fix(cli): show Goal objectives in session picker - #10295
Conversation
|
✅ Qwen Triage finished — CI landed green on ✅ Qwen Triage 已完成 —— |
|
Thanks for the PR! Template ✓ — all sections filled in, including the bilingual summary and a reviewer test plan. Problem — observed bug, not theory: the linked issue #10265 comes from a community user report (with screenshot) showing multiple Direction — aligned. Size — touches core ( Approach — minimal and pattern-conforming: an optional Risk — no changed file matches the revert-correlated high-risk paths. No elevated risk signals. Moving on to code review. 🔍 中文说明感谢贡献！ 模板 ✓ — 各部分齐全，包含中英双语说明和 reviewer 测试计划。 问题 — 真实已观测的 bug，不是理论问题：关联 issue #10265 来自社区用户反馈（附截图），0.22.x 上多个 方向 — 对齐。 规模 — 触及 core（ 方案 — 最小且符合既有模式：新增可选 风险 — 改动文件均未命中与 revert 相关的高风险路径。无升级风险信号。 进入代码审查 🔍 — Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max Reviewed at |
Code reviewBefore reading the diff, my own proposal for this problem was: add an optional Verified against the current tree:
No blockers, no convention violations. Tests cover the picker row, preview title, search matching, listing exposure, and latest-objective recovery — 132 test lines against 64 production lines. TestingEvidence from the PR's own CI at the reviewed commit, fetched via the API — no PR code is built or executed in this review. Linux unit suite and Serve A/B were still running at review time; the macOS/Windows platform variants and the integration suite are skipped in this run. No failures so far. The finalize job updates the table below once CI settles. Final CI results for
One row per check name (latest run); skipped checks omitted; failures sort first. / 每个检查名一行（取最新一次运行），省略 skipped，失败项排在最前。 Sandboxed verification would settle the remaining gap: Real-scenario (tmux) testing: not run — unattended CI never executes PR code; the TUI surface is exercised only by the isolated 中文说明代码审查在看 diff 之前，我自己的方案是：给会话列表项加可选 对照当前主干逐项验证：
无阻塞项，无规范违规。测试覆盖列表行、预览标题、搜索匹配、列表字段暴露与最新 objective 恢复——132 行测试对应 64 行生产代码。 测试证据来自该 PR 自身在被审提交上的 CI，经 API 获取——本审查不构建、不运行任何 PR 代码。审查时 Linux 单元测试与 Serve A/B 仍在运行；macOS/Windows 平台变体与集成套件本轮被跳过。目前无失败。CI 落定后 finalize 任务会更新上方表格。 沙箱验证可以补上剩余缺口： 真实场景（tmux）测试：未执行——无人值守 CI 从不运行 PR 代码；TUI 表面仅由上述隔离的 — Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max Reviewed at |
|
Confidence: 5/5 — clean across every stage; would merge without hesitation once CI lands. Stepping back: the problem is observed and specific (community report with screenshot, issue #10265), the solution is exactly the minimal approach I'd have proposed independently — an optional field, populated lazily through the same bounded reader The only reservations are inherent to the established bounded-read pattern this PR correctly reuses (windowed reads trade completeness for picker latency), not defects of this diff. CI at the reviewed commit is still in flight (Linux unit suite and Serve A/B; security checks already green), so approval is deferred until CI lands green on 中文说明置信度：5/5 — 各阶段均干净；CI 一通过即可毫不犹豫合入。 整体复盘：问题真实且具体（社区反馈附截图，issue #10265）；方案与我独立提出的最小做法完全一致——新增可选字段，经由 唯一的保留意见来自该 PR 正确复用的既有有界读取模式的固有取舍（以选择器延迟优先于完备性），并非本 diff 的缺陷。 被审提交上的 CI 仍在进行（Linux 单元测试与 Serve A/B；安全检查已通过），因此在 CI 于 — Qwen Code · qwen3.8-max Reviewed at |
🩺 serve daemon A/BBuilt the PR base vs this PR head ✅ No response changes against the PR base across 12 scenario(s). — Qwen Code · serve A/B |
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, looks ready to ship — CI landed green after the review. ✅
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.2)
…d label Review findings on QwenLM#10295: - R1-1 (Critical): the tail scan kept the last `objective` found on ANY `goal_state` line, so a `/goal clear` record — which persists `goal: null` and no objective at all — left the picker labelling the session with the goal the user had just cleared. `readLastMatchingLineFieldSync` reads the field from the LAST marker-carrying line instead, so the newest lifecycle record decides even when it omits the field. Its miss is now three-way: only `absent` (whole file scanned) lets the records fallback speak. A head-window hit is gone entirely — for a file bigger than the window it would resurrect a create record with an unknown number of later lifecycle records out of reach, and the parsed records are that same oldest slice of the file, so the honest answer there is no label. - R1-5: the pasted-twice policy block is now one `resolveGoalObjective` helper called from both `listSessions` and `getSessionListItem`. - R1-2/R1-3/R1-4/R1-7: tests for the legacy recovery arm, the prompt/title suppression guard at both producers, the `getSessionListItem` wiring, and the production file scan itself — the last one drives a real transcript whose goal record sits past the ten lines the records fallback parses, which is the only shape where a dead marker cannot hide behind it. The spy-based "prefers the latest objective" test is gone; it asserted the spy, not the code. - R1-6: the other four label surfaces stay as they are; the asymmetry is now a documented decision on `SessionListItem.goalObjective` rather than an accident, with the shape a follow-up would take. Mutation-verified: reverting the read to "last objective on any goal_state line" reddens 3; letting the records fallback answer an out-of-window scan reddens 1; a marker typo or a renamed field reddens 1 and 4; dropping the suppression guard reddens 3; dropping the `getSessionListItem` wiring or the legacy arm reddens 1 each. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VXsC4f71S6U6YkW82NRw7m
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.2)
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed. Suggestions are inline.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
Deferred under the convergence posture (round 3, not a blocker) — recorded, not requested in this round:
packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts:330 — [review] New reader inverts the sibling (key, marker) parameter order
Convergence: round 3 posted 2 inline comment(s), 2 of them reported for the first time; the previous round posted 8 (8 new). Findings keep coming back to the same files: packages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts (findings in round 2; 1 more now); packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts (findings in round 2; 1 more now). A cluster that keeps producing siblings usually means the fixes are treating instances of a shared root cause — triaging that cause before the next round, or splitting an independent cluster into its own pull request, tends to end the loop faster than fixing them one at a time. No Critical finding is open on this round, so merging and moving the remaining Suggestion threads to a follow-up issue is available as an ending — a merged pull request cannot diverge further. (Observation only — nothing was withheld from this review because of this observation.)
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。 建议见行内评论。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
收敛姿态下延后（第 3 轮，非阻断）——已记录，本轮不要求修改：共 1 条（原文未翻译，列表见上方英文部分）。
收敛情况：第 3 轮发布了 2 条行内评论，其中 2 条是首次提出；上一轮发布了 8 条（其中 8 条首次提出）。发现反复回到同一批文件：packages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts（第 2 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 1 条）；packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts（第 2 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 1 条）。一个不断再生兄弟发现的簇，通常意味着逐条修复只在处理同一根因的实例——先定位并处理该根因，或把独立的簇拆成单独的 PR，通常比逐条修复更快结束循环。本轮没有未决的 Critical，因此"合入后把剩余 Suggestion 线程转到后续 issue"是一个可选的结束方式——已合入的 PR 不会继续发散。（仅为观察——本轮评审未因此扣留任何内容。）
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.2)
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed.
1 Suggestion-level finding(s) this review confirmed are already reported on this PR and are not repeated:
- Parameter-order inversion of readLastMatchingLineFieldSync / extractJsonStringFieldFromLastMatchingLine (marker before key, siblings are key-first) — already reported in the round-3 deferral list (review 5054292672)
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
Convergence: round 4 posted 4 inline comment(s), 4 of them reported for the first time; the previous round posted 2 (2 new). Findings keep coming back to the same files: packages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts (findings in round 3; 2 more now); packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts (findings in round 2; 2 more now). The rate of new findings is not falling. A cluster that keeps producing siblings usually means the fixes are treating instances of a shared root cause — triaging that cause before the next round, or splitting an independent cluster into its own pull request, tends to end the loop faster than fixing them one at a time. Batching the remaining fixes and verifying them before the next push, or dropping this PR's reviews to --severity-floor critical, keeps the loop from re-deriving the same set. (Observation only — nothing was withheld from this review because of this observation.)
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。
本轮确认的 1 条建议级发现已在 PR 上报告过，不再重复发布（列表见上方英文部分）。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
收敛情况：第 4 轮发布了 4 条行内评论，其中 4 条是首次提出；上一轮发布了 2 条（其中 2 条首次提出）。发现反复回到同一批文件：packages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts（第 3 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 2 条）；packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts（第 2 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 2 条）。新发现的产出速度没有下降。一个不断再生兄弟发现的簇，通常意味着逐条修复只在处理同一根因的实例——先定位并处理该根因，或把独立的簇拆成单独的 PR，通常比逐条修复更快结束循环。把剩余修复攒成一批、验证后再推送，或将本 PR 的评审降到 --severity-floor critical，可以避免循环反复推导同一组发现。（仅为观察——本轮评审未因此扣留任何内容。）
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.3)
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed. Suggestions are inline.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
Not reviewed: test-efficacy probing — all probes inconclusive (harnessValidated: null; the probe runner tripped the repo's vitest prerequisite guard), neither validated nor refuted.
Convergence: round 5 posted 3 inline comment(s), 3 of them reported for the first time; the previous round posted 4 (4 new). Findings keep coming back to the same files: packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts (findings in round 4; 2 more now). A cluster that keeps producing siblings usually means the fixes are treating instances of a shared root cause — triaging that cause before the next round, or splitting an independent cluster into its own pull request, tends to end the loop faster than fixing them one at a time. (Observation only — nothing was withheld from this review because of this observation.)
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。 建议见行内评论。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
未审查：test-efficacy probing — all probes inconclusive (harnessValidated: null; the probe runner tripped the repo's vitest prerequisite guard), neither validated nor refuted。
收敛情况：第 5 轮发布了 3 条行内评论，其中 3 条是首次提出；上一轮发布了 4 条（其中 4 条首次提出）。发现反复回到同一批文件：packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts（第 4 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 2 条）。一个不断再生兄弟发现的簇，通常意味着逐条修复只在处理同一根因的实例——先定位并处理该根因，或把独立的簇拆成单独的 PR，通常比逐条修复更快结束循环。（仅为观察——本轮评审未因此扣留任何内容。）
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.3)
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
qwen-code-ci-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed — gaps disclosed.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally.
Not reviewed: build-and-test — Test (macos-latest, Node 22.x) and Test (windows-latest, Node 22.x) unit matrices were skipped in CI; unit suites ran on Linux only.
Not reviewed: test-efficacy probing — all probes inconclusive (harnessValidated: null; the probe runner tripped the repo's vitest prerequisite guard), neither validated nor refuted.
Deferred under the convergence posture (round 6, not a blocker) — recorded, not requested in this round:
packages/core/src/services/sessionService.test.ts:7317 — [review] Negative goal tests never assert the session item existspackages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts:327 — [review] Brace-recovery fallback's positive path has no testpackages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts:1985 — [review] The records-recovery 'none' branch is unpinnedpackages/core/src/services/sessionService.ts:1768 — [review] Whole-file inference rests on an undocumented cross-module invariantpackages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts:15 — [review] Production consumer of a 'unit tests only' export
Convergence: round 6 posted 1 inline comment(s), 1 of them reported for the first time; the previous round posted 3 (3 new). Findings keep coming back to the same files: packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts (findings in rounds 4, 5; 1 more now). A cluster that keeps producing siblings usually means the fixes are treating instances of a shared root cause — triaging that cause before the next round, or splitting an independent cluster into its own pull request, tends to end the loop faster than fixing them one at a time. (Observation only — nothing was withheld from this review because of this observation.)
中文说明
仅完成部分审查，审查缺口已披露。
未审查：build-and-test — Integration Tests (CLI, No Sandbox) was skipped in CI and its suite did not run locally。
未审查：build-and-test — Test (macos-latest, Node 22.x) and Test (windows-latest, Node 22.x) unit matrices were skipped in CI; unit suites ran on Linux only。
未审查：test-efficacy probing — all probes inconclusive (harnessValidated: null; the probe runner tripped the repo's vitest prerequisite guard), neither validated nor refuted。
收敛姿态下延后（第 6 轮，非阻断）——已记录，本轮不要求修改：共 5 条（原文未翻译，列表见上方英文部分）。
收敛情况：第 6 轮发布了 1 条行内评论，其中 1 条是首次提出；上一轮发布了 3 条（其中 3 条首次提出）。发现反复回到同一批文件：packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.ts（第 4、5 轮已出过发现，本轮又有 1 条）。一个不断再生兄弟发现的簇，通常意味着逐条修复只在处理同一根因的实例——先定位并处理该根因，或把独立的簇拆成单独的 PR，通常比逐条修复更快结束循环。（仅为观察——本轮评审未因此扣留任何内容。）
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.3)
| let markerOffset = line.lastIndexOf(lineContains); | ||
| while (markerOffset >= 0) { | ||
| const recordStart = line.lastIndexOf('{', markerOffset); | ||
| if (recordStart >= 0 && line[recordStart - 1] !== ':') { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Critical] R5-1: (fix-induced) [certifies-falsely] [new-surface] The torn/glued-line Goal recovery in extractJsonStringFieldFromLastMatchingLine keeps producing new corners: four successive rounds patched siblings of this surface (byte discriminator, structural predicate, suffix-first ordering, fragment rejection), and the round-6 commit that closed R5-1's input opened a new entrance at the same loop, so this finding is carried forward under R5-1's id. The : guard added in 9265a95de2 cannot tell a goal_state fragment nested inside a torn record from a complete record glued after a torn prefix, and the scan still penetrates to older lines when the newest marker cannot be attributed. Entrance (1), opened by the R5-1 fix itself: a /goal clear record glued onto a torn prefix that ends right at a key's colon (e.g. {"type":"system","subtype":"note","systemPayload": followed directly by the clear record) has its opening { rejected by this guard, _recoverObjectsFromLine recovers nothing because the torn brace keeps depth ≥ 1, and the scan falls through to the older create record — a session whose Goal the user cleared is labelled with the cleared objective in the /resume picker (row, preview, and search), via both listSessions and getSessionListItem. Before this guard existed the clear's suffix parsed and answered matched-undefined, so the resurrection does not fire at the round-5 head. Entrance (2): a goal_state-shaped object nested in an array inside a torn non-Goal record (..."items":[{"type":"system","subtype":"goal_state","objective":"injected"}] cut at the element's }) passes the guard — { preceded by [ — parses, satisfies the shallow top-level predicate, and labels a prompt-less session with fabricated model text; the authoritative parseGoalStateRecordPayloadV2 reader rejects the same fragment, so the two readers disagree.
Witness:
Probe over committed code, end-to-end through the real SessionService:
entrance 1 ENTRANCE1_SERVICE_LIST {"exists":true,"prompt":"","goalObjective":"Write the release notes"} <- cleared goal resurrected
entrance 2 ENTRANCE2_SERVICE_LIST {"exists":true,"prompt":"","goalObjective":"injected"} <- fabricated label
control (pinned torn-mid-string shape) CONTROL_FUNCTION {"matched":true} (value undefined)
minimal fail-closed candidate patch -> entrance 1 unlabelled, all 74 committed sessionStorageUtils tests green
Close it structurally rather than entrance by entrance: when the newest marker occurrence cannot be attributed to a standalone record (guard-rejected suffix and empty brace recovery), make that line decisive — answer matched-with-no-value or unmatched — and never penetrate to older lines; additionally interpret parsed candidates with the authoritative goal-payload parser (parseGoalStateRecordPayloadV2 via a caller-supplied callback) instead of the shallow top-level type/subtype predicate plus first-"objective"-string extraction, so the scan can never disagree with recoverGoalFromRecords.
Fix constraint: a clear record must remain matched-with-no-value, never unmatched, or a cleared goal resurrects the previous create's objective (pinned by 'does not resurrect an objective the user cleared'); keep 'rejects a nested marker at the end of a torn containing record' (packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.test.ts) and 'ignores a nested Goal marker in a non-Goal record' (packages/core/src/services/sessionService.test.ts) green; the writer forces snapshot.activity to 'idle' (packages/core/src/services/chatRecordingService.ts:1796), so every record that writer emits today must keep being accepted.
Fix witness: extend the it.each at packages/core/src/services/sessionService.test.ts:7326 ('does not resurrect a clear glued after a %s torn record') with a torn prefix ending in : — it is red at this commit — and add a sessionStorageUtils.test.ts case for a torn record ending in a goal-shaped array element asserting no label — also red at this commit; removing the structural fix must turn them red again.
中文说明
extractJsonStringFieldFromLastMatchingLine 中针对截断/粘连行的 Goal 恢复逻辑不断产生新的漏洞入口：连续四轮修复的都是同一表面的兄弟问题（字节级判别、结构化谓词、后缀优先排序、嵌套片段拒绝），而关闭 R5-1 入口的第 6 轮提交在同一个循环上又打开了一个新入口，因此本发现沿用 R5-1 的编号继续报告。9265a95de2 新增的 : 守卫无法区分"截断记录内部嵌套的 goal_state 片段"与"粘连在截断前缀之后的完整记录"，且当最新 marker 无法归属时扫描仍会穿透到更旧的行。入口 (1)（由 R5-1 修复本身引入）：一条 /goal clear 记录粘连在恰好结束于键冒号的截断前缀之后（如 {"type":"system","subtype":"note","systemPayload": 后直接跟 clear 记录）时，clear 的开括号 { 被该守卫拒绝，_recoverObjectsFromLine 因截断花括号使深度始终 ≥ 1 而恢复不出任何内容，扫描随即回落到更早的 create 记录——用户已清除 Goal 的会话在 /resume 选择器（列表行、预览、搜索）中被标上已清除的 objective，listSessions 与 getSessionListItem 均复现。在该守卫加入之前，clear 的后缀可以正常解析并返回 matched-undefined，第 5 轮代码上不会复活，因此这个入口正是 R5-1 修复打开的。入口 (2)：嵌套在非 Goal 截断记录数组中的 goal_state 形状对象（..."items":[{"type":"system","subtype":"goal_state","objective":"injected"}] 恰在元素 } 处截断）——{ 前驱字符是 [，通过守卫，片段解析成功并满足浅层顶层谓词，使无提示词会话被标上来自模型文本的伪造标签；权威读取器 parseGoalStateRecordPayloadV2 会拒绝同一片段，两个读取器结论不一致。
证据（探针）：在已提交代码上通过真实 SessionService 端到端运行，入口 1 返回 goalObjective: "Write the release notes"（已清除的 goal 被复活），入口 2 返回 goalObjective: "injected"（伪造标签）；对照组（已固定的字符串中部截断形态）正确返回 value 为 undefined；应用最小化的 fail-closed 候选修复后入口 1 不再标记，且 sessionStorageUtils 全部 74 个测试保持绿色。
请从结构上封闭而非逐入口修补：当最新 marker 无法归属到独立记录（后缀被守卫拒绝且花括号恢复为空）时，让该行具有决定性——返回 matched 且无值，或 unmatched——绝不再穿透到更旧的行；同时用权威的 goal 载荷解析器（parseGoalStateRecordPayloadV2，通过调用方提供的回调）替代浅层顶层 type/subtype 谓词加首个 "objective" 字符串提取来解释解析出的候选，使扫描结果永远不会与 recoverGoalFromRecords 分歧。
修复约束：clear 记录必须保持"matched 且无值"，绝不能变成未匹配，否则已清除的 goal 会复活上一条 create 的 objective（由 'does not resurrect an objective the user cleared' 固定）；保持 'rejects a nested marker at the end of a torn containing record'（packages/core/src/utils/sessionStorageUtils.test.ts）与 'ignores a nested Goal marker in a non-Goal record'（packages/core/src/services/sessionService.test.ts）绿色；写入端强制 snapshot.activity 为 'idle'（packages/core/src/services/chatRecordingService.ts:1796），因此该写入器当前产出的所有记录必须继续被接受。
修复验证：在 packages/core/src/services/sessionService.test.ts:7326 的 it.each（'does not resurrect a clear glued after a %s torn record'）中新增以 : 结尾的截断前缀变体——在本提交上是红的——并在 sessionStorageUtils.test.ts 新增截断记录以 goal 形状数组元素结尾的用例、断言不产生标签——在本提交上同样是红的；移除该结构性修复后两者必须重新变红。
— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.22.3)
2 participants
What this PR does
Goal-only sessions now use their persisted Goal objective as the fallback label in the resume picker when no custom title or user prompt exists. The same fallback is used in the preview, and picker search can match the displayed objective. Existing custom-title and prompt precedence remains unchanged.
Why it's needed
Sessions started with
/goalcan contain no ordinary user prompt, so/resumepreviously rendered them as(empty prompt)even though the Goal objective clearly identifies the work. This makes those sessions recognizable and searchable without changing their stored transcript format.Reviewer Test Plan
How to verify
Create a session with
/goal, leave it without a custom title or ordinary prompt, then open/resume. Confirm that the picker row and preview show the latest persisted Goal objective instead of(empty prompt), and that searching for text from the objective finds the session. Also confirm that a custom title still wins over a prompt or Goal objective, and a prompt still wins over the Goal objective.Evidence (Before & After)
Before: Goal-only sessions appeared as
(empty prompt)in the picker and had no useful preview title.After: Goal-only sessions display their latest Goal objective in both locations and can be found by objective text. Automated regression coverage verifies the picker row, preview, search behavior, and latest-objective recovery.
Tested on
Environment (optional)
Node.js 22; targeted core and CLI unit tests, package typechecks, related ESLint checks, and the repository build.
Risk & Scope
Linked Issues
Fixes #10265
中文说明
本 PR 的改动
仅包含 Goal 的会话在没有自定义标题和普通用户提示词时，现在会使用持久化的 Goal objective 作为
/resume选择器中的后备名称。预览区使用同一后备逻辑，选择器搜索也可以匹配当前显示的 objective。原有的自定义标题和提示词优先级保持不变。为什么需要
通过
/goal启动的会话可能没有普通用户提示词，因此/resume之前会把它们显示为(empty prompt)，即使 Goal objective 已经清楚描述了工作内容。此改动让这些会话无需修改存储格式即可被识别和搜索。Reviewer Test Plan
如何验证
使用
/goal创建一个会话，不设置自定义标题，也不添加普通提示词，然后打开/resume。确认选择器行和预览区显示最新持久化的 Goal objective，而不是(empty prompt)；同时确认使用 objective 中的文本搜索可以找到该会话。还应确认自定义标题仍优先于提示词和 Goal objective，提示词仍优先于 Goal objective。前后对比证据
改动前：仅包含 Goal 的会话在选择器中显示为
(empty prompt)，预览区也没有有用的标题。改动后：仅包含 Goal 的会话在选择器和预览区都会显示最新 Goal objective，并可通过 objective 文本搜索。自动化回归测试覆盖了选择器行、预览、搜索行为和最新 objective 的恢复。
测试平台
环境（可选）
Node.js 22；执行了 core 与 CLI 定向单元测试、包级类型检查、相关 ESLint 检查以及仓库构建。
风险与范围
关联 Issue
Fixes #10265