Skip to content

feat(web): merge Auto-review into permission modes - #410

Merged
zfy0701 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
codex/merge-auto-permission-mode
Aug 2, 2026
Merged

feat(web): merge Auto-review into permission modes#410
zfy0701 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
codex/merge-auto-permission-mode

Conversation

@zfy0701

@zfy0701 zfy0701 commented Aug 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • replace the separate Codex Permission mode and Approval reviewer controls with one four-preset permissions row: Read-only, Agent, Auto, and Agent (full access)
  • map the UI-only Auto preset to permissionMode=agent plus approvalsReviewer=auto_review; selecting another Codex preset restores approvalsReviewer=user
  • show the combined preset on Agent Detail and keep the four-choice control horizontally usable on narrow screens

Why

Follow-up to #407. codex-acp correctly exposes permission mode and approval reviewer as independent session options, but users should choose the familiar combined Codex permissions preset rather than coordinate two protocol-level controls.

The raw permission-mode catalog and session composer remain unchanged because session controls currently stage only the runtime mode, not the Agent-level reviewer preference.

Validation

  • Web data tests: 55 passed
  • Web typecheck
  • Web production build
  • full repository ESLint via the pre-push hook

Created by Codex . GPT-5.6 Sol

@agentconnect-md-test agentconnect-md-test Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Clean, well-scoped refactor. Verified the preset composition logic:

  • permissionModePresets correctly injects the Auto pill only when the runtime supports approvals-reviewer and agent is in the mode list.
  • selectedPermissionPreset / permissionPresetSettings round-trip correctly (agent+auto_reviewagent:auto-review), and switching to any other preset resets approvalsReviewer to user per the PR description.
  • agentPermissionDisplay's new optional approvalsReviewer param correctly falls back to prior behavior when omitted (e.g. SessionDetailView.tsx call site untouched).
  • Confirmed no leftover references to removed exports (supportsApprovalsReviewer, approvalsReviewerOptions, approvalsReviewerLabel) outside data.ts.
  • Tests updated consistently with the new API shape.

No blocking issues found.

sent by review-bot-fast (Claude Agent · sonnet) · open in session

@agentconnect-md-test agentconnect-md-test Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved at exact head 681dd7d3e003174a25ba12d81069fefb31c32cec. The Agent create/edit controls correctly compose the UI-only Auto preset as permissionMode=agent plus approvalsReviewer=auto_review, while every other Codex preset restores the reviewer to user. Non-Codex runtime catalogs and the session composer retain their raw permission-mode behavior, Agent Detail resolves the combined preset, and the scrollable non-wrapping pill row preserves the four choices on narrow layouts.

Validation on this revision passed all 579 web tests, web typecheck, the web production build, changed-file ESLint/Prettier, and diff hygiene. The exact-head GitHub Build, Check, Unit, Skill sandbox, both Integration shards, Semantic PR, and companion review checks are also green.

Non-blocking active-development warning: a previously persisted or API-authored noncanonical pair such as permissionMode=agent-full-access with approvalsReviewer=auto_review is displayed as Full Access while retaining the hidden reviewer value until the operator actively selects a preset. That migration behavior is acceptable for this unreleased system.

sent by review-bot (Codex · gpt-5.6-sol) · open in session

@zfy0701
zfy0701 merged commit 4a24be9 into main Aug 2, 2026
9 checks passed
@zfy0701
zfy0701 deleted the codex/merge-auto-permission-mode branch August 2, 2026 08:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant