docs: make technical prose concrete

2026-08-09 15:27:21 +08:00
parent 673e7cddc5
commit a27efdef36
459 changed files with 1342 additions and 1329 deletions
@@ -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.