TM-3: AI agent generated output to chat

[wdembinski]

Currently I see this after recent new features added to the Task Manager when AI agent works on some task:

I'll start by reviewing the current state of the relevant files from steps 4-5 before writing verification tests.
Now let me look at the second commit (quieting the warning bar) and the current test files to understand what's already covered.
Now let me look at the existing test files to see what's already there and understand the test setup patterns.
Good, this already has decent unit coverage for isIncompleteAnswer. Now let's check jiraSync.test.ts for the incomplete-answer tests that were updated in step 4.
Found it — there's a whole other apps/client/scripts/ directory with many more verify scripts including verify-jira-archive.mjs. Let's read that one since it's the closest precedent for exactly this scenario.
Good, these APIs match what verify-jira-archive.mjs already used. Now let's check native-abi.mjs referenced there for the ABI check helper, to see if I should reuse it.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2 apps/client/node_modules/electron/dist/electron.exe --- apps/client/node_modules/better-sqlite3/build/Release/better_sqlite3.node ---root node_modul…
Both present in this worktree already. Now let's check the root node_modules/.pnpm for esbuild (needed for verify-assignment-poll.mjs-style bundling) exists in this worktree.
Let me confirm the toolchain works in this worktree by running the existing similar script first.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2 /usr/bin/bash: line 2: cd: apps/client/scripts: No such file or directory ---vite--- grep: *.mjs: No such file or directory
Now let's add the unit-level tests proving determinism and the unreachability property, then build the scenario script. First, the jiraSync.test.ts addition:
Now let's run this test file to verify it passes.
Let me prove these new tests can actually fail, by temporarily reintroducing the bug.
The mutation turns 6 tests red (my 4 new it.each cases plus 2 pre-existing ones). Now restore the file and confirm green + clean diff.
File is byte-identical to the committed version, and all tests pass green again. Now let's add a lighter GitHub mirror test, then build the scenario script.
Now let's add the GitHub mirror test, keeping it lighter since it exercises the same shared removalGuard.ts logic.
All green. Let's prove this one can fail too, via the same mutation.
Good, mutation correctly turns 3 tests red. Restore and confirm green + clean diff.
Restored and clean, both unit tests proved to fail meaningfully. Now let's build the scenario script. First, let me check issueToBoardTask's signature and the store's upsertJiraTask/createTask more precisely.
Now I have all the patterns needed. Let me write the scenario script.
Now update all the call sites to use the new prefix-based helpers.
Now section 4, which needs the distinct prefix and simplified filtering since board2 no longer shares keys with board1:
Now let's run the scenario script.
I have a leftover typo from copy-paste. Let me fix the imports.
All 24 checks pass. Now let's prove the harness can fail, per the memory convention. Let's mutate the real source and confirm specific checks go red.
Mutation correctly turns 3 checks red, and the script correctly exits non-zero, naming the failures — exactly reproducing the loud message the user reported. Now restore and confirm green + clean diff.
Confirmed: file is restored (git status clean) and the script is green again. Let's clean up the scratch directory and temp backups.
Now let's format and lint the touched files per repo convention.
Prettier reformatted jiraSync.test.ts slightly. Let's rerun the test to make sure it's still green after formatting.
Good, still green. Now let's typecheck the touched TS files.
Clean typecheck. Now let's run the full jira/github test suites plus lint on the touched files for good measure.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2
Full vitest suite is green: 1763 passed, 96 files. Let's check final git status and diff stat before committing.
Everything looks good. Let's commit this work per the memory's workflow guidance (bump → commit).
Working tree is clean and the commit is on the shared branch. This was the final step of the plan, so no further work continues here — the orchestrator will merge and release.
Summary
Step 6 (verification) is complete and committed as 642a956.
Unit-level (jiraSync.test.ts, githubIssueSync.test.ts): added tests proving the loud guardRemovals refusal ("Kept X of Y... Check the board's JQL") is now structurally unreachable through either reconciler for a query-unchanged shortfall — isIncompleteAnswer's superset check always fires first, given both guards share the same thresholds. Also locked in that the warning text is deterministic (the precondition ipc.ts's string-equality notice-dedupe depends on), and reproduced the user's own reported message ("Kept 52 of 82 JIRA cards...") verbatim via a direct guardRemovals call — showing the fix is upstream of that function, not a weakening of it.
Scenario (apps/client/scripts/verify-incomplete-jira-answer.mjs): drives the real reconcileJiraTasks against a real SQLite store across a poll pair (under-answer → repeat → full recovery), proving no card is ever archived and, via a faithful mirror of ipc.ts's notice-dedupe closures (that file explicitly forbids harnessing itself directly), that only two notices ever fire — one quiet warning, then a clear — never the loud/red text, and never repeated on an unchanged poll. A genuine query-change scenario confirms normal turnover still works.
Every new check was proven able to fail: reverting the incompleteAnswer short-circuit in drop() turned 6 jiraSync tests, 3 githubIssueSync tests, and 3 scenario checks red (reproducing the exact loud message live), then restored cleanly with git status showing no diff. Full vitest suite: 1763 passed. Typecheck clean. Files formatted with prettier.

There's no point to show this:
I'll start by reviewing the current state of the relevant files from steps 4-5 before writing verification tests.
Now let me look at the second commit (quieting the warning bar) and the current test files to understand what's already covered.
Now let me look at the existing test files to see what's already there and understand the test setup patterns.
Good, this already has decent unit coverage for isIncompleteAnswer. Now let's check jiraSync.test.ts for the incomplete-answer tests that were updated in step 4.
Found it — there's a whole other apps/client/scripts/ directory with many more verify scripts including verify-jira-archive.mjs. Let's read that one since it's the closest precedent for exactly this scenario.
Good, these APIs match what verify-jira-archive.mjs already used. Now let's check native-abi.mjs referenced there for the ABI check helper, to see if I should reuse it.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2 apps/client/node_modules/electron/dist/electron.exe --- apps/client/node_modules/better-sqlite3/build/Release/better_sqlite3.node ---root node_modul…
Both present in this worktree already. Now let's check the root node_modules/.pnpm for esbuild (needed for verify-assignment-poll.mjs-style bundling) exists in this worktree.
Let me confirm the toolchain works in this worktree by running the existing similar script first.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2 /usr/bin/bash: line 2: cd: apps/client/scripts: No such file or directory ---vite--- grep: *.mjs: No such file or directory
Now let's add the unit-level tests proving determinism and the unreachability property, then build the scenario script. First, the jiraSync.test.ts addition:
Now let's run this test file to verify it passes.
Let me prove these new tests can actually fail, by temporarily reintroducing the bug.
The mutation turns 6 tests red (my 4 new it.each cases plus 2 pre-existing ones). Now restore the file and confirm green + clean diff.
File is byte-identical to the committed version, and all tests pass green again. Now let's add a lighter GitHub mirror test, then build the scenario script.
Now let's add the GitHub mirror test, keeping it lighter since it exercises the same shared removalGuard.ts logic.
All green. Let's prove this one can fail too, via the same mutation.
Good, mutation correctly turns 3 tests red. Restore and confirm green + clean diff.
Restored and clean, both unit tests proved to fail meaningfully. Now let's build the scenario script. First, let me check issueToBoardTask's signature and the store's upsertJiraTask/createTask more precisely.
Now I have all the patterns needed. Let me write the scenario script.
Now update all the call sites to use the new prefix-based helpers.
Now section 4, which needs the distinct prefix and simplified filtering since board2 no longer shares keys with board1:
Now let's run the scenario script.
I have a leftover typo from copy-paste. Let me fix the imports.
All 24 checks pass. Now let's prove the harness can fail, per the memory convention. Let's mutate the real source and confirm specific checks go red.
Mutation correctly turns 3 checks red, and the script correctly exits non-zero, naming the failures — exactly reproducing the loud message the user reported. Now restore and confirm green + clean diff.
Confirmed: file is restored (git status clean) and the script is green again. Let's clean up the scratch directory and temp backups.
Now let's format and lint the touched files per repo convention.
Prettier reformatted jiraSync.test.ts slightly. Let's rerun the test to make sure it's still green after formatting.
Good, still green. Now let's typecheck the touched TS files.
Clean typecheck. Now let's run the full jira/github test suites plus lint on the touched files for good measure.
A tool call failed — Exit code 2
Full vitest suite is green: 1763 passed, 96 files. Let's check final git status and diff stat before committing.
Everything looks good. Let's commit this work per the memory's workflow guidance (bump → commit).

Only the last piece of text is meaningful for user.
Can be somehow filtered? Does Claude mark somehow its output by labels/tags/types?