fix(web): review summary only says optional when it is

[flamboh]

Note

🤖 Claude Opus 5.5 on behalf of Oliver

Problem

The pull request review composer always labeled the summary "(optional)", but a Comment review needs a summary or at least one line comment. The Submit button respected that rule, so on a review with no line comments the form said the summary was optional and then wouldn't submit. This shows up most on your own pull request. GitHub and Forgejo only let a PR's author leave Comment reviews, so the verdict picker there also had just one option, which looked broken.

Fix

• The placeholder is computed from the same check as the Submit button, so they can't disagree. It says "(optional)" only when an empty summary would actually submit (Approve, or a review that already has line comments). Otherwise it says "Summarize your review or add line comments", or keeps the Forgejo "(required to request changes)" text when that verdict is selected.
• The verdict picker is hidden when only one verdict is available, on both web and mobile. Mobile's segmented control had the same single-option problem; its placeholder never claimed the summary was optional.

Evidence

Review tab, no line comments, against a GitHub sandbox repo.

Your own PR (Comment is the only verdict)

Before	After

Someone else's PR (all three verdicts)

Before	After

Mobile, your own PR (iOS simulator)

Before	After

With the after build, submitting a Comment review with a summary from the simulator still works: GitHub recorded it as COMMENTED on the sandbox pull request.

Validation

• vp lint and vp fmt on both files
• tsc --noEmit for apps/web and apps/mobile
• Before/after captures from a worktree dev server, web and iOS simulator
• Submitted a Comment review from the iOS simulator on your own pull request

Made with Claude Opus 5.5 in Claude Code, running in T3 Code.

[macroscopeapp]

Approvability

Verdict: Approved at cbc0713

Macroscope's review found this PR approvable — This is a contained pull-request review UI fix: the web placeholder now matches existing submit requirements, and redundant single-option verdict controls are hidden on web and mobile. No schema, infrastructure, security-sensitive, or static-analysis changes are involved.

Notes:

• Diff unchanged. Approvability was decided on eligibility alone.

^{You can add or adjust custom eligibility rules. Learn more.}

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.config.ts
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: c7dde6ea-e8d5-4491-8e1d-ac5acd6e9f68

---

---

---

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d45d1a1 and cbc0713.

---

---

---

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• apps/mobile/src/features/pull-requests/PullRequestReviewSheet.tsx
• apps/web/src/components/pullRequest/PullRequestReviewForm.tsx

---

---

---

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 10 included reviews per hour; 9 remain after this review.

---

---

---

---

📝 Walkthrough

📝 Walkthrough

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The mobile and web review forms now hide the verdict selector when one or fewer verdicts are offered. The web form updates submission eligibility checks and summary prompts based on the selected verdict and available review content.

Changes

Review form behavior

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Web submission eligibility and prompts apps/web/src/components/pullRequest/PullRequestReviewForm.tsx	Submission eligibility now checks the selected verdict and supplied summary. Request-changes reviews require a summary; other verdicts can submit when approving or when a summary or inline comments are present. The placeholder reflects the selected verdict and eligibility.
Verdict selector visibility and layout apps/mobile/src/features/pull-requests/PullRequestReviewSheet.tsx, apps/web/src/components/pullRequest/PullRequestReviewForm.tsx	Both forms show the verdict selector only when multiple verdicts are offered. The web form positions the selector before the submit button.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Change: Bug fix

Suggested reviewers: juliusmarminge

---

---

---

---

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to cbc07

No merge-blocking issue is established; the mobile form can still submit a review when its only verdict is hidden.

Pre-merge checks | 3 | 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check		The description explains the problem, fix, evidence, validation, and agent attribution. It does not include the required Scope and approval section or explain why this focused fix qualifies without an…	Add the Scope and approval section. Link the triaged issue or explicit maintainer approval, or explain why this obvious bug fix qualifies for the exemption.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Linked Issues check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check		The title clearly and concisely describes the main fix: correcting the review summary’s optional label.

---

Full details: Description check

Explanation

The description explains the problem, fix, evidence, validation, and agent attribution. It does not include the required Scope and approval section or explain why this focused fix qualifies without an issue or maintainer approval.

---

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create a new PR

---

---

---

---

---

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[juliusmarminge]

Note

This comment is posted by Julius' dot

The web before/after images show the corrected placeholder and verdict picker. The mobile picker also changes, but the PR says mobile was only typechecked. Please add mobile before/after screenshots showing the single-verdict case and confirm that submitting a Comment review still works, as required by the verification guide.

[flamboh]

Note

🤖 Claude Opus 5.5 on behalf of Oliver

Added mobile before/after to the description, from the iOS simulator on a pull request the viewer authored, where Comment is the only verdict. The one-option segmented control is gone after the change.

Submitting still works: with the after build, I submitted a Comment review with a summary from the simulator, and GitHub recorded it as COMMENTED on the sandbox pull request.

Dismissing prior approval to re-evaluate cbc0713