh-tools` 吸收了代码生成、一个工具、一个桥和一个事件。包内的模块边界（`ts-types.ts`、`code-mode.ts` 与 `schema.ts`/`json-schema.ts`/`presentation.ts` 并列）和 seam 共同约束了这一增长：所有基底相关的内容都在 `ctx.codeRuntime` 之后。
|
||||
**注册表 scope 增长。** `dsh-tools` 吸收了代码生成、一个工具、一个桥和一个事件。包内模块把这些职责分开（`ts-types.ts`、`code-mode.ts` 与 `schema.ts`、`json-schema.ts`、`presentation.ts` 并列），所有 code-runtime 专用实现都由 `ctx.codeRuntime` 提供。
|
||||
|
||||
**大型无损 JSON 值可能耗尽内存。** 工具绑定会在分发前对无损 JSON 创建快照，并完整返回规范 JSON 返回值。运行时会校验 worker 端口两侧，但不对单次绑定设置字节数上限；结构化克隆成本以及进程或 worker 内存构成实际边界。只有包含日志、完成值和失败诊断的组合外层输出账本受字节数上限约束。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.md
|
||||
2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.md: 28ecf985db1289ce4f80570583eac6a051cd2c0b
|
||||
2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.zh.md: 5f349ddcacebe66c346976b822c9dcc65bda8d18
|
||||
2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.md: 2b9ea93c40bd4b3547cfda83c3ad0bd52c047792
|
||||
2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.zh.md: 8b647fa51511e1c4cac55c3a9ea39b7e059bc381
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ English | [中文](2026-06-21-subagent-capability-seam.zh.md)
|
||||
|
||||
The harness has a long-deferred seam for **subagents** — an agent delegating work to another agent. The intent was sketched in the `Agent`/`AgentLoop` interfaces ([packages/core/agent/src/types.ts](../../../../packages/core/agent/src/types.ts), [packages/core/agent-loop/src/index.ts](../../../../packages/core/agent-loop/src/index.ts)): a creation option referencing a parent agent (fork = seed the child session with the parent's event log; spawn = fresh session), with the child returned as an `Agent` handle so steering and event subscription work uniformly.
|
||||
|
||||
The distinctive requirement — the one that shapes the whole design — is that **multiple subagent implementations must coexist at runtime**. A parent may want a cheap in-process child for a scoped subtask AND an isolated out-of-process child (over ACP) in the same session. The transports:
|
||||
**Multiple subagent implementations must coexist at runtime.** A parent may want a cheap in-process child for a scoped subtask AND an isolated out-of-process child (over ACP) in the same session. The transports:
|
||||
|
||||
- **in-process** — a child concrete `Agent` on the same `Context` (the cheapest, and nearly free given the existing agent factory);
|
||||
- **ACP** — act as an ACP *client* driving another agent process (which can be another instance of ourselves);
|
||||
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ Each in-process subagent runs in its **own `Session`** (own id, `parentSession`
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing
|
||||
|
||||
Registry and tool tests replace only the nondeterministic child boundary with a package-local scripted provider while exercising the real `SubagentService`, lifecycle, task integration, and model-facing tool. Provider and consumer export shapes retain their Loader regression coverage for the failure described in [postmortem 0001](../../../../docs/postmortem/0001-acp-default-export-drops-inject.md). Registry tests cover reload safety, duplicate names, and start-time capability rejection; nested-agent scenarios replay keylessly through [per-session snapshot replay](../testing/2026-06-22-subagent-snapshot-replay.md); in-process backends also have real-loop unit tests and a with-key e2e.
|
||||
Registry and tool tests replace only the nondeterministic child with a package-local scripted provider while exercising the real `SubagentService`, lifecycle, task integration, and model-facing tool. Loader regression tests still cover the provider and consumer exports for the failure described in [postmortem 0001](../../../../docs/postmortem/0001-acp-default-export-drops-inject.md). Registry tests cover reload safety, duplicate names, and start-time capability rejection; nested-agent scenarios replay keylessly through [per-session snapshot replay](../testing/2026-06-22-subagent-snapshot-replay.md); in-process backends also have real-loop unit tests and a with-key e2e.
|
||||
|
||||
## Consequences
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
harness 有一个长期搁置的 seam 用于 **subagent**：一个 agent 将工作委派给另一个 agent。这一意图在 `Agent`/`AgentLoop` 接口中已有草案（[packages/core/agent/src/types.ts](../../../../packages/core/agent/src/types.ts)、[packages/core/agent-loop/src/index.ts](../../../../packages/core/agent-loop/src/index.ts)）：一个创建选项引用父 agent（fork = 用父会话的事件日志初始化子会话；spawn = 全新会话），子 agent 以 `Agent` 句柄返回，使 steering（中途引导）和事件订阅可以统一工作。
|
||||
|
||||
决定整体设计走向的核心需求是：**多种 subagent 实现必须在运行时共存**。一个父 agent 可能在同一个会话中既需要一个廉价的进程内子 agent 处理有限范围的子任务，又需要一个隔离的进程外子 agent（通过 ACP）。传输方式：
|
||||
**多种 subagent 实现必须在运行时共存。**一个父 agent 可能在同一个会话中既需要一个廉价的进程内子 agent 处理有限范围的子任务，又需要一个隔离的进程外子 agent（通过 ACP）。传输方式：
|
||||
|
||||
- **进程内**：在同一个 `Context` 上创建一个具体的子 `Agent`（最廉价，且鉴于现有 agent 工厂几乎零成本）；
|
||||
- **ACP**：作为 ACP *客户端*驱动另一个 agent 进程（可以是自身的另一个实例）；
|
||||
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ bash seam（[能力 seam](../architecture/2026-06-13-capability-seams.md)）在
|
||||
|
||||
## 测试
|
||||
|
||||
注册表与工具测试仅用包内脚本化提供方替换非确定性的子进程边界，同时运行真实的 `SubagentService`、生命周期、任务集成和面向模型的工具。提供方与消费方的 export 形状仍保留 Loader 回归覆盖，以防止[事故复盘（postmortem）0001](../../../../docs/postmortem/0001-acp-default-export-drops-inject.md) 中描述的失败。注册表测试覆盖重载安全性、重名和启动时能力拒绝；嵌套 agent 场景通过[逐会话快照回放](../testing/2026-06-22-subagent-snapshot-replay.md)进行无密钥回放；进程内后端还有真实循环的单元测试和带密钥的 e2e 测试。
|
||||
注册表与工具测试仅用包内脚本化提供方替换非确定性的子 agent，同时运行真实的 `SubagentService`、生命周期、任务集成和面向模型的工具。Loader 回归测试仍覆盖提供方与消费方的 export，以防止[事故复盘（postmortem）0001](../../../../docs/postmortem/0001-acp-default-export-drops-inject.md)中描述的失败。注册表测试覆盖重载安全性、重名和启动时能力拒绝；嵌套 agent 场景通过[逐会话快照回放](../testing/2026-06-22-subagent-snapshot-replay.md)进行无密钥回放；进程内后端还有真实循环的单元测试和带密钥的 e2e 测试。
|
||||
|
||||
## 后果
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-06-30-hook-bridges.md
|
||||
2026-06-30-hook-bridges.md: eecc1fc75c10618481231083f890e0e4b122c1ee
|
||||
2026-06-30-hook-bridges.zh.md: dcc8f496cb3bc6ea7857ce804a9159cbfcbc3f08
|
||||
2026-06-30-hook-bridges.md: 0dce552820186755e9243bc5ce1dd3361e2e739d
|
||||
2026-06-30-hook-bridges.zh.md: 2df3a47fd6219e4007e2cad8f2ffa9bef9600a87
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ English | [中文](2026-06-30-hook-bridges.zh.md)
|
||||
|
||||
The harness's extension surface is its typed interception points ([the interception extension-points Agent Note](2026-06-30-interception-extension-points.md)): a "native hook" is just an ordinary cordis plugin subscribing to `agent/session-start`, `agent/pre-step`, `tools/pre-execute`, `tools/post-execute`, `agent/turn-stopping`, `subagent/start`, or `subagent/end`. But users arrive with **existing** Claude Code (CC) and Codex hook configs — a `hooks.json` (or a settings file's `hooks` key) full of shell-command hooks — and want those to run unmodified. This Agent Note introduces the two **bridge plugins** that translate that external shell-hook protocol onto the typed extension points, built on the shared wire-protocol library ([the hook-protocol-lib Agent Note](2026-06-30-hook-protocol-lib.md)).
|
||||
|
||||
The framing that shapes the whole design: **a bridge is a compatibility adapter, not a power tool.** Anything a bridge does (block a tool, inject context, force continuation, observe a subagent) a native cordis plugin does more powerfully — typed returns, full `ctx`, no serialization boundary. The bridge's reason to exist is to run the explicitly supported subset of external CC/Codex command hooks. That keeps each bridge thin: parse the config, pick a matcher mode, build the per-event payload, call `runHook` + `mergeHookOutputs` from the shared lib, and map the neutral outcome to a typed Decision. The package READMEs own the exact current unsupported-event and partial-field inventory against the official protocols.
|
||||
The core rule is: **a bridge is a compatibility adapter, not a power tool.** Anything a bridge does (block a tool, inject context, force continuation, observe a subagent) a native cordis plugin does more powerfully — typed returns, full `ctx`, no serialization boundary. The bridge's reason to exist is to run the explicitly supported subset of external CC/Codex command hooks. That keeps each bridge thin: parse the config, pick a matcher mode, build the per-event payload, call `runHook` + `mergeHookOutputs` from the shared lib, and map the neutral outcome to a typed Decision. The package READMEs own the exact current unsupported-event and partial-field inventory against the official protocols.
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
harness 的扩展面是其类型化拦截点（见[拦截扩展点 Agent Note](2026-06-30-interception-extension-points.md)）：所谓「原生钩子」不过是一个普通的 Cordis 插件，订阅 `agent/session-start`、`agent/pre-step`、`tools/pre-execute`、`tools/post-execute`、`agent/turn-stopping`、`subagent/start` 或 `subagent/end`。但用户带着**既有的** Claude Code（CC）和 Codex 钩子配置到来，一个 `hooks.json`（或 settings 文件中的 `hooks` 键）里满是 shell 命令钩子，并希望它们原样运行。本 Agent Note 引入两个**桥接插件**，将外部 shell 钩子协议翻译到类型化扩展点上，构建于共享的协议格式（wire format）库之上（见 [hook-protocol-lib Agent Note](2026-06-30-hook-protocol-lib.md)）。
|
||||
|
||||
贯穿整个设计的定位：**桥接是兼容性适配器，不是高级工具。** 桥接能做的事（阻止工具、注入上下文、强制继续、观察 subagent），原生 Cordis 插件都能做得更强——类型化返回值、完整 `ctx`、无序列化边界。桥接存在的理由是运行外部 CC/Codex 命令钩子中被明确支持的子集。这使每个桥接保持精简：解析配置、选择匹配模式、构建每事件的 payload、调用共享库的 `runHook` + `mergeHookOutputs`，再将中性结果映射为类型化 Decision。各包的 README 维护着当前不支持的事件和部分字段的完整清单，以官方协议为参照。
|
||||
核心规则是：**桥接是兼容性适配器，不是高级工具。** 桥接能做的事（阻止工具、注入上下文、强制继续、观察 subagent），原生 Cordis 插件都能做得更强——类型化返回值、完整 `ctx`、无序列化边界。桥接存在的理由是运行外部 CC/Codex 命令钩子中被明确支持的子集。这使每个桥接保持精简：解析配置、选择匹配模式、构建每事件的 payload、调用共享库的 `runHook` + `mergeHookOutputs`，再将中性结果映射为类型化 Decision。各包的 README 维护着当前不支持的事件和部分字段的完整清单，以官方协议为参照。
|
||||
|
||||
## 决策
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.md
|
||||
2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.md: e1a5c65894913ad93f46db8ae45e5ef5ead215f3
|
||||
2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.zh.md: 129920a02dc21a91ddc92de3d920ddad24968656
|
||||
2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.md: 3305d3644fa3baf7e1522311b98b4eb29d08f631
|
||||
2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.zh.md: dd7e63710ae99d1a04bc0e87d49976e28af1dae5
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ English | [中文](2026-07-16-durable-per-step-time-context.zh.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Problem
|
||||
|
||||
A request-only clock can tell the model the current time, but replacing that value in the system prompt removes the evidence behind earlier time-sensitive reasoning. Multi-step turns need requests to retain the readings that shaped preceding steps. The request must remain reconstructable after restart, and automatic compaction must account for the same timing context the model receives.
|
||||
A request-only clock can tell the model the current time, but replacing that value in the system prompt removes the evidence behind earlier time-sensitive reasoning. Multi-step turns need requests to retain the readings used by preceding steps. The request must remain reconstructable after restart, and automatic compaction must account for the same timing context the model receives.
|
||||
|
||||
A process-local refresh cache makes displayed time depend on state that cannot survive resume or be reconstructed from the durable session. Durable interval scheduling can reduce append frequency without introducing that hidden state.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
## 问题
|
||||
|
||||
仅存在于请求中的时钟可以告诉模型当前时间，但在系统提示词中替换这个值会移除先前对时间敏感的推理所依据的证据。在包含多个步骤的轮次中，请求需要保留影响先前步骤的读数。系统必须能在重启后重建请求，自动压缩（compaction）也必须将模型实际收到的同一份时间上下文纳入考量。
|
||||
仅存在于请求中的时钟可以告诉模型当前时间，但在系统提示词中替换这个值会移除先前对时间敏感的推理所依据的证据。在包含多个步骤的轮次中，请求需要保留先前步骤使用的读数。系统必须能在重启后重建请求，自动压缩（compaction）也必须将模型实际收到的同一份时间上下文纳入考量。
|
||||
|
||||
进程本地刷新缓存会使显示时间依赖于一种既无法在恢复后保留、也无法从持久会话重建的状态。持久的间隔调度可以减少追加频率，而不引入这种隐藏状态。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.md
|
||||
2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.md: 19d37c7ec2dbe5192e4c7e7ecd26e5b7f1467606
|
||||
2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.zh.md: 8dd270278932011db9658f9e4d5c1a1b6fe707ec
|
||||
2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.md: a4b8deee86b1f6102e48e34079a93a74dfcfa288
|
||||
2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.zh.md: 0d89329dd91d74491f3f9af0812bb9b4db9c8793
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,28 +4,28 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
English | [中文](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.zh.md)
|
||||
|
||||
> Scope: bounding the `tool/code-dispatch` event's content with the existing spill machinery. The [host foundation note](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-ui-foundation.md) accepted the unbounded log deliberately with this spill integration as the payoff point; the [live-parallel note](2026-07-26-code-mode-live-parallel-dispatch.md) settled the event pair this shaping hooks into.
|
||||
> Scope: limiting the `tool/code-dispatch` event's content with the existing spill implementation. The [host foundation note](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-ui-foundation.md) deliberately accepted the unlimited log and deferred spill support to this change; the [live-parallel note](2026-07-26-code-mode-live-parallel-dispatch.md) defines the event pair that this listener processes.
|
||||
|
||||
## Problem
|
||||
|
||||
Since the full-content dispatch logging landed, a `run_code` program that reads a large file wrote the complete rendered text into the session log — uncapped and outside spill policy, while native results were bounded to `maxInlineBytes` before logging. The asymmetry was backwards: sub-calls (built for bulk data work) were precisely the calls most likely to carry huge results, and the JSONL grew by megabytes per such turn.
|
||||
After full-content dispatch logging was added, a `run_code` program that reads a large file wrote the complete rendered text into the session log without a limit or spill policy, while native results were limited to `maxInlineBytes` before logging. This treated the most likely large results differently: sub-calls are intended for bulk data work, and each affected turn added megabytes to the JSONL.
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision
|
||||
|
||||
**A log-shaping waterfall on the registry, and the spill policy as its first listener.**
|
||||
**A `tools/code-dispatch-log` waterfall on the registry, with spill policy as its first listener.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Extension point**: `tools/code-dispatch-log` — a scope-filtered waterfall the bridge runs (via the registry's PRIVATE `shapeDispatchLog` invoker, handed to the bridge as a capability closure in `RunCodeBridgeOptions` — the waterfall is the public contract, the invoker never widens the service surface; contained: a throwing listener falls back to the unshaped content, with total error formatting so a hostile thrown value cannot escape the containment) over each settled sub-dispatch before appending `tool/code-dispatch`. The payload (`CodeDispatchLog`) carries the outer execution, the hoisted `agent` routing key, the sub-call identity, and the default content — the RENDERED result projection a native `tool/result` would carry (the program itself received the structured `value`). Only the durable copy is shapeable; the model sees neither. Shaping runs OFF the program path as tracked side work, but bounded: past `maxParallelSubCalls` pending log tasks the ordered commit lane holds, so a slow spill backend backpressures the run instead of accumulating unbounded pending I/O; run settlement still drains every task inside the open turn.
|
||||
- **Policy**: `dsh-spill-policy` registers a second arm on the new extension point sharing the exact replacement pipeline of its model-facing arm (same `maxInlineBytes` cap, same preview + locator + within-cap invariant, same best-effort fallbacks), with the artifact labeled `dispatch` under the sub-call id. UIs and replay read the full text through the spill artifact exactly as they do for spilled native results, so the native-parity rendering story survives bounding.
|
||||
- **One deliberate asymmetry**: the model-facing arm skips `read` (the `read → spill → read again` loop); the dispatch-log arm bounds `read` sub-calls too — a log copy is not model context, so the loop cannot happen, and `read` is precisely the tool that produces huge logs.
|
||||
- **Extension point**: `tools/code-dispatch-log` is a scope-filtered waterfall that the bridge runs over each settled sub-dispatch before appending `tool/code-dispatch`. The bridge receives the registry's private `shapeDispatchLog` invoker as a capability closure in `RunCodeBridgeOptions`; the waterfall is the public contract, and the invoker does not add a service method. If a listener throws, the invoker reports any thrown value safely and uses the original settled content. The `CodeDispatchLog` payload carries the outer execution, the `agent` routing key, the sub-call identity, and the default content: the rendered result projection that a native `tool/result` would carry, while the program receives the structured `value`. A listener can replace only the durable copy, which the model never sees. The listener runs as tracked work outside the program's result path. When more than `maxParallelSubCalls` log tasks are pending, the ordered commit loop waits, so a slow spill backend limits later sub-call starts instead of accumulating unlimited pending I/O. Run settlement still waits for every task inside the open turn.
|
||||
- **Policy**: `dsh-spill-policy` registers a listener for this event and uses the same replacement code as its model-result listener: the same `maxInlineBytes` limit, preview and locator, within-limit invariant, and best-effort fallback. The spill artifact is labeled `dispatch` under the sub-call id. UIs and replay read its full text through the same path used for spilled native results, so both result kinds render with the same information.
|
||||
- **One deliberate difference**: the model-result listener skips `read` to prevent a `read → spill → read again` loop. The dispatch-log listener also replaces oversized `read` sub-call content because a log copy is not model context, so that loop cannot occur, and `read` is the tool most likely to produce a large log entry.
|
||||
|
||||
## Alternatives considered
|
||||
|
||||
**Bound inside the bridge with a plain cap (no spill).** Rejected: truncation without a locator loses data replay/UIs may need, and re-introduces the "truncated summary" degraded render path the stack removed.
|
||||
**Apply a plain byte limit inside the bridge without spill storage.** Rejected: truncation without a locator loses data that replay or UIs may need and restores the less informative "truncated summary" rendering that earlier changes removed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Spill inside the bridge directly (call `ctx.spillStore` from code-mode.ts).** Rejected: the registry would grow a hard dependency on the spill capability; the waterfall keeps the policy where every other spill decision lives, composable and disable-able (omitted `maxInlineBytes` still means a true no-op).
|
||||
**Spill inside the bridge directly by calling `ctx.spillStore` from `code-mode.ts`.** Rejected: the registry would require the spill capability. The waterfall keeps this policy with the other spill decisions and allows compositions to omit it; omitting `maxInlineBytes` still makes the listener a no-op.
|
||||
|
||||
**Reuse `tools/post-execute` for nested calls instead of a new event.** Rejected: post-execute shapes the PROGRAM-facing result (nested calls deliberately skip it so programs get complete data); the durable copy needs its own decision point after the program has its value.
|
||||
**Reuse `tools/post-execute` for nested calls instead of a new event.** Rejected: post-execute can change the program-facing result, so nested calls deliberately skip it and programs receive complete data. The durable copy needs a separate listener that runs after the program has its value.
|
||||
|
||||
## Consequences
|
||||
|
||||
The session log is bounded again for Code Mode turns — the README's Known Limitations entry about uncapped dispatch logging is resolved and now points here. Old logs with oversized dispatch content still replay (the event shape is unchanged; only future appends shrink). The web UI renders spilled sub-call output as the preview + locator text through the identical native path, no special casing.
|
||||
Code Mode dispatch entries in the session log now have the configured byte limit, and the README's Known Limitations entry about unlimited dispatch logging now points here. Old logs with oversized dispatch content still replay because the event fields are unchanged; only future appends contain less text. The web UI renders spilled sub-call output as preview and locator text through the same path as native results, with no special case.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,28 +4,28 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
[English](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-log-spill.md) | 中文
|
||||
|
||||
> 范围：用既有的 spill 机制为 `tool/code-dispatch` 事件的内容施加边界。[宿主侧基础 Agent Note](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-ui-foundation.md)当初有意接受了不设上限的日志，并以这次 spill 集成为兑现点；[实时并行 Agent Note](2026-07-26-code-mode-live-parallel-dispatch.md)敲定了本次整形所挂接的事件对。
|
||||
> 范围：用既有的 spill 实现限制 `tool/code-dispatch` 事件的内容。[宿主侧基础 Agent Note](2026-07-26-code-dispatch-ui-foundation.md)有意接受了不设上限的日志，并把 spill 支持留到本次更改；[实时并行 Agent Note](2026-07-26-code-mode-live-parallel-dispatch.md)定义了该监听器处理的事件对。
|
||||
|
||||
## 问题
|
||||
|
||||
自携带完整内容的分发日志落地以来，读取大文件的 `run_code` 程序过去会把完整的渲染文本写进会话日志，不设上限、位于 spill 策略之外；而原生结果在记录之前就已被限制在 `maxInlineBytes` 以内。这种不对称的方向完全反了：子调用（本就为批量数据工作而设计）恰恰是最可能携带巨大结果的调用，而每个这样的轮次都会让 JSONL 增长数 MB。
|
||||
加入完整内容的分发日志后，读取大文件的 `run_code` 程序会把完整的渲染文本写进会话日志，既没有上限，也不经过 spill 策略；原生结果则会在记录之前限制在 `maxInlineBytes` 以内。两类结果受到不同处理，而为批量数据工作设计的子调用最可能产生巨大结果；每个受影响的轮次都会让 JSONL 增长数 MB。
|
||||
|
||||
## 决策
|
||||
|
||||
**在注册表上增设一个日志整形 waterfall（瀑布式事件），spill 策略作为其第一个监听器。**
|
||||
**在注册表上增设 `tools/code-dispatch-log` waterfall（瀑布式事件），spill 策略作为其第一个监听器。**
|
||||
|
||||
- **扩展点**：`tools/code-dispatch-log`，一个按作用域过滤的 waterfall，由桥接层在追加 `tool/code-dispatch` 之前对每个已结算的子分发运行（经由注册表的私有 `shapeDispatchLog` 调用器——作为能力闭包经 `RunCodeBridgeOptions` 交给桥接层；waterfall 才是公开约定，调用器绝不扩大服务接口。故障被兜住：监听器抛出异常时回退到未整形的内容，并用可处理任意抛出值的错误格式化，确保恶意抛出值无法逃出兜底）。载荷（`CodeDispatchLog`）携带外层执行、提升出来的 `agent` 路由键、子调用标识与默认内容——即原生 `tool/result` 所载的渲染后结果投影（程序本身收到的是结构化 `value`）。可整形的只有持久副本；模型两者都看不到。整形作为被跟踪的旁路工作在程序路径之外运行，但有界：待处理日志任务超过 `maxParallelSubCalls` 时有序提交通道会暂停，因此慢速 spill 后端会对整个 run 施加背压，而不是无限累积待完成 I/O；run 结算仍会在开放轮次内排空全部任务。
|
||||
- **策略**：`dsh-spill-policy` 在新扩展点上注册第二个分支，与其面向模型的分支共用一模一样的替换流水线（同样的 `maxInlineBytes` 上限、同样的预览 + 定位符 + 不超上限不变式、同样的尽力而为回退），产物以 `dispatch` 为标签，记在子调用 id 名下。UI 与回放通过 spill 产物读取全文，方式与读取被 spill 的原生结果完全相同，因此与原生同等保真的渲染在施加边界之后依然成立。
|
||||
- **一处有意的不对称**：面向模型的分支跳过 `read`（避免 `read → spill → read again` 循环）；分发日志分支则连 `read` 子调用也施加边界：日志副本不是模型上下文，该循环因此不可能发生，而 `read` 恰恰是会产生巨大日志的那个工具。
|
||||
- **扩展点**：`tools/code-dispatch-log` 是一个按作用域过滤的 waterfall，桥接层会在追加 `tool/code-dispatch` 之前，对每个已结算的子分发运行它。桥接层通过 `RunCodeBridgeOptions` 接收注册表私有的 `shapeDispatchLog` 调用器；waterfall 是公开约定，该调用器不会增加服务方法。监听器抛出异常时，调用器会安全地报告任意抛出值，并使用原始的已结算内容。`CodeDispatchLog` 载荷包含外层执行、`agent` 路由键、子调用标识和默认内容；默认内容是原生 `tool/result` 会携带的渲染后结果投影，而程序收到结构化 `value`。监听器只能替换持久化副本，模型不会看到这份副本。监听器作为受跟踪任务在程序的返回路径之外运行。待处理日志任务超过 `maxParallelSubCalls` 时，有序提交循环会等待，因此慢速 spill 后端会限制后续子调用启动，而不会无限累积待完成 I/O。run 结算仍会在开放轮次内等待全部任务完成。
|
||||
- **策略**：`dsh-spill-policy` 为该事件注册监听器，并复用面向模型结果的监听器所用的替换代码：相同的 `maxInlineBytes` 上限、预览和定位符、不超上限不变式，以及尽力而为回退。spill 产物以 `dispatch` 为标签，记录在子调用 id 名下。UI 与回放通过读取被 spill 原生结果的同一路径读取全文，因此两类结果会渲染出相同的信息。
|
||||
- **一处有意差异**：面向模型结果的监听器跳过 `read`，以防出现 `read → spill → read again` 循环。分发日志监听器也会替换过大的 `read` 子调用内容，因为日志副本不是模型上下文，该循环不会发生，而 `read` 最可能产生巨大的日志条目。
|
||||
|
||||
## 曾考虑的替代方案
|
||||
|
||||
**在桥接层内部用普通上限施加边界（不做 spill）。** 否决：没有定位符的截断会丢失回放与 UI 可能需要的数据，还会重新引入本堆叠 PR（Pull Request）链已经移除的「截断摘要」降级渲染路径。
|
||||
**在桥接层内部使用普通字节数上限，不存入 spill。** 否决：没有定位符的截断会丢失回放或 UI 可能需要的数据，还会恢复之前更改已经移除的、信息较少的「截断摘要」渲染。
|
||||
|
||||
**直接在桥接层内做 spill（从 code-mode.ts 调用 `ctx.spillStore`）。** 否决：注册表会因此对 spill 能力产生硬依赖；waterfall 则把策略留在所有其他 spill 决策所在的地方，既可组合也可禁用（省略 `maxInlineBytes` 依然意味着真正的 no-op）。
|
||||
**直接在桥接层内做 spill，即从 `code-mode.ts` 调用 `ctx.spillStore`。** 否决：注册表会要求提供 spill 能力。waterfall 把该策略与其他 spill 决策放在一起，并允许组合不加载它；省略 `maxInlineBytes` 时，该监听器仍不执行任何操作。
|
||||
|
||||
**让嵌套调用复用 `tools/post-execute`，而不是新增一个事件。** 否决：post-execute 整形的是面向程序的那份结果（嵌套调用有意跳过它，好让程序拿到完整数据）；持久副本需要一个属于自己的决策点，位于程序取得其值之后。
|
||||
**让嵌套调用复用 `tools/post-execute`，而不是新增一个事件。** 否决：post-execute 可以修改面向程序的结果，因此嵌套调用有意跳过它，让程序取得完整数据。持久化副本需要一个单独的监听器，在程序取得其值之后运行。
|
||||
|
||||
## 后果
|
||||
|
||||
对 Code Mode 轮次而言，会话日志重新有了边界：README 中关于分发日志不设上限的 「已知限制」条目已经解决，现在指向本篇。携带超大分发内容的旧日志仍可回放（事件形状未变；只有今后的追加才会变小）。Web UI 经由与原生完全相同的路径，把被 spill 的子调用输出渲染为预览 + 定位符文本，没有任何特殊处理。
|
||||
会话日志中的 Code Mode 分发条目现在遵守已配置的字节数上限，README 中关于分发日志不设上限的「已知限制」条目现在指向本篇。携带超大分发内容的旧日志仍可回放，因为事件字段没有变化；只有今后的追加包含更少文本。Web UI 经由与原生结果相同的路径，把被 spill 的子调用输出渲染为预览和定位符文本，不需要特殊处理。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
|
||||
# side as of the last confirmed-consistent state. Both languages carry equal authority;
|
||||
# after editing either side, bring the other along and re-record with:
|
||||
# pnpm run verify-translation-pairing --write .agents/notes/implemented/feature/2026-07-30-plan-review-presentation-intent.md
|
||||
2026-07-30-plan-review-presentation-intent.md: f524f7ec67dff3e6d7a6bf59ac204f5c8aae13c6
|
||||
2026-07-30-plan-review-presentation-intent.zh.md: 69e0ae00fbc2a98ed45a6d2b711a17f7c947c7e6
|
||||
2026-07-30-plan-review-presentation-intent.md: 62e1c24aba7a2901a46da4e6ace9707814472974
|
||||
2026-07-30-plan-review-presentation-intent.zh.md: 8415b94cab697e0fa9c4094b938d8ceb99107c7f
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -12,15 +12,15 @@ Every one of those affordances is wrong for the surface. Reviewing a plan is one
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision
|
||||
|
||||
A question may declare a **presentation intent**, and the Web composer renders a declared intent as its own surface. `AskUserQuestionItem` gains `intent?: AskUserQuestionIntent`, a tagged shape whose one member is `{ kind: 'plan-review', approve: string }`; `plan-mode` sets it on the review question, naming `Approve` as the label that approves.
|
||||
A question may declare a **presentation intent**, and the Web composer renders a declared intent as its own surface. `AskUserQuestionItem` gains `intent?: AskUserQuestionIntent`, a tagged union whose one member is `{ kind: 'plan-review', approve: string }`; `plan-mode` sets it on the review question, naming `Approve` as the label that approves.
|
||||
|
||||
An intent shapes presentation only. The answer protocol is untouched: a UI honouring the intent answers with the same option labels a generic UI would send, so `exit_plan_mode` reads one answer shape regardless of which surface collected it, and a UI that does not know a tag renders the generic flow with nothing lost but the layout.
|
||||
An intent changes presentation only. The answer protocol is untouched: a UI honouring the intent answers with the same option labels a generic UI would send, so `exit_plan_mode` reads the same answer fields regardless of which surface collected them, and a UI that does not know a tag renders the generic flow with nothing lost but the layout.
|
||||
|
||||
`approve` names the affirmative option instead of relying on option order, so no UI infers a verdict from a position. Two assertions an intent makes are beyond the types, and `UserInteractionService.ask()` rejects both as `BAD_INTENT` at the asker: an `approve` naming none of that question's own options — before any UI can answer a choice never offered — and an intent on a question with no `detail`, the thing it declares itself a review of, which would ask the user to approve something invisible. On the wire the intent is a discriminated union, so an unrecognised tag is a rejected frame rather than a silently generic render.
|
||||
|
||||
`ui-question` renders the intent as `PlanReviewPanel`, in the waiting-approval card language: the amber strip carries `Plan review`, the plan is the scrolling markdown body, and the decision row holds three actions — `Chat about it`, `Refuse`, `Approve`. The question text becomes the card's accessible name rather than a headline, because the buttons already say what the decision is. Approve and Refuse answer with the asker's own option labels and keep the asker's descriptions as tooltips; `Chat about it` cancels the request, which returns the composer so the user can simply say what they want. All copy is bilingual under the existing `question` namespace.
|
||||
|
||||
Routing lives inside the single composer entry (`QuestionComposer` chooses the shape) rather than in a second chain registration, and `planReviewOf` claims a request only when the card can send every answer that request allows: one question declaring the intent, the plan as its `detail`, the named approve label offered, and a binary single choice — at most one option besides approve, and not multi-select. A third option or a multi-select batch has answers two buttons cannot express, so the generic flow keeps it, and keeps anything else the card cannot render. "Presentation only" is therefore literal: an intent never costs the user a reachable answer, and the client — downstream of a wire boundary — leaves every request answerable.
|
||||
Routing lives inside the single composer entry (`QuestionComposer` chooses the presentation) rather than in a second chain registration, and `planReviewOf` claims a request only when the card can send every answer that request allows: one question declaring the intent, the plan as its `detail`, the named approve label offered, and a binary single choice — at most one option besides approve, and not multi-select. A third option or a multi-select batch has answers two buttons cannot express, so the generic flow keeps it, and keeps anything else the card cannot render. "Presentation only" is therefore literal: an intent never costs the user a reachable answer, and the client — downstream of a wire boundary — leaves every request answerable.
|
||||
|
||||
Dismissal became its own model-facing outcome. `ASK_CANCELLED` previously reached the model as "the user cancelled ask_user_question", naming a tool it never called; `exit_plan_mode` now reports that the user dismissed the review to speak instead and to stay in plan mode and wait. Every other ask failure — an abort from turn cancel or provider teardown, where no user is coming — keeps its own message.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -12,15 +12,15 @@ Status: implemented
|
||||
|
||||
## 决定
|
||||
|
||||
一个问题可以声明**呈现意图（presentation intent）**，Web 输入区把已声明的意图渲染为它自己的界面。`AskUserQuestionItem` 新增 `intent?: AskUserQuestionIntent`，一个带标签的形状，目前唯一成员是 `{ kind: 'plan-review', approve: string }`；`plan-mode` 在审阅问题上设置它，并指明 `Approve` 是表示批准的标签。
|
||||
一个问题可以声明**呈现意图（presentation intent）**，Web 输入区把已声明的意图渲染为它自己的界面。`AskUserQuestionItem` 新增 `intent?: AskUserQuestionIntent`，这是一个带标签的联合，目前唯一成员是 `{ kind: 'plan-review', approve: string }`；`plan-mode` 在审阅问题上设置它，并指明 `Approve` 是表示批准的标签。
|
||||
|
||||
意图只塑造呈现。回答协议不变：遵循意图的 UI 回答的仍是通用 UI 会发送的那些选项标签，因此无论由哪个界面收集，`exit_plan_mode` 读到的都是同一种回答形状；而不认识某个标签的 UI 渲染通用流程，除布局之外一无所失。
|
||||
意图只改变呈现。回答协议不变：遵循意图的 UI 回答的仍是通用 UI 会发送的那些选项标签，因此无论由哪个界面收集，`exit_plan_mode` 读到的都是同一组回答字段；而不认识某个标签的 UI 渲染通用流程，除布局之外一无所失。
|
||||
|
||||
`approve` 指名肯定选项，而不依赖选项顺序，因此没有任何 UI 会从位置推断裁决。意图作出的两项断言超出类型的表达能力，`UserInteractionService.ask()` 都以 `BAD_INTENT` 在提问方一侧拒绝：`approve` 未命中该问题自身的任一选项 —— 早于任何 UI 回答一个从未被提供过的选择；以及意图落在没有 `detail` 的问题上，而 `detail` 正是它自称在审阅的东西，那会让用户去批准一件看不见的事。在协议格式（wire format）上意图是可辨识联合，因此无法识别的标签是被拒绝的帧，而不是静默退回通用渲染。
|
||||
|
||||
`ui-question` 把该意图渲染为 `PlanReviewPanel`，沿用等待审批卡片的语言：琥珀色条带写着 `Plan review`，计划是可滚动的 markdown 主体，决定行放三个操作 —— `Chat about it`、`Refuse`、`Approve`。问题文本成为卡片的无障碍名称而非标题，因为按钮已经说明了这次决定是什么。Approve 与 Refuse 用提问方自己的选项标签回答，并把提问方的描述保留为 tooltip；`Chat about it` 取消该请求，从而让输入区归位，用户直接说他想说的话即可。所有文案在既有 `question` 命名空间下双语。
|
||||
|
||||
路由住在单一输入区条目内部（由 `QuestionComposer` 选择形状），而不是第二个链式注册；`planReviewOf` 仅在卡片能够发出该请求允许的每一个答案时才接管：只有一个问题且声明了意图、以 `detail` 承载计划、提供了被指名的批准标签，且是二元单选 —— 除批准外最多一个选项，且非多选。出现第三个选项或多选批次时，其答案是两个按钮无法表达的，通用流程保留它，也保留其他任何卡片渲染不了的请求。因此"只塑造呈现"是字面意义上的：意图绝不让用户失去一个可达的答案，而位于协议边界下游的客户端让每个请求都保持可回答。
|
||||
路由住在单一输入区条目内部（由 `QuestionComposer` 选择呈现），而不是第二个链式注册；`planReviewOf` 仅在卡片能够发出该请求允许的每一个答案时才接管：只有一个问题且声明了意图、以 `detail` 承载计划、提供了被指名的批准标签，且是二元单选 —— 除批准外最多一个选项，且非多选。出现第三个选项或多选批次时，其答案是两个按钮无法表达的，通用流程保留它，也保留其他任何卡片渲染不了的请求。因此"只改变呈现"是字面意义上的：意图绝不让用户失去一个可达的答案，而位于协议边界下游的客户端让每个请求都保持可回答。
|
||||
|
||||
放弃审阅成为面向模型的独立结果。`ASK_CANCELLED` 以前传到模型的是"the user cancelled ask_user_question"，指名了一个它从未调用的工具；现在 `exit_plan_mode` 报告用户放弃审阅是为了改用说话，并要求留在 plan mode 中等待。其余每一种 ask 失败 —— 轮次取消或提供方拆卸导致的中止，那里并没有用户会来 —— 保留它们自己的消息。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user