feat(comments): add since filter

[steipete]

Summary

Fixes #688.

Adds --since <RFC3339> to both comment list surfaces:

• gog drive comments list <fileId> --since <timestamp>
• gog docs comments list <docId> --since <timestamp>

The flag is validated locally as RFC3339/RFC3339Nano with timezone and is passed to Drive Comments startModifiedTime, preserving existing paging, --all, --include-resolved, --include-quoted, and output behavior.

Proof

Local:

• go test ./internal/cmd -run 'TestDriveCommentsList|TestDocsCommentsList|TestDriveComments_ValidationErrors|TestDocsComments_ValidationErrors'
• go test ./internal/cmd/...
• make docs-commands
• make ci
• /Users/steipete/Projects/agent-scripts/skills/autoreview/scripts/autoreview --mode local → clean, no accepted/actionable findings
• git diff --check

Live E2E with clawdbot@gmail.com:

• Reauthenticated the revoked clawdbot OAuth token and verified auth list --check reports valid:true.
• Built this branch as /tmp/gog-comments-since.
• Created a scratch Google Doc, added one Docs comment, then verified:
  • docs comments list returned docs_all_count:1
  • docs comments list --since 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z returned docs_since_past_count:1
  • docs comments list --since <future RFC3339> returned docs_since_future_count:0
  • drive comments list --since 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z returned drive_since_past_count:1
  • naked datetime 2026-06-04T10:00:00 was rejected with invalid --since
• Scratch doc cleanup verified with drive get --fields id,name,trashed: cleanup_trashed:true.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed June 7, 2026, 12:29 AM ET / 04:29 UTC.

Summary
The PR adds a --since RFC3339 flag to Drive and Docs comment-list commands, wires it to Drive comments.list startModifiedTime, and updates tests, generated command docs, and the changelog.

Reproducibility: not applicable. as a bug reproduction; this is a feature PR. Source inspection of current main shows no --since fields or StartModifiedTime call, and the PR body reports live E2E counts for the new behavior.

Review metrics: 1 noteworthy metric.

• Changed files: 9 files changed, +89/-4. The user-facing flag touches shared comments plumbing, two command surfaces, regression tests, generated docs, and release notes.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🦞 diamond lobster
Proof: 🦞 diamond lobster
Patch quality: 🦞 diamond lobster
Result: ready for maintainer review.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Next step before merge

• No ClawSweeper repair lane is needed because review found no concrete code defect; the remaining action is normal maintainer check and merge handling.

Security
Cleared: The diff does not change dependencies, CI, secrets handling, auth storage, or other security-sensitive execution paths.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Land this PR, or an equivalent narrow implementation, after normal checks while keeping startModifiedTime wiring centralized in the shared Drive comments helper.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable as a bug reproduction; this is a feature PR. Source inspection of current main shows no --since fields or StartModifiedTime call, and the PR body reports live E2E counts for the new behavior.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes, this is the narrow maintainable path: one shared RFC3339 validator and one shared Drive comments API path avoid divergent Drive and Docs implementations.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model gpt-5.5, reasoning high; reviewed against 3d5c9cef65fa.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add P2: This is a normal-priority Drive/Docs comments feature with a clear polling-efficiency benefit and limited blast radius.
• add rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• add status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: The external-contributor proof gate does not apply to this collaborator PR; the PR body nevertheless includes reported local tests and live Google E2E output for Drive/Docs since filtering.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a normal-priority Drive/Docs comments feature with a clear polling-efficiency benefit and limited blast radius.
• rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: The external-contributor proof gate does not apply to this collaborator PR; the PR body nevertheless includes reported local tests and live Google E2E output for Drive/Docs since filtering.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• Repository policy read: AGENTS.md was read fully and applied to this review: PR review is read-only, CLI output should stay parseable, and generated command docs/tests are expected for user-facing flags. (AGENTS.md:1, 3d5c9cef65fa)
• Current main lacks the requested flag: On current main, DriveCommentsListCmd exposes fileId, max, page, all, fail-empty, and include-quoted, but no Since field. (internal/cmd/drive_comments.go:23, 3d5c9cef65fa)
• Current shared API call lacks server-side time filtering: The current shared comments list call sets IncludeDeleted, PageSize, Fields, optional PageToken, and Context, with no StartModifiedTime call. (internal/cmd/comment_ops.go:109, 3d5c9cef65fa)
• PR implementation uses the shared path: The PR head adds since to shared list options, passes it through both command surfaces, validates RFC3339Nano, and applies StartModifiedTime when non-empty. (internal/cmd/comment_ops.go:120, fa954ebd26bd)
• PR tests cover query wiring and validation: The PR adds test coverage that checks startModifiedTime is sent for Drive and Docs comment listing and that a naked datetime is rejected. (internal/cmd/drive_comments_cmd_test.go:34, fa954ebd26bd)
• Related issue context supports the narrow scope: The linked feature request at feat(comments): add --since=<RFC3339> filter on docs/drive comments list #688 asks for this exact low-level filter and a later comment separates it from the broader polling request at feat(drive/docs): add poll subcommand with state-file for changes + comments #690.

Likely related people:

• steipete: Git blame and git show attribute the current main Drive/Docs comment-list command structs and shared helper to commit 2c84d89 by Peter Steinberger; the same handle is also the current PR author. (role: introduced comments command surface and recent area contributor; confidence: high; commits: 2c84d8981dd5; files: internal/cmd/comment_ops.go, internal/cmd/drive_comments.go, internal/cmd/docs_comments.go)

What the crustacean ranks mean

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

How this review workflow works

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.