fix: correct worktree plan path in merge handler #575
Conversation
The worktree implementation_plan.json path was missing the
.auto-claude/specs/{specId}/ directory structure, causing the
worktree plan to not update after merge operations.
This left tasks stuck in "human_review" in the UI even after
successful merge, because ProjectStore reads the worktree plan
when it exists.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <[email protected]>
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe handlers now place worktree implementation plans under a per-spec directory ( Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (3)apps/frontend/src/**/*.{ts,tsx,jsx}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CLAUDE.md)
Files:
apps/frontend/src/**/*.{ts,tsx}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CLAUDE.md)
Files:
apps/frontend/**/*.{ts,tsx}⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file
Files:
🧠 Learnings (2)📓 Common learnings📚 Learning: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314ZApplied to files:
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts (2)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Summary of ChangesHello @doublefx, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request addresses a critical UI bug that prevented tasks from correctly updating their status after a merge. The underlying problem was an improperly constructed file path for the worktree's implementation plan. By correcting this path, the system can now accurately record and reflect task progress, improving the overall user experience and data consistency. Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request effectively resolves a bug where tasks were getting stuck in the 'human_review' status after a merge operation. The root cause was correctly identified as an incorrect path being used to update the implementation_plan.json file within the worktree. The fix is direct and correct, ensuring the path includes the necessary .auto-claude/specs/{specId}/ directory structure. The change is minimal, well-commented, and directly addresses the problem. The code quality is excellent, and I have no further suggestions.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
apps/frontend/src/**/*.{ts,tsx,jsx}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CLAUDE.md)
Always use i18n translation keys for all user-facing text in the frontend instead of hardcoded strings
Files:
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts
apps/frontend/src/**/*.{ts,tsx}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CLAUDE.md)
Use
useTranslation()hook with namespace prefixes (e.g., 'navigation:items.key') for accessing translation strings in React components
Files:
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts
apps/frontend/**/*.{ts,tsx}
⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file
apps/frontend/**/*.{ts,tsx}: Review React patterns and TypeScript type safety.
Check for proper state management and component composition.
Files:
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: CR
Repo: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314Z
Learning: When submitting PRs to the upstream AndyMik90/Auto-Claude repository, always target the `develop` branch, not `main`
Learnt from: CR
Repo: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314Z
Learning: Use git worktrees for isolated agent builds with branches following the naming pattern `auto-claude/{spec-name}`
Learnt from: CR
Repo: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314Z
Learning: Store project-specific data including specs, plans, and QA reports in `.auto-claude/specs/` directory and add to .gitignore
📚 Learning: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: AndyMik90/Auto-Claude PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-30T16:38:36.314Z
Learning: Use git worktrees for isolated agent builds with branches following the naming pattern `auto-claude/{spec-name}`
Applied to files:
apps/frontend/src/main/ipc-handlers/task/worktree-handlers.ts
- Add fsPromises.mkdir() with recursive: true before writeFile
- Prevents silent ENOENT failures when .auto-claude/specs/{specId} doesn't exist
- Addresses CodeRabbit review comment about missing directory creation
…Auto-Claude into fix/worktree-plan-sync
CodeRabbit Review - Fix AppliedI've addressed the CodeRabbit review comment about missing parent directory creation. Issue Identified by CodeRabbit:The code attempted to write to
Fix Applied (Commit fd94471):// Ensure parent directory exists before writing
await fsPromises.mkdir(path.dirname(planPath), { recursive: true });
await fsPromises.writeFile(planPath, JSON.stringify(plan, null, 2));What this does:
Why the ENOENT handling is still needed: With the Testing:✅ Build succeeds |
3 participants
Base Branch
developbranch (required for all feature/fix PRs)Description
Fixes a bug where tasks remained stuck in "human_review" status in the UI after successful merge operations.
Root cause: The worktree
implementation_plan.jsonpath was missing the.auto-claude/specs/{specId}/directory structure, so the plan update after merge wrote to the wrong location.The fix: Corrects the worktree plan path to include the full spec directory structure:
Related Issue
Type of Change
Area
Checklist
developbranchCI/Testing Requirements
Feature Toggle
Breaking Changes
Breaking: No
Summary by CodeRabbit
Refactor
Bug Fixes
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.