feat: chat transcript mr2a html export - #10076

🩺 serve daemon A/B

Built the PR base vs this PR head 13fde70, drove a fixed endpoint set against each, and diffed the JSON responses. Only fields that changed are shown.

✅ No response changes against the PR base across 12 scenario(s).

— Qwen Code · serve A/B

🖼️ web-shell visual preview

Rendered against a mock daemon (no real backend): the PR base vs this PR head e67c1a0. Only screenshots that changed are shown (flows below, if any, are head-only) — refreshes on every push.

Screenshots · before / after

ℹ️ No screenshot changed against the PR base — but this PR edits 19 render-shaping files:

• packages/web-shell/client/components/MessageList.module.css
• packages/web-shell/client/components/MessageList.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/MessageTimestamp.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/WebShellTranscript.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/messages/AssistantMessage.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/messages/Markdown.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/messages/PlanExecutionView.tsx
• packages/web-shell/client/components/messages/PlanMessage.module.css
• …and 11 more.

Either the change has no visual effect (logic, plumbing, a state the scenarios never reach), or no scenario renders this UI — in which case the preview cannot see it, and an empty result is a coverage gap rather than a clean bill of health. To make it visible, add a scenario to packages/web-shell/client/e2e/visuals/screenshots.spec.ts that seeds whatever state the UI is gated on; it then appears here as a head-only (NEW) capture.

_{Full-resolution recordings (.webm) are attached to the workflow run.}

— Qwen Code · web-shell visuals

✅ Qwen Triage finished — view run. See the stage comments in this thread for the result.

✅ Qwen Triage 已完成 —— 查看运行。结果见本线程中的各阶段评论。

Thanks for the PR! This is MR2A of the shared chat transcript design — a planned milestone, and it reads that way. Gate notes below.

Template ✓ — all required sections are present. One small nit: the English half omits the ### Evidence (Before & After) subheading that the Chinese half includes. Not blocking.

Problem: this is a planned feature milestone, not theoretical hardening. It implements the merged design doc docs/design/web-shell/chat-transcript-contract-prevalidation.md (§9.6 HTML Export pipeline, §12.2 MR2 steps 5–9), follows the already-merged prevalidation stage (#9388), and links issue #9387. Worth noting: #9387 was opened by the same author and still carries need-discussion / priority/P3 — the prevalidation stage got merged, but the issue thread itself never got an explicit maintainer green-light for the production migration.

Direction: aligned. The design doc — merged by a maintainer in #9388 on 2026-08-19 — prescribes exactly this split: export builder + document mode + HTML wiring + browser/security gates now, VS Code live timeline migration deferred to MR2B with the gate intentionally left at overall: "fail" and selectedVscodePath: null. The issue carries roadmap/export-data. Claude Code's changelog has no direct HTML-export entry, but transcript rendering is an actively maintained surface there — the area is relevant.

Size: large. 11,210 changed lines across 96 files and 7 packages (cli, core, sdk-typescript, acp-bridge, web-shell, web-templates, vscode-ide-companion) — of which ~6,101 are production logic (68 files), 5,000 are tests (27 files), and 109 are schema. For a feat PR there is no hard block, but this carries the maintainer-awareness flag at 500+ production lines and the large-PR advisory at 1000+: if any seam here can be split (e.g. document schema + projector separately from host wiring), two smaller PRs would review faster. Deferring MR2B already helps.

Approach: the scope matches the design doc's consumer-ordered plan — the centerpiece is the new closed ExportTranscriptDocumentV1 projector (~2,000 lines under packages/cli/src/ui/utils/export/), plus markdown document policy, the web-templates document entry, and the integration-runner rewrite (−894 lines converging onto the shared pipeline). Things worth thinking about: the CLI-only build path now also compiles webui/web-shell/web-templates (build-time cost on every fast lane), and four new runtime dependencies (unified, remark-parse, remark-gfm, remark-math) enter the CLI for the markdown policy. Both follow from the design, but they are real tradeoffs.

Risk: no matches on the revert-correlated high-risk paths. Elevated attention goes to two places instead: the shared web-shell components (also serving the live interactive shell) and the security boundary itself — CI evidence will matter, and the ubuntu lane is currently red (details in the review comment).

Moving on to code review. 🔍

— Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max

_{Reviewed at 5f9470b974c2e60e33f0d3278566adf7a69669f1 · re-run with @qwen-code /triage}

Code review

I read the security boundary in detail — it is the heart of this PR, and it holds up: per-kind Pick allowlists with assertNever exhaustiveness (a future block kind fails the build, not the user), forbidden-field scans (rawInput/rawOutput/sessionId/…), fail-closed validateStrict in core, then a second full re-validation of the finished document (semantic safety + consistency + budgets + schema). Opaque IDs, zeroed block timestamps, home-path redaction, URL-scheme allowlist, data-URI-only images (no SVG), CSP default-src 'none' with nonce-gated scripts, renderer-version binding, and a build that refuses to inline any <script sequence. Live-mode preservation is structural, not hopeful: document is a third render mode, adapter behavior is opt-in flagged (safeToolProjection, includeSourceIdentity, default off), and the MessageList change is an extraction of groupParallelAgents into a shared adapter. The pipeline reuses the SDK's canonical projector instead of re-replaying records, per design §9.6. No critical security or correctness holes found in the boundary itself.

What does need attention:

1. CI is red on this head, and the failure is in code this PR restructured. The ubuntu lane fails one web-shell test (evidence below): MessageList — compact mode > keeps a folded single-agent summary separate from an approving agent — the expected msg-summary-t1 node never renders. That test exists unchanged on main and is not modified here, while the grouping logic it exercises is exactly what this PR extracted and retyped. Please fix it or demonstrate it is a flake with a re-run; as it stands it contradicts the "interactive/readonly behavior preserved" claim.
2. The SDK preview path changed semantics beyond export. segmentId now gates block merging (user text gets \n separators across segments, shell blocks only merge on matching segment), and argsSummary generation now redacts sensitive keys — on the shared daemon preview path, so the live UI sees these too. The updated 520-line daemonUi suite pins the new behavior, but the PR describes itself as preserving runtime semantics; worth a maintainer confirming that is the intended scope.
3. Build/runtime footprint tradeoffs (follow the design, but are real): --cli-only builds now compile webui + web-shell + web-templates, and four new CLI runtime deps (unified, remark-parse, remark-gfm, remark-math) serve the markdown policy. Minor: Mermaid renders now queue through one global promise even in non-document mode.

sequenceDiagram
    participant P1 as ChatRecord records
    participant P2 as Record export policy
    participant P3 as SDK canonical projector
    participant P4 as Document projector
    participant P5 as Gates
    participant P6 as CSP template
    participant P7 as Browser gate
    P1->>P2 keep visible record kinds only
    P2->>P3 project to transcript blocks
    P3->>P4 typed allowlist, opaque IDs, redaction, budgets
    P4->>P5 schema plus semantic re-validation, fail closed
    P5->>P6 inject escaped JSON under nonce CSP
    P6->>P7 zero network, canary, search copy print probes

Test evidence (this PR's own CI — unattended run, no PR code executed here)

The PR's central lane is red on the reviewed commit. Test (ubuntu-latest, Node 22.x) fails in the web-shell suite: 1 failed / 4276 passed (4277) —

FAIL components/MessageList.dom.test.tsx
  > MessageList — compact mode > keeps a folded single-agent summary separate from an approving agent
AssertionError: expected null not to be null
 ❯ components/MessageList.dom.test.tsx:736:11
    expect(container.querySelector('[data-testid="msg-summary-t1"]')).not.toBeNull();

I verified this test exists at line 718 of MessageList.dom.test.tsx on main and is not touched by this PR, while the grouping code it exercises is exactly what this PR extracted and retyped — so I classify it as PR-caused rather than infra noise (log body claims aside, the diff and check identity say otherwise). The job log ends with the runner terminating after the suite; the failure above is the exit cause. macOS and Windows unit lanes are skipped on PRs by design (#10059); the integration lane was skipped for this run. Twenty auxiliary lanes passed, including web-shell E2E Smoke, Serve A/B, Desktop Shell (ubuntu + windows), Dependency CVE audit, Secret scan (TruffleHog), and precheck-pr. Not independently verified here: the author's reviewer-test-plan claims (Chromium browser gate behavior, VSIX notices parity) — the browser gate produced no green signal in this commit's CI (the lane failed at the unit step).

Sandboxed verification would settle the behavioural claims once CI is green: @qwen-code /verify — whether the new document pipeline is load-bearing (A/B: export HTML through the new projector vs the legacy path, and does the browser gate actually fail when the allowlist projection is removed) cannot be proven by the unit suite alone; @qwen-code /tmux — for the user-visible /export html TUI surface. The author has write access, so either lane can be triggered directly; until the red unit test is resolved neither would say much.

— Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max

_{Reviewed at 5f9470b974c2e60e33f0d3278566adf7a69669f1 · re-run with @qwen-code /triage}

Confidence: 2/5 — the security boundary is genuinely well built, but the PR's own CI fails a pre-existing test that pins the exact "live behavior preserved" claim it makes, and a change of this size needs a maintainer in the loop regardless.

Stepping back: my independent take on this problem would have been almost exactly what this PR does — a closed, versioned document type with per-kind allowlists, a one-way projector that never serializes raw payloads, reuse of the existing canonical projection, a nonce-CSP template with zero remote surface, and all hosts converged on one renderer. The implementation matches or exceeds that, and the defensive layers (forbidden-field scan, second full re-validation, assertNever exhaustiveness, build-time refusal to inline script sequences) are better than what I would have sketched. This is not volume-for-volume's-sake; it tracks a maintainer-merged design doc step by step.

But two things keep this from a clean pass:

• The red CI is the core claim breaking. The failing test is unchanged from main and covers the compact-mode grouping this PR extracted and retyped. If the extraction were truly behavior-preserving, that test would pass. Either the extraction changed something subtle (my read: likely) or the test is flaky (prove it with a re-run). Until then, "interactive/readonly semantics preserved" is asserted, not demonstrated — and on a security-boundary PR, the compatibility claim carries the same weight as the boundary itself.
• Scope for a human, not a gate. ~6,100 production lines across 7 packages, a shared SDK preview path whose semantics changed (segmentId merge rules, argsSummary redaction), and a CLI build/runtime footprint that grows even under --cli-only. Nothing here looks wrong on reading, but at this size "looks right on reading" is not the bar — the Stage 0 rule puts this in maintainer territory, and I am capping my confidence accordingly rather than approving on the strength of a clean-ish read.

Verdict: request changes on the red CI (fix or prove flake), and defer the rest to @yiliang114 — you merged the prevalidation stage (#9388) this builds on; the questions worth your eyes are the SDK preview-semantics scope and whether MR2A should land whole or split at the schema/projector seam. @water-in-stone strong work on the boundary itself; the blocker is narrow and concrete.

— Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max

_{Reviewed at 5f9470b974c2e60e33f0d3278566adf7a69669f1 · re-run with @qwen-code /triage}

Follow-up on the change-request review, Stage 2 triage, and Stage 3 triage on current PR head ef5d30fac1.

All 33 inline review threads now have an author reply and are resolved:

• 31 findings were addressed with focused production or regression-test changes, including the export redaction/markdown/resource-budget boundary, typed preview correctness, background-agent terminal state, document renderer error handling, interactive Web Shell compatibility, and build-path scoping.
• R1-14 and R1-15 were answered with an explicit boundary decision rather than represented as code fixes. The Chromium document gate remains a dedicated Playwright integration gate (4/4), and the no-access-key projection check remains an isolated integration boundary (151/151, with the focused contract gate 3/3). They were not added as ordinary workspace unit-test scripts because doing so would weaken their runtime/dependency isolation.
• The earlier compact-mode regression remains fixed: folded synthetic summaries stay separate from approving agents.

Validation on this head:

• npm run build: passed
• npm run typecheck: passed
• CLI export tests: 48/48
• SDK daemon UI tests: 352/352
• Web Shell focused/relevant tests: 413/413
• VS Code export tests: 9/9
• transcript contract gate: 3/3
• Chromium document gate: 4/4
• isolated no-access-key integration suite: 151/151 across 13 files

I left the historical CHANGES_REQUESTED reviews intact; they were not dismissed. The inline concerns have been replied to and resolved against the current published head.

Final main synchronization update: PR head is now df02ec37e4, a normal merge of QwenLM/qwen-code main at d526612e92 on top of the reviewed/fixed head ef5d30fac1. The merge introduced no additional conflict resolution or PR-specific production changes.

I reran the relevant validation after this merge: repository build and typecheck passed; CLI export 54/54, SDK transcript/UI 391/391, Web Shell relevant tests 686/686 (including the compact-mode regression), VS Code export 9/9, transcript contract 3/3, Chromium document gate 4/4, and the isolated no-access-key integration gate 151/151 across 13 files all passed.

All 33 inline review threads remain replied to and resolved. The historical CHANGES_REQUESTED reviews remain intact and were not dismissed.

Follow-up on the round-3 review and maintainer review at current PR head 64cc57a59c.

• Replied to all 17 open inline threads. Sixteen code/repository concerns are fixed and resolved; the 128 MiB package-budget vs renderer-slimming decision has a truthful status reply and remains open for explicit maintainer direction.
• Closed the latest home-path and Markdown parser/scanner bypasses with focused regressions, and removed the internal review-evaluation artifact from the tracked repository.
• Investigated the red Web Shell E2E Smoke job rather than changing the mount path: the CI trace shows 117 module requests failing together with net::ERR_NETWORK_CHANGED, with no React/page error. On the exact reviewed head, the single affected flow passed 1/1 locally, the CI-equivalent first batch passed 7/7 with seven workers, and the complete smoke suite passed 44/44. This points to the runner/network event rather than a deterministic App/MessageList regression; a CI rerun is the appropriate next verification.

Validation for the published fixes: CLI Export/Markdown 53/53, repository build and typecheck passed, transcript contract + Chromium document gate 7/7, and focused lint/format/diff checks passed.

The historical CHANGES_REQUESTED reviews remain intact and were not dismissed.

Qwen Code review timed out. Qwen review timed out after 21600 seconds (of the 360-minute budget). This run already used the maximum 360 minute timeout. See workflow logs.

Qwen Code review timed out. Qwen review timed out after 21600 seconds (of the 360-minute budget). This run already used the maximum 360 minute timeout. See workflow logs.

HTML export UI regression report

Tested scope: PR #10076, current head e67c1a04ee2600339f670da2e80978eaf7fe1acf. The browser harness was prepared at 44fa755e1fe69a578fa7f27e5e3612fcb1df439c; before publishing this report I verified that the scoped export implementation and fixtures have no diff between that commit and the current head.

Method: I generated the legacy and WebShell HTML from the same representative ChatRecord fixture, exercised the PR's toHtml(sessionData, records) product path through a tmux-run helper, and opened the resulting standalone files in a real browser at 1440 px and 480 px widths. The richer block matrix used a schema-valid v1 document to isolate renderer coverage. I did not run npm ci or a broad local build.

Case matrix

Before / After — same representative fixture

Legacy WebUI exporter	WebShell document exporter

Responsive width — same fixture at 480 px

Legacy WebUI exporter	WebShell document exporter

Recovery and fail-closed states

Partial export	Incompatible renderer version

Remaining blockers / decisions

1. Critical: the unresolved four-layer percent-encoded home-path case can still survive export sanitization. This remains a merge blocker: feat: chat transcript mr2a html export #10076 (comment)
2. Product parity: I would not describe the current result as 1:1 parity until the metadata panel, Context Usage, and theme behavior are either restored or explicitly accepted as intentional removals.
3. Package budget: the unresolved package-size thread keeps the raised 128 MiB budget; the measured package is about 117.8 MiB. A maintainer still needs to accept that trade-off or request a renderer packaging change: feat: chat transcript mr2a html export #10076 (comment)
4. Current CI snapshot: the main Node 22 test job and visual capture job pass on the latest head, but Java 11 is failing while Serve A/B, web-shell smoke, and automated review are still pending. Java 17 and Java 21 pass. Failed job: https://github.com/QwenLM/qwen-code/actions/runs/33311990001/job/99258596651
5. Manual closeout: after the Critical and intended parity decisions are resolved, run one final interactive /export html command from a PR-built CLI and verify the produced file. That is the only user-facing command-path case not executed in this pass.

Conclusion: the WebShell document renderer is a functional upgrade for transcript content and its desktop/narrow standalone rendering is sound, but the PR is not ready to merge yet because of the unresolved security Critical and explicit legacy-parity losses above.

Follow-up on the product-direction items in the UI regression report: P02-P05 should no longer be treated as open decisions.

The migration should preserve existing useful export behavior unless there is a concrete incompatibility. Before merge, the WebShell document export should retain the legacy metadata summary (repository/branch/model/channel/tokens/session and file-operation information), Context Usage, theme behavior, and screen-level expand/collapse controls. Print CSS can still force everything expanded.

The boundary is also explicit: this is a static, read-only session-history export. It should not render a composer, send/attachment/voice controls, model or permission selectors, connect to the daemon, or expose actions that continue the conversation or execute tools. New document rendering capabilities such as Mermaid, math, typed tool output, diff, plan, ask-user history, and nested-agent history are welcome, but they should be additive rather than replacing legacy information.

Please keep these adaptations behind document mode so existing interactive/readonly WebShell consumers are unchanged, and render restored metadata only after the existing export sanitization policy has been applied. I consider the missing legacy behaviors in scope for this migration, separately from the unresolved security and CI blockers.