feat(agent-chat): batch approvals — Deny all + context peek [blocked on runner collect window]#5470
Draft
ardaerzin wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
When a turn parks on 2+ approval gates the dock still shows one card at a time, so "Approve all" was a blind click over the hidden siblings. Turn the batch "Approve all" into a split button: the primary click still approves the whole batch, but the caret opens a peek that lists every pending action (friendly tool name + one-line payload preview) so approving all is informed, and offers the explicit turn-level "Deny all". Deny all is the deny counterpart to Approve all — a warm reject of every open gate via resume (no teardown), never inferred from a per-card Deny. Per-card Deny/Approve are unchanged for stepping one at a time. FE-only; a per-row read/write risk chip is a later increment once the runner supplies the hint.
📝 WalkthroughSummary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughApprovalDock adds batch “Deny all” handling and changes multi-gate approval actions to a split dropdown with payload previews and an explicit denial option. ChangesBatch approval controls
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant ApprovalDock
participant PendingApprovalGates
participant onApprovalResponse
User->>ApprovalDock: Select Deny all
ApprovalDock->>PendingApprovalGates: Collect shown pending gate IDs
ApprovalDock->>onApprovalResponse: Send approved=false for each gate
Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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 |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
Contributor
Author
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Action performedReview finished.
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
web/oss/src/components/AgentChatSlice/components/ApprovalDock.tsx (1)
61-62: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | 💤 Low valueRemove or condense these implementation comments.
The helper and JSX structure already communicate the behavior; keep any necessary rationale to one short line.
web/oss/src/components/AgentChatSlice/components/ApprovalDock.tsx#L61-L62: remove or reduce to a one-line rationale.web/oss/src/components/AgentChatSlice/components/ApprovalDock.tsx#L349-L353: remove or reduce to a one-line rationale.As per coding guidelines, “Keep in-code comments to at most one short line; use longer comments only for genuinely surprising constraints such as bugs, races, or ordering requirements.”
Source: Coding guidelines
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 184f21b2-e085-45eb-a6b7-baaec837be88
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
web/oss/src/components/AgentChatSlice/components/ApprovalDock.tsx
ardaerzin
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 24, 2026
Stop is verified warm (§5 acceptance passes). Steer's 'message as model feedback' (§3) is NOT reachable pure-FE — both harnesses continue the original turn on reject and the ACP reply carries no text; the redirect needs runner path A or ACP-chain patch C. UI shipped flag-gated (#5477). Batch surfacing is a small runner change (#5470), not blocked by #5391.
ardaerzin
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 24, 2026
…/Stop/steer) (#5444) * docs(agent-workflows): reject-siblings approval policy proposal (Deny/Stop/steer) * docs(agent-workflows): add task-5 implementation findings Stop is verified warm (§5 acceptance passes). Steer's 'message as model feedback' (§3) is NOT reachable pure-FE — both harnesses continue the original turn on reject and the ACP reply carries no text; the redirect needs runner path A or ACP-chain patch C. UI shipped flag-gated (#5477). Batch surfacing is a small runner change (#5470), not blocked by #5391.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Draft — dormant until the runner surfaces ≥2 approval gates at once. Stacks on
feat/sessions-storage-rework.What
When a turn parks on 2+ approval gates, the dock shows one card at a time, so "Approve all" was a blind click over hidden siblings. This turns the batch "Approve all" into a split button:
Per-card Deny/Approve unchanged. FE-only; a per-row read/write risk chip is a later increment. (Implements the Stop + context surface from the approved reject-siblings proposal, PR #5444.)
Why it's a draft / blocked
The UI only triggers when the dock sees ≥2 simultaneous pending gates. On the current base the runner parks concurrent gates together but the post-drain sweep force-defers all but the first (
DEFERRED_NOT_EXECUTED), so the dock only ever shows one card — confirmed live on Pi and Claude. So this is dead-but-correct code until a small runner change surfaces the batch (hold parked siblings instead of deferring — the collect window; composes with #5382's per-card resume, no #5391 adapter work).Discussion + the ask to Mahmoud: the reject-siblings Slack thread (approved proposal #5444).
Verification
tsc --noEmitclean in the changed file; prettier + eslint clean.Do not merge until the runner surfaces the batch.