Skip to content

Hide untouched Antigravity model families - #2924

Merged
steipete merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
fix/2875-agy-untouched-families
Aug 14, 2026
Merged

Hide untouched Antigravity model families#2924
steipete merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
fix/2875-agy-untouched-families

Conversation

@steipete

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Replaces #2875 (fork disallows maintainer edits) — the contributor's commits are preserved verbatim with @urda as author, plus one correction on top.

Summary

Antigravity's RetrieveUserQuotaSummary reports every model family the plan covers, so an account that only runs Gemini still carries Claude/GPT rows pinned at 0% that crowd out real lanes (especially the small widget's 2-row limit). Display surfaces (menu card, provider settings usage list, widget) now hide a family once every lane in it reports known zero usage.

Correction over #2875

The original hid a family whose usage was unknown (nil) as if it were known-zero. AntigravityQuotaFamilyVisibility now requires usageKnown before treating a lane as idle, so a family that simply hasn't reported yet keeps rendering. The all-untouched fallback (never render an empty card) was already correct and is preserved.

Proof

  • 44 focused tests green (MenuCardAntigravityTests, UsageStoreWidgetSnapshotTests)
  • make check clean; full make test 859/859 selections green
  • Codex autoreview clean on both the corrective patch and the whole branch

Fixes the dead-row half of the Antigravity display complaints; ranked menu-bar selection is unaffected (untouched families never win there anyway).

urda and others added 4 commits August 13, 2026 22:49
Drop a quota family from menu cards and widgets when no lane reports known usage;
keep every family when all are untouched;
pair an unfamiliar family's lanes by title so a reset lane never hides beside an active sibling;
keep provider details listing every family as the diagnostic surface.
Co-authored-by: Urda <github@urda.com>
Co-authored-by: Peter Urda <peter.urda@gmail.com>
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🦞👀
ClawSweeper picked this up.

Pull request received. I will update this pull request when review starts.

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added P3 Low-risk cleanup, docs, polish, ergonomics, or speculative feature. rating: 🦞 diamond lobster Very strong PR readiness with only minor maintainer review expected. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. labels Aug 14, 2026
@clawsweeper

clawsweeper Bot commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed August 14, 2026, 4:23 AM ET / 08:23 UTC.

ClawSweeper review

What this changes

The branch hides Antigravity model families whose quota lanes are all known zero from menu cards and widgets, while retaining unknown-usage and provider-detail rows.

Merge readiness

⚠️ Ready for maintainer review - 2 items remain

Keep open for normal owner review. The PR’s shared compact-display rule matches the provider’s known/unknown quota semantics and leaves diagnostic provider details unfiltered; no patch defect was found.

Priority: P3
Reviewed head: 096a25d7aa7fd8ceb24708a772560589ac9ae907

Review scores

Measure Result What it means
Overall readiness 🐚 platinum hermit (4/6) The implementation is a focused, well-covered display refinement with no identified correctness or security blocker.
Proof confidence 🌊 off-meta tidepool Not applicable: This owner-authored PR is outside the external-contributor real-behavior-proof gate; its body supplies focused test and check results as supplemental validation.
Patch quality 🐚 platinum hermit (4/6) No actionable review findings were identified.

Verification

Check Result Evidence
Real behavior Not applicable Not applicable: This owner-authored PR is outside the external-contributor real-behavior-proof gate; its body supplies focused test and check results as supplemental validation.
Evidence reviewed 4 items Current compact behavior: Current main routes every Antigravity quota-summary window directly into menu-card metrics, establishing the display surface this PR refines.
Known-usage contract: Quota-summary windows are marked known only when the provider reports a non-disabled remaining fraction; unknown values are represented with a zero placeholder but usageKnown false.
PR head implementation: The proposed shared rule requires every lane in a family to be usageKnown and at zero before filtering it, and retains all families when every family is untouched.
Findings None None.
Security None None.

How this fits together

Antigravity quota summaries enter CodexBar as named usage windows, then feed menu-card metrics and widget rows. This change adds a shared presentation-only filter for compact surfaces while the provider-details pane continues to show every reported lane.

flowchart LR
    A[Antigravity quota summary] --> B[Named usage windows]
    B --> C[Family visibility rule]
    C --> D[Compact menu card]
    C --> E[Widget rows]
    B --> F[Provider details]
    F --> G[All reported lanes]
Loading

Before merge

  • Resolve merge risk (P1) - Antigravity’s quota-summary protocol is documented as internal, so future unfamiliar bucket identifiers could affect family grouping; the change limits this to compact presentation and preserves unknown and all-untouched states.
  • Complete next step (P2) - This owner-authored PR needs ordinary merge review and normal checks, not an automated repair lane.
Agent review details

Security

None.

Review metrics

Metric Value Why it matters
Source and test delta production +66/-2, tests +417/-5 Most of the patch is focused regression coverage around one shared display rule spanning the menu and widget.

Root-cause cluster

Relationship: canonical
Canonical: #2924
Summary: This owner-authored branch is the active replacement for the closed contributor branch covering the same display behavior.

Members:

Proposal only: this assessment does not dispatch repair, suppress jobs, mutate sibling items, close, or merge anything.

Merge-risk options

Maintainer options:

  1. Land with the bounded display fallback (recommended)
    Accept the limited provider-protocol drift risk because the filter is compact-display-only and conservatively retains unknown and all-untouched families.

Technical review

Best possible solution:

Land the centralized compact-display filter after normal merge validation, retaining the documented title fallback for new provider bucket families and all lanes in provider details.

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

Yes — current main renders every quota-summary window in both compact paths, and a snapshot with one active family plus one known-zero family reaches the proposed filter deterministically. This read-only review did not execute the app.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes — centralizing the rule avoids menu/widget drift and its known-usage condition matches the provider parser’s contract; preserving provider details is the appropriate diagnostic fallback.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against f043a784a71f.

Labels

Label justifications:

  • P3: This is a limited-scope compact-display usability improvement rather than a broken core workflow.
  • merge-risk: 🚨 other: The family classifier interprets an internal upstream quota protocol, so new bucket naming can affect which compact rows are suppressed.
  • rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
  • status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This owner-authored PR is outside the external-contributor real-behavior-proof gate; its body supplies focused test and check results as supplemental validation.

Evidence

What I checked:

Likely related people:

  • steipete: Current-main history shows repeated Antigravity provider and compact-presentation work, and this owner-authored branch carries the replacement implementation. (role: recent Antigravity area contributor; confidence: high; commits: d74595b4989d, a2444e62ec6d; files: Sources/CodexBar/MenuCardView+ModelHelpers.swift, Sources/CodexBar/UsageStore+WidgetSnapshot.swift, Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/Antigravity/AntigravityStatusProbe.swift)
  • Yuxin-Qiao: Recent history includes a focused Antigravity quota-readiness repair adjacent to this provider path. (role: adjacent Antigravity contributor; confidence: medium; commits: 1118a6288beb; files: Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/Antigravity/AntigravityStatusProbe.swift)

Rank-up moves

Optional improvements that raise the rating; they are not merge blockers.

  • Let the normal required checks gate the exact current head before merge.

Rating scale

Score Internal tier Crab rank Meaning
6/6 S 🦀 challenger crab Exceptional readiness
5/6 A 🦞 diamond lobster Very strong readiness
4/6 B 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR; ordinary maintainer review
3/6 C 🦐 gold shrimp Useful, but confidence is limited
2/6 D 🦪 silver shellfish Proof or implementation needs work
1/6 F 🧂 unranked krab Not merge-ready
N/A NA 🌊 off-meta tidepool Rating does not apply

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality.
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.

Workflow

  • 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.

History

Review history (2 earlier review cycles)
  • reviewed 2026-08-14T07:15:20.752Z sha c4674e0 :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none
  • reviewed 2026-08-14T07:57:18.980Z sha c4674e0 :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none

@urda

urda commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for making this built in!

@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added the merge-risk: 🚨 other 🚨 Merging this PR has meaningful risk outside the owned taxonomy. label Aug 14, 2026
@clawsweeper clawsweeper Bot added rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. and removed rating: 🦞 diamond lobster Very strong PR readiness with only minor maintainer review expected. labels Aug 14, 2026
@urda

urda commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
image

:shipit:

@steipete
steipete merged commit 0a0fcce into main Aug 14, 2026
9 checks passed
@urda

urda commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

image

Amazing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

merge-risk: 🚨 other 🚨 Merging this PR has meaningful risk outside the owned taxonomy. P3 Low-risk cleanup, docs, polish, ergonomics, or speculative feature. rating: 🐚 platinum hermit Good normal PR readiness with ordinary maintainer review expected. status: 👀 ready for maintainer look ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants