vscode-cowriting-plugin/sessions/0029/SESSION-0029.0-TRANSCRIPT-2026-06-11T21-32--2026-06-11T21-53.md

Session 0029.0 — Transcript

App: vscode-cowriting-plugin Start: 2026-06-11T21-32 (PST) End: 2026-06-11T21-53 (PST) Type: brainstorming Poster: Ben Stull (with Claude) Posture: autonomous (yolo) Status: FINALIZED

Launch prompt

/goal next   →  (resolved from memory) Brainstorm + write the Solution Design for
Feature #29 — interactive track-changes review in the markdown preview: clean
zero-annotation editor (left) + the rendered markdown preview (right) as the single
review surface; annotations on/off toggle; changes-since-baseline painted
green=human / blue=LLM / strikethrough=deleted; ✓/✗ accept-reject of the LLM's
changes ONLY, driven from inside the preview webview. Markdown-only product (F6
deprecated as a view; rename deferred). Mostly assembly of F3/F4/F6/F7/F9 + 3 new
pieces. Per issue #29.

Pre-state

• Epic #1 shipped (F1–F9 + F7.1). Last work: F7.1 intra-diagram mermaid diff (#22, session 0027), then F9 authorship preview (#27, session 0026).
• #29 (F10) had been captured as a type/feature (P1) in session 0028, with a rich issue body + a draft in the content repo (issues/interactive-markdown-review-preview.md).
• A brainstorming placeholder 0029 had already been claimed at 21:32 (just before a /clear), then the conversation was cleared and reopened with /goal next. Clean main, 0 ahead/0 behind origin.

Session arc (turn-by-turn)

1. Route. /goal next resolved the memory Next /goal: → "brainstorm/spec #29". A Feature needs a Solution Design first (R3) → brainstorming session. Invoked wgl-brainstorming.
2. Adopt, don't duplicate. The claim dry-run surfaced an in-flight 0029 placeholder (Type: brainstorming, same task, claimed 4 min earlier — the orphan from the pre-/clear attempt). Decision: adopt 0029 rather than claim a redundant 0030. Verified clean baseline; CLAUDE.md import present; resolved app (content repo present, no BDD corpus).
3. Orient. Read issue #29's content-repo draft, the F7 rendered-preview spec (coauthoring-rendered-preview.md, incl. §11 F7.1), the F9 authorship spec (2026-06-11-authorship-preview-design.md), and dispatched an Explore agent that mapped every code seam (F3 decorations + spansFor; F7 renderTrackChanges/renderAuthorship/renderOp; F4 accept/reject → applyAgentEdit; F6 baseline + onDidChangeBaseline; webview postMessage/setMode; commands/keybindings; tests).
4. Found the crux. F9 had explicitly rejected combining authorship with the diff (INV-26: "two modes, never combined"); #29 reverses that. And the issue is internally inconsistent: F4 ships propose-by-default (LLM edits stay pending, not in the buffer), yet the issue says blue = "changes since the baseline" and "✗ reverts the document" — wording that imagines LLM text already in the buffer.
5. Resolved the forks with the operator (superpowers:brainstorming process):
   • Linchpin — where do the LLM's ✓/✗ changes come from? → Proposals surface in the preview (keep propose-by-default; ✓ = F4 accept + baseline advance, ✗ = F4 reject). [vs. apply-then-review / both-axes.]
   • Clean-editor scope → fully clean (strip F3 attribution and F4 proposal threads; proposals become preview-only).
   • F6 disposition → hide command + keybinding (when:false); keep controller + baseline data layer.
6. Two follow-ons decided autonomously (logged): status-bar indicator (not forced auto-open) for proposal-while-no-preview; remove F9's dead renderAuthorship/segmented control (salvage the PUA-sentinel coloring into a shared colorByAuthor); neutral strikethrough for deletions.
7. Presented the design, then (autonomous) wrote the Solution Design: specs/coauthoring-interactive-review.md (v0.1.0) — architecture (one pure renderReview overlaying diff + author sentinels + proposal blocks; interactive sealed webview posting intent to the F4 seam), INV-32/33/34, 4 slices, host-E2E tier. Self-reviewed (no placeholders; INV numbering continues from F7.1's 29–31 / F9's 26–28; issue-wording reconciliation stated explicitly).
8. Finalized (this skill): submitted the spec graduated to the content repo; updated memory; published this transcript.

Cut state

• Deliverable: specs/coauthoring-interactive-review.md (F10, v0.1.0) → submitted graduated to vscode-cowriting-plugin-content/specs/ (commit 118bc29).
• Code: none (brainstorming session — no implementation).
• Memory: new f10-interactive-review-spec-graduated.md + index + Next /goal:.
• Working tree: clean main apart from this transcript and the untracked specs/ scratch (the submitted spec + the pre-existing stray F8 spec).

Deferred decisions

Autonomous-mode low-confidence calls the driver made and would have liked operator input on.

• Proposal-while-no-preview affordance → status-bar indicator (clickable to open), rather than forcing the preview to auto-open. Respects "write left, review right"; cheap to flip to auto-open. (Spec §6.7, §9.)
• F9's now-dead renderAuthorship + segmented control → removed (not left dormant), salvaging the PUA-sentinel author-coloring into a shared colorByAuthor helper renderReview reuses. (Spec §6.2, §9.)
• Deletions → neutral strikethrough (not author-colored), per the issue's "strikethrough = deleted". (Spec §6.7.)

Operator plate (loose ends to be aware of)

• Session 0024 unfinalized — still open from F8 work; not touched here.
• Stray specs/coauthoring-out-of-workspace.md (already-graduated F8 spec) sits untracked in the CODE repo; left untouched (submit-spec took only the F10 file). A deliberate cleanup PR can remove it.

Next-session prompt

/goal plan-and-execute #29 (F10 interactive review) per vscode-cowriting-plugin-content/specs/coauthoring-interactive-review.md — write the implementation plan from §7 (SLICE-1 clean editor → SLICE-2 renderReview engine → SLICE-3 interactive controller+webview → SLICE-4 tests/docs) and execute; host-E2E tier, no deploy pipeline (extension, no flotilla)