32 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
32 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
|
# Agent Note: Command row copy is split between the row and the handler
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Status: implemented
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
English | [中文](2026-07-30-command-row-copy-contract.zh.md)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Problem
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The web command row renders `title · summary` from one logged [command lifecycle pair](../../proposed/architecture/2026-07-27-session-projection-and-command-log.md): the title was the dispatched line rebuilt from `command/run` (`/permission workspace-write`) and the summary was `command/done`'s verbatim `text` (`Permission preset: workspace-write.`). Both halves were written without knowing about the other, so the row said the command name twice and its argument twice — the single worst case being the row a user gets for every Access-chip pick.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Decision
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The row's two halves have disjoint jobs, and each side is written to its own half alone.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The row title is the bare command name — no `/`, no arguments. The `/` belongs to the composer's input grammar, not to a settled record, and the argument is not the row's to report: the summary already says what the command did. `GenericCommandCard` keeps the `命令` fallback for a cross-window node whose `command/run` page fell out of the client's window.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A command handler's settlement `text` therefore never repeats the command's own name, because the surface that renders it has already said it. `/permission` returns `preset workspace-write` and, bare, `current preset workspace-write (available: …)`. Read as a row this is `permission · preset workspace-write`; read as a standalone line — the TUI appends the same text as a notice — it still states which preset now applies.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The log is unchanged: `command/run` keeps the structured `name`/`args` split, so a richer registered command row can still render arguments from the same node without a second data channel.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Alternatives considered
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Keep the dispatched line as the title and only shorten the settlement text.** The argument would still appear on both sides of the separator (`permission workspace-write · preset workspace-write`), which is the repetition complained about.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Drop the settlement text from the collapsed row instead of the arguments.** It inverts the row's value: the outcome is what a durable record is for, and an error text would then have nowhere to land.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Have the row strip a leading command name from the settlement text.** Presentation would silently rewrite handler-authored text, and every handler that phrased its outcome differently would defeat the heuristic.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Consequences
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Every command row gets shorter, and the rule scales: a new command's author writes its outcome without knowing which surface renders it, and no surface has to de-duplicate. The cost is that the dispatched arguments leave the collapsed row — while a command is still executing the row shows only its name and `执行中…` — and that the no-repetition rule is a convention the reviewer enforces, not a gate. The `/permission` texts are pinned by the permission package's command tests, and the assembled row copy by the [seeded-history](../../../../apps/web/tests/snapshots/seeded-history/command-row.expected.md) web golden, which reaches a real settled command row keylessly because `/permission` runs entirely on the host.
|