fix: Human review checkpoint using stopped status (Issue #1231) #1334
Conversation
|
Note Other AI code review bot(s) detectedCodeRabbit has detected other AI code review bot(s) in this pull request and will avoid duplicating their findings in the review comments. This may lead to a less comprehensive review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds a plan-review gating flow: spec runner can stop after planning and mark plans as Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant Frontend as Frontend (Agent Manager)
participant Runner as Backend (Spec Runner)
participant Plan as Implementation Plan File
participant Events as Frontend Exit Handler
User->>Frontend: start spec creation
Frontend->>Runner: spawn spec-creation (pass requireReviewBeforeCoding)
rect rgba(100,149,237,0.5)
Runner->>Plan: write spec + implementation_plan.json
Runner->>Plan: set status="stopped", planStatus="awaiting_review"
Runner-->>Frontend: process exits (code 0/1)
end
rect rgba(144,238,144,0.5)
Frontend->>Events: on process exit -> read metadata & plan
Events->>Plan: validate subtasks & metadata
alt requireReviewBeforeCoding true & subtasks exist
Events->>Plan: atomic write stopped/awaiting_review, set metadata.stoppedForPlanReview
Events->>Frontend: notify renderer status "stopped"
else
Events->>Plan: atomic write plan status "in_progress"
Events->>Frontend: start coding execution
end
end
rect rgba(255,218,185,0.5)
User->>Frontend: review spec, click "Restart Task"
Frontend->>Events: clear stoppedForPlanReview, start execution
Events->>Runner: start coding
end
Estimated code review effort🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~45 minutes Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Summary of ChangesHello @kaigler, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request implements a crucial 'human review before coding' feature, enhancing the task workflow by introducing a deliberate pause after the planning phase. It ensures that users can review the generated plan before any coding begins, addressing prior issues with task progression and UI stability. The changes span both backend logic for status management and frontend UI updates to clearly communicate the review state and facilitate task resumption. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
![sentry[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/12637?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| if ((code === 0 || code === 1) && exitProject && exitTask) { | ||
| const specsBaseDir = getSpecsDir(exitProject.autoBuildPath); | ||
| const specDir = path.join(exitProject.path, specsBaseDir, exitTask.specId); | ||
| const specFilePath = path.join(specDir, AUTO_BUILD_PATHS.SPEC_FILE); |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a human review checkpoint between the planning and coding phases, which is a great enhancement to the workflow. The implementation uses a stopped status and a --no-build flag to pause the task, with corresponding UI changes to guide the user. The changes are well-distributed across the backend, frontend main process, and UI components. My review focuses on a couple of areas for improvement in the backend Python script and a frontend TypeScript handler, mainly concerning code clarity, efficiency, and robustness. Overall, this is a solid implementation of a valuable feature.
apps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py
Outdated
| import json | ||
| plan_data = json.loads(plan_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")) | ||
| plan_data["planStatus"] = "awaiting_review" | ||
| plan_data["status"] = "stopped" # Mark as stopped for review | ||
| plan_path.write_text(json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False), encoding="utf-8") | ||
| debug("spec_runner", "Set planStatus to 'awaiting_review' for frontend") | ||
| print() | ||
| print_status("Planning complete. Awaiting review before coding.", "success") | ||
| print(f" {muted('Review the spec at:')} {orchestrator.spec_dir / 'spec.md'}") | ||
| print(f" {muted('When ready, restart the task in the UI to begin coding.')}") | ||
| except Exception as e: | ||
| debug_error("spec_runner", f"Failed to update plan status: {e}") | ||
| print_status(f"Failed to update plan status: {e}", "error") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's good practice to place all imports at the top of the file for better readability and to avoid potential issues. Please move import json to the top of the file with the other imports. Also, catching a generic Exception is too broad. It's better to catch more specific exceptions like json.JSONDecodeError and IOError to handle expected errors gracefully without masking other potential bugs.
| import json | |
| plan_data = json.loads(plan_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")) | |
| plan_data["planStatus"] = "awaiting_review" | |
| plan_data["status"] = "stopped" # Mark as stopped for review | |
| plan_path.write_text(json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False), encoding="utf-8") | |
| debug("spec_runner", "Set planStatus to 'awaiting_review' for frontend") | |
| print() | |
| print_status("Planning complete. Awaiting review before coding.", "success") | |
| print(f" {muted('Review the spec at:')} {orchestrator.spec_dir / 'spec.md'}") | |
| print(f" {muted('When ready, restart the task in the UI to begin coding.')}") | |
| except Exception as e: | |
| debug_error("spec_runner", f"Failed to update plan status: {e}") | |
| print_status(f"Failed to update plan status: {e}", "error") | |
| plan_data = json.loads(plan_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")) | |
| plan_data["planStatus"] = "awaiting_review" | |
| plan_data["status"] = "stopped" # Mark as stopped for review | |
| plan_path.write_text(json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False), encoding="utf-8") | |
| debug("spec_runner", "Set planStatus to 'awaiting_review' for frontend") | |
| print() | |
| print_status("Planning complete. Awaiting review before coding.", "success") | |
| print(f" {muted('Review the spec at:')} {orchestrator.spec_dir / 'spec.md'}") | |
| print(f" {muted('When ready, restart the task in the UI to begin coding.')}") | |
| except (json.JSONDecodeError, IOError) as e: | |
| debug_error("spec_runner", f"Failed to update plan status: {e}") | |
| print_status(f"Failed to update plan status: {e}", "error") | |
| if (hasSpec && hasPlan) { | ||
| // Read metadata to check if review is required before coding | ||
| let requireReviewBeforeCoding = false; | ||
| if (existsSync(metadataPath)) { | ||
| try { | ||
| const metadata = JSON.parse(readFileSync(metadataPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| requireReviewBeforeCoding = metadata.requireReviewBeforeCoding === true; | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to read metadata:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Check if plan has subtasks (planning actually produced a plan) | ||
| let planHasSubtasks = false; | ||
| try { | ||
| const planContent = JSON.parse(readFileSync(planPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| const allSubtasks = (planContent.phases || []).flatMap((p: { subtasks?: unknown[] }) => p.subtasks || []); | ||
| planHasSubtasks = allSubtasks.length > 0; | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to read plan:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (planHasSubtasks && requireReviewBeforeCoding) { | ||
| // User wants to review before coding - STOP the task | ||
|
|
||
| // Set stoppedForPlanReview flag in metadata | ||
| try { | ||
| let metadata: Record<string, unknown> = {}; | ||
| if (existsSync(metadataPath)) { | ||
| metadata = JSON.parse(readFileSync(metadataPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| } | ||
| metadata.stoppedForPlanReview = true; | ||
| writeFileSync(metadataPath, JSON.stringify(metadata, null, 2)); | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to update task_metadata.json:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Update plan file status to stopped | ||
| try { | ||
| const planContent = JSON.parse(readFileSync(planPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| planContent.status = "stopped"; | ||
| planContent.planStatus = "awaiting_review"; | ||
| writeFileSync(planPath, JSON.stringify(planContent, null, 2)); | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to update implementation_plan.json:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Invalidate cache so UI reflects the new status | ||
| projectStore.invalidateTasksCache(exitProject.id); | ||
|
|
||
| // Notify renderer of status change | ||
| safeSendToRenderer( | ||
| getMainWindow, | ||
| IPC_CHANNELS.TASK_STATUS_CHANGE, | ||
| taskId, | ||
| "stopped" as TaskStatus, | ||
| exitProjectId | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (planHasSubtasks && !requireReviewBeforeCoding) { | ||
| // Auto-continue to coding phase | ||
| const baseBranch = exitTask.metadata?.baseBranch || exitProject.settings?.mainBranch; | ||
| agentManager.startTaskExecution( | ||
| taskId, | ||
| exitProject.path, | ||
| exitTask.specId, | ||
| { | ||
| parallel: false, | ||
| workers: 1, | ||
| baseBranch, | ||
| useWorktree: exitTask.metadata?.useWorktree | ||
| } | ||
| ); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This block of code has some inefficiencies and duplication. The metadata and plan files are read multiple times within this block. It would be more efficient to read each file once at the beginning, store their contents in variables, and then use those variables for checks and modifications. This would reduce I/O operations and make the code easier to follow.
Additionally, the logic to update the plan and metadata files seems to duplicate what spec_runner.py does when the --no-build flag is passed. Is this intentional as a fallback? If so, a comment explaining this would be helpful. If not, this could be a source of redundancy and potential race conditions.
Implemented "Require human review before coding" feature with clean stopped-status approach instead of complex human_review state handling. ## Problem - Planning completed but task sat idle (no transition to coding) - Review checkpoint crashed in UI mode (no TTY for interactive menu) - App restart triggered false stuck detection - Original detection logic (!hasSubtasks) failed because Python creates subtasks during planning ## Solution - Task stops cleanly after planning when review required - User sees accordion explaining review needed - User clicks Restart to continue to coding - Restart automatically skips planning, goes straight to coding phase ## Technical Implementation ### Backend Changes: - spec_runner.py: Set planStatus="awaiting_review" + status="stopped" when --no-build flag present - plan.py: Fix update_status_from_subtasks() to preserve review state (line 208: check for both "human_review"/"stopped" statuses and "review"/"awaiting_review" planStatus values) ### Frontend Changes: - agent-manager.ts: Pass --no-build flag when requireReviewBeforeCoding=true - agent-events-handlers.ts: Detect planStatus="awaiting_review" instead of checking !hasSubtasks (which always failed) - TaskLogs.tsx: Show review accordion between Planning/Coding phases - TaskCard.tsx: Show "Review Required" badge only when stopped for review - execution-handlers.ts: Clear stoppedForPlanReview flag on restart - Type definitions: Add stopped status + stoppedForPlanReview metadata - i18n: English + French translations ### Cleanup: - Removed PlanReviewGate component (replaced with accordion) - Simplified UI flow using existing stopped status pattern ## Key Fixes 1. Detection logic: Use explicit backend signal (planStatus) instead of inferring from side effects (!hasSubtasks) 2. Status preservation: Prevent plan.py from resetting "stopped" status back to "backlog" during update_status_from_subtasks() 3. Stuck detection: Already handled (stopped status naturally excluded) ## Testing - ✅ Build: Pass - ✅ TypeScript: Pass - ✅ Unit tests: Pass (1969/1997, failures unrelated) - ✅ Manual testing: Verified review checkpoint works, restarts correctly ## Migration Notes Uses stopped status + metadata flag instead of introducing new human_review state for plan review. This approach: - Leverages existing infrastructure - Avoids stuck detection issues - Provides clear user mental model - Reduces complexity and technical debt Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
kaigler
force-pushed
the
fix/planning-to-coding-transition
branch
from
439ad5a to
1670dd5
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (6)
apps/backend/task_logger/storage.py (1)
117-132: Inconsistent auto-save behavior:set_phase_startedshould persist changes likeupdate_phase_status.The addition of
self.save()at line 132 ensures status changes persist atomically, which is correct. However,set_phase_started(lines 134-143) modifies phase data without callingself.save().In the current caller chain (logger.py:155-167),
set_phase_startedis followed by_add_entry, which auto-saves, so the data happens to persist. But this is fragile: if a crash occurs betweenset_phase_startedand the next auto-save operation, thestarted_attimestamp is lost. Additionally,update_spec_id(lines 153-160) exhibits the same pattern, requiring callers to explicitly save (as seen in utils.py:66).For consistency and robustness,
set_phase_startedshould either callself.save()likeupdate_phase_statusandadd_entry, or be documented as requiring manual caller persistence (likeupdate_spec_id). The current mixed approach creates maintenance risk.apps/frontend/src/renderer/__tests__/task-order.test.ts (5)
244-254: Test assertion inconsistent withcreateEmptyTaskOrder()implementation.The test expects
loadTaskOrderto return an object without thestoppedkey, butcreateEmptyTaskOrder()intask-store.ts(lines 127-128) now includesstopped: []. This test will fail.Update the assertion to include the
stoppedcolumn:Proposed fix
expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder).toEqual({ backlog: [], in_progress: [], ai_review: [], human_review: [], pr_created: [], - done: [] + done: [], + stopped: [] });
279-286: Same inconsistency: missingstoppedcolumn in assertion.This assertion also needs to include
stopped: []to match the actualcreateEmptyTaskOrder()return value.Proposed fix
expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder).toEqual({ backlog: [], in_progress: [], ai_review: [], human_review: [], pr_created: [], - done: [] + done: [], + stopped: [] });
305-312: Same inconsistency: missingstoppedcolumn in assertion.Proposed fix
expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder).toEqual({ backlog: [], in_progress: [], ai_review: [], human_review: [], pr_created: [], - done: [] + done: [], + stopped: [] });
591-598: Same inconsistency: missingstoppedcolumn in assertion.Proposed fix
expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder).toEqual({ backlog: [], in_progress: [], ai_review: [], human_review: [], pr_created: [], - done: [] + done: [], + stopped: [] });
93-111: Test doesn't verifystoppedcolumn preservation.For completeness, add
stoppedto this test since it's named "should preserve all column orders".Proposed enhancement
it('should preserve all column orders', () => { const order = createTestTaskOrder({ backlog: ['task-1'], in_progress: ['task-2'], ai_review: ['task-3'], human_review: ['task-4'], pr_created: ['task-5'], - done: ['task-6'] + done: ['task-6'], + stopped: ['task-7'] }); useTaskStore.getState().setTaskOrder(order); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.backlog).toEqual(['task-1']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.in_progress).toEqual(['task-2']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.ai_review).toEqual(['task-3']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.human_review).toEqual(['task-4']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.pr_created).toEqual(['task-5']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.done).toEqual(['task-6']); + expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.stopped).toEqual(['task-7']); });
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In `@apps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py`:
- Around line 375-380: Run the formatter (ruff format) on the modified Python
files to fix lint/format issues reported by CI; specifically reformat the file
containing the spec_runner logic where debug(...) and print_status(...) are used
(the changes around the --no-build block in spec_runner.py). After running ruff
format, verify the diff is clean and re-run tests or pre-commit hooks, then
recommit the reformatted files so the CI lint step passes.
- Around line 385-391: Replace the direct plan_path.write_text call with the
project's atomic write helper to avoid corrupting implementation_plan.json on
crashes: import and use the existing atomic helper (search for functions named
like atomic_write, atomic_write_text, or write_atomic) to write
json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False) to plan_path with
encoding="utf-8" instead of calling plan_path.write_text; keep the surrounding
try block and the modifications to plan_data and ensure the helper is used for
the final write operation.
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts`:
- Around line 192-229: The code updates only the main metadataPath and planPath
but not worktree copies, so getTasks() may later pick up a worktree plan that
still shows the task as active; detect if a worktree exists for this task (the
same logic used by getTasks()/worktree handling), compute the corresponding
worktree metadata and plan file paths (mirror of metadataPath and planPath), and
perform the same JSON updates (set stoppedForPlanReview = true on metadata and
status="stopped"/planStatus="awaiting_review" on plan) with the same error
handling; keep using the same variables taskId, exitProjectId/exitProject.id,
projectStore.invalidateTasksCache and safeSendToRenderer to notify and
invalidate cache after updating both main and worktree files.
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/execution-handlers.ts`:
- Around line 224-233: When clearing the stoppedForPlanReview flag in the task
start flow, replace the non-atomic write with the existing atomicWriteFileSync
helper to avoid partial JSON writes: after reading and parsing metadata
(metadataPath / readFileSync), set metadata.stoppedForPlanReview = false and
call atomicWriteFileSync(metadataPath, JSON.stringify(metadata, null, 2)); keep
the existence check (existsSync) and error handling intact and update the
log/console message as needed; reference the stoppedForPlanReview update block
and the atomicWriteFileSync function when making the change.
In `@apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskActions.tsx`:
- Around line 75-83: The TaskActions component contains hardcoded user-facing
strings; import and call useTranslation(['tasks']) at the top of the TaskActions
component, replace all literal text (e.g., "Restart Task", "Recover Task",
"Resume Task", "Stop Task", "Start Task", "Task completed successfully", "Delete
Task" and any dialog titles/messages) with translation calls using the t
function and the tasks:actions.* namespace (for example use
t('tasks:actions.restart') where the current string "Restart Task" is rendered),
and update onStartStop, delete/confirm dialogs, button labels and any toast
messages to use t(...) accordingly so all UI strings reference translation keys.
In `@apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskLogs.tsx`:
- Around line 126-135: The showPlanReviewAccordion currently treats a failed
planning phase the same as a completed one; change the condition so the
accordion only appears when planningPhaseStatus is 'completed'. Update the logic
that computes showPlanReviewAccordion (referencing requiresReviewBeforeCoding,
planningPhaseStatus, isPlanningComplete, isPlanningFailed, and hasCodingEntries)
to remove the isPlanningFailed branch and use only isPlanningComplete (i.e.,
require requireReviewBeforeCoding && isPlanningComplete && !hasCodingEntries),
ensuring the accordion is not shown when planning failed.
In `@apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/TaskCard.tsx`:
- Around line 532-540: The badge currently uses the non-namespaced i18n key and
shows for any non-coding/non-done statuses; update the Badge in TaskCard
(TaskCard.tsx) to use the namespaced key (e.g.
t('tasks:metadata.reviewRequired')) and tighten the visibility condition so it
only renders when the task is in the plan-review stop state — i.e. check that
task.status === 'stopped' && task.stoppedForPlanReview === true — instead of the
broader task.status !== 'in_progress' && task.status !== 'done', ensuring it
won't appear for later statuses like 'human_review' or 'pr_created'.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (3)
apps/backend/implementation_plan/plan.py (1)
1-1: CI lint failure: Runruff formatto fix formatting.The pipeline reports that
ruff formatwould reformat this file. Please run:ruff format apps/backend/ --fixapps/frontend/src/renderer/__tests__/task-order.test.ts (2)
244-254: Test expectation is missing thestoppedcolumn.This test expects the empty order state to NOT include
stopped, butcreateEmptyTaskOrder()intask-store.tsnow returns{ ..., stopped: [] }. This test will fail because the actual object includes thestoppedproperty.The same issue appears in other tests at lines 279-286, 305-311, and 591-597.
💚 Proposed fix
// Should fall back to empty order state expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder).toEqual({ backlog: [], in_progress: [], ai_review: [], human_review: [], pr_created: [], - done: [] + done: [], + stopped: [] });Apply this fix to all four test cases that check for empty order state.
93-111: Consider addingstoppedcolumn to comprehensive order preservation test.This test verifies that all column orders are preserved, but doesn't include the new
stoppedcolumn in its test data or assertions. For comprehensive coverage, consider adding it.♻️ Suggested improvement
it('should preserve all column orders', () => { const order = createTestTaskOrder({ backlog: ['task-1'], in_progress: ['task-2'], ai_review: ['task-3'], human_review: ['task-4'], pr_created: ['task-5'], - done: ['task-6'] + done: ['task-6'], + stopped: ['task-7'] }); useTaskStore.getState().setTaskOrder(order); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.backlog).toEqual(['task-1']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.in_progress).toEqual(['task-2']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.ai_review).toEqual(['task-3']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.human_review).toEqual(['task-4']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.pr_created).toEqual(['task-5']); expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.done).toEqual(['task-6']); + expect(useTaskStore.getState().taskOrder?.stopped).toEqual(['task-7']); });
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In @.gitignore:
- Line 10: The .gitignore contains unusual entries "nul" and ".bill/" that lack
context; update the repository-wide .gitignore by either removing these entries
if they are not needed globally, or add a short comment above each entry
explaining its purpose and scope (e.g., Windows reserved device exclusion for
"nul" or a developer-specific directory for ".bill/") so reviewers understand
why "nul" and ".bill/" remain; ensure the comment clarifies whether the entry is
global or should be moved to a local/developer-specific ignore file.
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts`:
- Line 25: The import list in the module includes an unused symbol
createPlanIfNotExists which should be removed to eliminate dead code; update the
import statement that currently imports persistPlanStatusSync, getPlanPath,
createPlanIfNotExists so it only imports the actually used symbols (e.g.,
persistPlanStatusSync and getPlanPath), and run your linter/TS build to confirm
no remaining unused imports exist.
- Around line 172-195: The reads for metadata and plan (reading metadataPath
into metadata and planPath into planContent) can both fail silently causing
requireReviewBeforeCoding and planHasSubtasks logic to be unreliable; update the
block that reads metadata and plan (the code around hasSpec/hasPlan, metadata,
planContent, metadataPath, planPath) to detect and log when either or both reads
failed (include taskId and which path(s) failed or parse errors), and emit a
clear warning that the planning->coding transition is being skipped due to read
failures so operators can debug the ambiguous task state.
In `@apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/TaskCard.tsx`:
- Around line 632-641: Replace the non-namespaced translation key used for the
Restart button in TaskCard.tsx: find the Button rendered when task.status ===
'stopped' (the element using handleStartStop and rendering <Play />) and change
the translation call from t('actions.restart') to the namespaced key
t('tasks:restart') so it follows the tasks:* convention.
♻️ Duplicate comments (7)
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/execution-handlers.ts (1)
224-233: Use atomic write for task_metadata.json updates.This is the same concern as the previous review: the non-atomic write can leave a partial JSON if the app crashes mid-save. Please use the existing
atomicWriteFileSynchelper here.♻️ Proposed fix
- writeFileSync(metadataPath, JSON.stringify(metadata, null, 2)); + atomicWriteFileSync(metadataPath, JSON.stringify(metadata, null, 2));apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts (1)
196-228: Worktree persistence still missing — stopped/awaiting_review state will be lost on refresh.The past review flagged that this block updates only the main plan/metadata paths. For worktree-backed tasks,
getTasks()prefers the worktree plan, so the stopped state disappears on UI refresh.The pattern for worktree persistence already exists later in this file (lines 282-306). Apply the same approach here:
🔧 Suggested fix
try { planContent.status = "stopped"; planContent.planStatus = "awaiting_review"; writeFileSync(planPath, JSON.stringify(planContent, null, 2)); } catch (err) { console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to update implementation_plan.json:`, err); } + // Also persist to worktree if it exists (getTasks prefers worktree version) + const worktreePath = findTaskWorktree(exitProject.path, exitTask.specId); + if (worktreePath) { + const worktreeSpecDir = path.join(worktreePath, specsBaseDir, exitTask.specId); + const worktreeMetadataPath = path.join(worktreeSpecDir, "task_metadata.json"); + const worktreePlanPath = path.join(worktreeSpecDir, AUTO_BUILD_PATHS.IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN); + + try { + let worktreeMeta: Record<string, unknown> = {}; + if (existsSync(worktreeMetadataPath)) { + worktreeMeta = JSON.parse(readFileSync(worktreeMetadataPath, "utf-8")); + } + worktreeMeta.stoppedForPlanReview = true; + writeFileSync(worktreeMetadataPath, JSON.stringify(worktreeMeta, null, 2)); + } catch (err) { + console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to update worktree metadata:`, err); + } + + try { + if (existsSync(worktreePlanPath)) { + const worktreePlan = JSON.parse(readFileSync(worktreePlanPath, "utf-8")); + worktreePlan.status = "stopped"; + worktreePlan.planStatus = "awaiting_review"; + writeFileSync(worktreePlanPath, JSON.stringify(worktreePlan, null, 2)); + } + } catch (err) { + console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to update worktree plan:`, err); + } + } + // Invalidate cache so UI reflects the new statusapps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py (2)
376-402: CI lint failure: Runruff formatto fix formatting.The pipeline reports that
ruff formatwould reformat this file. Please run:ruff format apps/backend/ --fix
386-399: Use atomic write to prevent plan file corruption.The
plan_path.write_text()call can corruptimplementation_plan.jsonif the process crashes mid-write. The codebase already has an atomic write helper used elsewhere (e.g., inplan.py'ssave()method).🔧 Suggested fix using atomic write helper
Add the import at the top:
from core.sentry import capture_exception, init_sentry +from core.file_utils import write_json_atomicThen replace the write call:
- plan_path.write_text(json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False), encoding="utf-8") + write_json_atomic(plan_path, plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/TaskCard.tsx (1)
532-540: Namespace the review badge label and scope it to the plan-review stop state.
Uset('tasks:metadata.reviewRequired')and restrict the badge totask.status === 'stopped' && task.metadata?.stoppedForPlanReviewto avoid showing it in unrelated states. As per coding guidelines.apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskActions.tsx (1)
75-83: Localize the new “Restart Task” label.
Uset('tasks:actions.restart')to match i18n requirements. As per coding guidelines.apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskLogs.tsx (1)
126-134: Avoid showing the review accordion when planning failed.The current logic shows the accordion when
isPlanningComplete || isPlanningFailed, but displaying "Review Required" with instructions to "Review spec.md and edit if needed. Click Restart when ready to begin coding." is misleading if planning actually failed. The accordion should only appear when planning completed successfully.🐛 Proposed fix
const isPlanningComplete = planningPhaseStatus === 'completed'; - const isPlanningFailed = planningPhaseStatus === 'failed'; const hasCodingEntries = phaseLogs?.phases.coding?.entries && phaseLogs.phases.coding.entries.length > 0; - // Only show when: review required AND planning finished (completed or failed) AND coding not started - const showPlanReviewAccordion = requiresReviewBeforeCoding && (isPlanningComplete || isPlanningFailed) && !hasCodingEntries; + // Only show when: review required AND planning completed AND coding not started + const showPlanReviewAccordion = requiresReviewBeforeCoding && isPlanningComplete && !hasCodingEntries;
| Thumbs.db | ||
| ehthumbs.db | ||
| Desktop.ini | ||
| nul |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
cat -n .gitignore | head -20Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 527
🏁 Script executed:
git log --oneline -p -- .gitignore | head -100Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1681
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for any references to "nul" or ".bill" in the codebase
rg "nul|\.bill" --type-list | head -20Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 454
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for any documentation or comments about these entries
rg -i "nul|bill" --type md --type txt | head -50Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 5472
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for any actual "nul" files or references in the codebase
fd nulRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for ".bill" directory or references
fd billRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Check if there are any comments or context in the PR/commit about these specific entries
git log --all --oneline --grep="bill\|nul" 2>/dev/nullRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1965
🏁 Script executed:
# Look for any README or documentation about .bill directory
find . -type f \( -name "README*" -o -name "*.md" \) -exec grep -l "\.bill\|bill" {} \; 2>/dev/nullRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Check if there's any issue or PR description that might explain these entries
git show 1670dd5 --format=fuller 2>/dev/null | head -50Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 2317
🏁 Script executed:
# Check if "nul" appears in any other repositories or gitignore best practices
# Also check if this was copied from somewhere
rg "nul" --type-list 2>&1 | head -5Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 179
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for any references to this being a Windows-specific issue or tool
rg -i "windows|device|reserved" -- .gitignoreRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Check the full context of the .gitignore to see the coding guideline compliance
cat -n .gitignore | grep -A 5 -B 5 "auto-claude"Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 445
Clarify the purpose of nul and .bill/ entries.
The nul entry at line 10 is a reserved Windows device name that cannot be created as a regular file. This is an unusual .gitignore pattern that lacks explanation.
Similarly, the .bill/ entry at line 15 appears to be a personal development directory but has no documented purpose or relation to the PR's stated objectives (human review checkpoint feature).
Please clarify why these entries are needed and whether they should remain in the repository-wide .gitignore.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In @.gitignore at line 10, The .gitignore contains unusual entries "nul" and
".bill/" that lack context; update the repository-wide .gitignore by either
removing these entries if they are not needed globally, or add a short comment
above each entry explaining its purpose and scope (e.g., Windows reserved device
exclusion for "nul" or a developer-specific directory for ".bill/") so reviewers
understand why "nul" and ".bill/" remain; ensure the comment clarifies whether
the entry is global or should be moved to a local/developer-specific ignore
file.
| if (hasSpec && hasPlan) { | ||
| // Read metadata and plan once to avoid multiple file reads | ||
| let metadata: Record<string, unknown> = {}; | ||
| let planContent: Record<string, unknown> = {}; | ||
|
|
||
| if (existsSync(metadataPath)) { | ||
| try { | ||
| metadata = JSON.parse(readFileSync(metadataPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to read metadata:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| planContent = JSON.parse(readFileSync(planPath, "utf-8")); | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| console.error(`[Task ${taskId}] Failed to read plan:`, err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const requireReviewBeforeCoding = metadata.requireReviewBeforeCoding === true; | ||
| const allSubtasks = ((planContent.phases as Array<{ subtasks?: unknown[] }>) || []) | ||
| .flatMap((p) => p.subtasks || []); | ||
| const planHasSubtasks = allSubtasks.length > 0; | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial
Consider logging when planning-to-coding transition is skipped due to read failures.
If both metadata and plan reads fail silently, the transition logic effectively becomes a no-op. The task continues without stopping for review or auto-continuing, which may leave it in an ambiguous state. Adding a log when the block exits without taking action improves debuggability.
💡 Optional improvement
const planHasSubtasks = allSubtasks.length > 0;
+ if (!planHasSubtasks) {
+ console.warn(`[Task ${taskId}] Plan exists but has no subtasks - skipping transition logic`);
+ }
+
if (planHasSubtasks && requireReviewBeforeCoding) {🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts` around lines
172 - 195, The reads for metadata and plan (reading metadataPath into metadata
and planPath into planContent) can both fail silently causing
requireReviewBeforeCoding and planHasSubtasks logic to be unreliable; update the
block that reads metadata and plan (the code around hasSpec/hasPlan, metadata,
planContent, metadataPath, planPath) to detect and log when either or both reads
failed (include taskId and which path(s) failed or parse errors), and emit a
clear warning that the planning->coding transition is being skipped due to read
failures so operators can debug the ambiguous task state.
Addresses CodeRabbit AI review feedback for PR AndyMik90#1334: - Fix task-order.test.ts: add stopped column to assertions - Fix TaskLogs.tsx: don't show accordion when planning failed - Fix TaskCard.tsx: use namespaced i18n key and scope badge condition - Fix TaskActions.tsx: localize all hardcoded strings using i18n - Use atomic writes for task_metadata.json and implementation_plan.json - Persist stopped state to worktree copies for getTasks() consistency - Fix phase transition validation to allow natural planning→coding flow The phase-protocol.ts fix ensures that when transitioning from planning to coding, the validation allows it because the current phase (planning) IS the prerequisite for coding - no need to wait for it to be in completedPhases array. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In `@apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskActions.tsx`:
- Around line 134-138: Replace the insecure dangerouslySetInnerHTML usage in
AlertDialogDescription with the i18n Trans component: remove the <p
dangerouslySetInnerHTML={{ __html: t('dialogs:deleteTask.confirmMessage', {
title: task.title }) }} /> and instead render <Trans
i18nKey="dialogs:deleteTask.confirmMessage" values={{ title: task.title }} />
(wrap in a <p> if needed) and import Trans from react-i18next at the top of
TaskActions.tsx; keep the existing warning paragraph but ensure interpolation
uses the Trans/values pattern so task.title is treated as text, not raw HTML.
♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
apps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py (1)
394-397: Use atomic write to prevent plan file corruption.This file write is not atomic—a crash or interrupt mid-write could corrupt
implementation_plan.json. Theplan.pymodule in the same backend useswrite_json_atomicfor the same purpose. Apply the same pattern here for consistency and safety.♻️ Suggested fix
Add the import at the top with the other core imports:
from core.file_utils import write_json_atomicThen replace the write:
- plan_path.write_text( - json.dumps(plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False), - encoding="utf-8", - ) + write_json_atomic(plan_path, plan_data, indent=2, ensure_ascii=False)apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/TaskCard.tsx (1)
632-641: Namespace the restart label key.
This still uses a non-namespaced key; align with the tasks namespace (and the restart key used in TaskActions).✅ Suggested fix
- {t('actions.restart')} + {t('tasks:actions.restartTask')}As per coding guidelines.
- Replace dangerouslySetInnerHTML with Trans component to prevent XSS - Use write_json_atomic for plan file in spec_runner.py - Use namespaced i18n key for restart button in TaskCard.tsx Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/TaskCard.tsx (1)
94-110: Consider addingstoppedForPlanReviewto the memo comparator.The custom comparator checks several metadata fields but omits
stoppedForPlanReview, which is now used to conditionally render the plan-review badge. IfstoppedForPlanReviewchanges whiletask.statusremains'stopped', the component won't re-render.While
stoppedForPlanReviewtypically changes alongsidestatus, adding it to the comparator ensures correctness:♻️ Suggested fix
prevTask.metadata?.archivedAt === nextTask.metadata?.archivedAt && prevTask.metadata?.prUrl === nextTask.metadata?.prUrl && + prevTask.metadata?.stoppedForPlanReview === nextTask.metadata?.stoppedForPlanReview && // Check if any subtask statuses changed (compare all subtasks) prevTask.subtasks.every((s, i) => s.status === nextTask.subtasks[i]?.status)
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In `@apps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py`:
- Around line 377-419: The file needs to be reformatted to satisfy ruff; run the
formatter (e.g., `ruff format`) on the file containing the spec_runner logic
that touches symbols like spec_runner, plan_path, orchestrator, and
write_json_atomic so the JSON handling/try/except block and surrounding
debug/print calls are properly formatted; after formatting, re-run the linter to
ensure no remaining style errors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In `@apps/backend/runners/spec_runner.py`:
- Around line 412-420: The plan status update in spec_runner currently swallows
failures (in the except block catching json.JSONDecodeError/OSError and the else
branch when the plan file is missing) by only logging via
debug_error/print_status and exiting with success; modify the behavior so that
when updating the implementation_plan.json fails you return a non-zero exit
(e.g., call sys.exit(1) or raise a RuntimeError) after logging the error in the
except block and likewise treat the missing plan file (the else branch referring
to plan_path and implementation_plan.json) as a fatal error—log the error with
debug_error/print_status and then exit non-zero—unless you explicitly choose
graceful degradation, in which case change log levels and add a comment
documenting the intended behavior.
- Add stoppedForPlanReview to TaskCard memo comparator - Exit non-zero on plan status update failure in spec_runner.py Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
AndyMik90
left a comment
AndyMik90
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🤖 Auto Claude PR Review
Merge Verdict: 🟠 NEEDS REVISION
🟠 Needs revision - 1 structural/other issue(s) require attention.
Branch is out of date with base branch. Update branch first - if no conflicts arise, you can merge. If merge conflicts arise, resolve them and run follow-up review again. 3 non-blocking suggestion(s) to consider.
Risk Assessment
| Factor | Level | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Complexity | High | Based on lines changed |
| Security Impact | None | Based on security findings |
| Scope Coherence | Good | Based on structural review |
🚨 Blocking Issues (Must Fix)
- Branch Out of Date: PR branch is behind the base branch and needs to be updated
Findings Summary
- Low: 3 issue(s)
Generated by Auto Claude PR Review
Findings (3 selected of 3 total)
🔵 [eef17b540d44] [LOW] Unused import: createPlanIfNotExists
📁 apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts:25
The function createPlanIfNotExists is imported from './task/plan-file-utils' but is never used anywhere in this file. This is dead code that should be removed to keep the codebase clean.
Suggested fix:
Remove `createPlanIfNotExists` from the import statement:
```typescript
import { persistPlanStatusSync, getPlanPath } from "./task/plan-file-utils";
#### 🔵 [fa3bcd1de11c] [LOW] Missing Array.isArray check for planContent.phases
📁 `apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts:212`
The code casts `planContent.phases` to `Array<{ subtasks?: unknown[] }>`, but if `planContent.phases` is a malformed value (not an array), the `flatMap` call will throw a TypeError. The fallback `|| []` only handles undefined/null, not other malformed types like strings or objects.
**Suggested fix:**
Add Array.isArray check:
const allSubtasks = (Array.isArray(planContent.phases) ? planContent.phases : [])
.flatMap((p) => p.subtasks || []);
#### 🔵 [752bb1016188] [LOW] Duplicated atomic write utility could be consolidated
📁 `apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts:107`
The `atomicWriteFileSync` function defined here duplicates the same pattern that exists in `terminal-session-store.ts` (lines 198-236) and the Python backend's `core/file_utils.py`. While functionally correct, having multiple copies increases maintenance burden.
**Suggested fix:**
Consider extracting the atomic write utility to a shared location (e.g., apps/frontend/src/main/utils/file-utils.ts) and importing it where needed.
---
*This review was generated by Auto Claude.*
- Remove unused import `createPlanIfNotExists` from agent-events-handlers - Add Array.isArray check for planContent.phases to handle malformed data - Consolidate duplicated atomicWriteFileSync utility into shared file-utils module Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…hase - Send TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS event with phase='coding' immediately when starting coding phase, instead of waiting for Python process to emit it - Add .bill/ to gitignore Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In @.gitignore:
- Around line 64-65: Remove the duplicate ".bill/" ignore entry so it only
appears once in the .gitignore and keep a single commented instance (e.g., under
either the "Local Development" or "Auto Claude Generated" section) with a brief
comment explaining why it's ignored; update the .gitignore by deleting the
redundant ".bill/" line and ensure the remaining ".bill/" entry is accompanied
by a short comment for clarity, leaving ".auto-claude/" unchanged.
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts`:
- Around line 318-333: Replace the hardcoded user-facing message ("Starting
implementation...") in the safeSendToRenderer call that emits
IPC_CHANNELS.TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS with an i18n key (e.g.,
"tasks.startingImplementation") and ensure the renderer components (TaskProgress
and TaskSelector) translate ExecutionProgress.message via t() before rendering;
also add the key "startingImplementation" to the tasks locale JSONs (en and fr)
so the renderer can look it up.
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
.gitignore (1)
10-15: Clarify the purpose ofnuland.bill/ignores.This was raised before; please either remove these entries if they’re not globally needed or add brief comments explaining why they belong in the repo-wide ignore file.
.gitignore
Outdated
| .auto-claude/ | ||
| .bill/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial
Avoid duplicate .bill/ entries across sections.
The same ignore appears under Local Development and Auto Claude Generated; keep one entry (with a brief comment) to reduce confusion.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In @.gitignore around lines 64 - 65, Remove the duplicate ".bill/" ignore entry
so it only appears once in the .gitignore and keep a single commented instance
(e.g., under either the "Local Development" or "Auto Claude Generated" section)
with a brief comment explaining why it's ignored; update the .gitignore by
deleting the redundant ".bill/" line and ensure the remaining ".bill/" entry is
accompanied by a short comment for clarity, leaving ".auto-claude/" unchanged.
| // FIX: Send execution progress event with 'coding' phase immediately | ||
| // This ensures the task card badge shows "Coding" instead of staying on "Planning" | ||
| // The Python process will also emit __EXEC_PHASE__:coding, but this provides | ||
| // immediate UI feedback during the process startup delay | ||
| safeSendToRenderer( | ||
| getMainWindow, | ||
| IPC_CHANNELS.TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS, | ||
| taskId, | ||
| { | ||
| phase: "coding" as ExecutionPhase, | ||
| phaseProgress: 0, | ||
| overallProgress: 25, // Planning complete (25%), starting coding | ||
| message: "Starting implementation...", | ||
| completedPhases: ["planning"] as ExecutionPhase[] | ||
| }, | ||
| exitProjectId |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
# Check if the file exists and examine the lines in question
if [ -f "apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts" ]; then
echo "=== File found at specified path ==="
wc -l "apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts"
echo ""
echo "=== Lines 310-340 context ==="
sed -n '310,340p' "apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts"
else
echo "File not found at specified path"
fiRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1246
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for ExecutionProgressData type to understand if message is user-facing
rg "ExecutionProgressData|interface.*Progress" --type ts --type tsx -A 5Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 92
🏁 Script executed:
# Check for i18n patterns in the codebase, specifically for task-related translations
fd "en\\.json|de\\.json|fr\\.json" --type f | head -20Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Look for existing task progress translation keys
rg "tasks:progress|phase|implementation" --type json -A 2 -B 2Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 14881
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for ExecutionProgressData type definition
rg "ExecutionProgressData|interface.*Progress" --type ts -A 10Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 40795
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for how the message field is handled in renderer components
rg "TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS" --type ts | head -20Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 607
🏁 Script executed:
# Check the tasks.json locale file structure for progress-related keys
cat apps/frontend/src/shared/i18n/locales/en/tasks.json | head -100Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 3525
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for any existing "progress" or "starting" related keys in locale files
rg "progress|starting" apps/frontend/src/shared/i18n/locales/ --type jsonRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1306
🏁 Script executed:
# Look for components that display task progress messages
fd "Task.*Progress|Progress.*Task" apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/ --type ts --type tsxRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 234
🏁 Script executed:
# Check TaskCard and related components for message display
rg "overallProgress|phaseProgress|message" apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-list/ --type ts -B 2 -A 2Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 153
🏁 Script executed:
# Look at how stores receive and use ExecutionProgress
rg "TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS|execution-progress" apps/frontend/src/renderer/stores/ --type ts -B 3 -A 8Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 47
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for where message from ExecutionProgress is displayed
rg "message" apps/frontend/src/renderer/stores/ -A 2 -B 2Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 34754
🏁 Script executed:
# Look at task store for execution progress handling
find apps/frontend/src/renderer/stores -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.tsx" | xargs grep -l "ExecutionProgress"Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 112
🏁 Script executed:
# Check what files import or use execution progress data
rg "ExecutionProgress" apps/frontend/src/renderer/ -lRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 240
🏁 Script executed:
# Check task-store for ExecutionProgress handling and message usage
grep -n "TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS\|ExecutionProgress\|message" apps/frontend/src/renderer/stores/task-store.ts | head -50Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1085
🏁 Script executed:
# Look at how task progress updates are handled in the task store
sed -n '1,100p' apps/frontend/src/renderer/stores/task-store.tsRepository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 4083
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for where execution progress message is displayed to the user
rg "currentSubtask|message" apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/ -B 2 -A 2 | grep -A 5 -B 5 "progress\|execution"Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 25027
🏁 Script executed:
# Check TaskProgress.tsx to confirm how the message is displayed
sed -n '1,200p' apps/frontend/src/renderer/components/task-detail/TaskProgress.tsx | grep -A 5 -B 5 "message"Repository: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude
Length of output: 1149
Replace hardcoded progress message with an i18n key.
The "Starting implementation..." string is user-facing and displayed directly in TaskProgress.tsx and TaskSelector.tsx without translation. Use an i18n translation key instead.
🔧 Suggested change
- message: "Starting implementation...",
+ message: "tasks:progress.startingImplementation",Add the translation key to locale files:
apps/frontend/src/shared/i18n/locales/en/tasks.json:"startingImplementation": "Starting implementation..."apps/frontend/src/shared/i18n/locales/fr/tasks.json: French equivalent
The renderer must translate ExecutionProgress.message using t() when displaying it to users.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In `@apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/agent-events-handlers.ts` around lines
318 - 333, Replace the hardcoded user-facing message ("Starting
implementation...") in the safeSendToRenderer call that emits
IPC_CHANNELS.TASK_EXECUTION_PROGRESS with an i18n key (e.g.,
"tasks.startingImplementation") and ensure the renderer components (TaskProgress
and TaskSelector) translate ExecutionProgress.message via t() before rendering;
also add the key "startingImplementation" to the tasks locale JSONs (en and fr)
so the renderer can look it up.
- Remove duplicate .bill/ entries from .gitignore - Add i18n translation key for "Starting implementation..." message - English: execution.messages.startingImplementation - French: execution.messages.startingImplementation Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
AndyMik90
force-pushed
the
develop
branch
2 times, most recently
from
67a743f to
e83e445
Compare
2 participants
Summary
Problem
Technical Changes
Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Reliability
Localization
Tests
Chores
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.