Work/rlm c6s approval UI

[zenchantlive]

🐢 Turtlez Pull Request

Type: [feat | fix | chore | docs | refactor]
Scope: [ui | backend | engine | infra]

Story of Collaboration

Decisions Made

Challenges

Verification Results

• bun run lint passes
• tsc --noEmit passes
• Unit tests pass
• E2E tests pass (if applicable)

---

This PR acts as a page in our project notebook.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[openhands-ai]

Looks like there are a few issues preventing this PR from being merged!

• GitHub Actions are failing:
  • CI

If you'd like me to help, just leave a comment, like

@OpenHands please fix the failing actions on PR #4 at branch `work/rlm-c6s-approval-ui`

Feel free to include any additional details that might help me get this PR into a better state.

_{^{You can manage your notification settings}}

[qodo-free-for-open-source-projects]

CI Feedback 🧐

(Feedback updated until commit fc972e6)

A test triggered by this PR failed. Here is an AI-generated analysis of the failure:

Action: build

Failed stage: Lint [❌]

Failed test name: ""

Failure summary: The action failed during bun run lint because ESLint reported 5 errors (and 7 warnings) and the lint script exited with code 1. ESLint errors were all @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any violations (“Unexpected any. Specify a different type”) at: - rlm-chat/scripts/maintenance/purge-todo-bias.ts:10:113 - rlm-chat/scripts/repro/test-vault-isolation.ts:28:25 and 38:25 - rlm-chat/src/lib/db/context-store.ts:836:18 - rlm-chat/src/lib/runtime/tool-runtime.ts:245:25 There were also @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars warnings, but the job failed because of the lint errors, not the warnings.

Relevant error logs: 1: ##[group]Runner Image Provisioner 2: Hosted Compute Agent ... 154: + autoprefixer@10.4.23 155: + better-sqlite3@12.6.2 156: + diff@8.0.3 157: + lucide-react@0.563.0 158: + next@16.1.4 159: + react@19.2.3 160: + react-dom@19.2.3 161: 445 packages installed [2.42s] 162: ##[group]Run cd rlm-chat 163: �[36;1mcd rlm-chat�[0m 164: �[36;1mbun run lint�[0m 165: shell: /usr/bin/bash -e {0} 166: ##[endgroup] 167: $ eslint 168: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/scripts/maintenance/purge-todo-bias.ts 169: ##[error] 10:113 error Unexpected any. Specify a different type @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any 170: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/scripts/repro/test-vault-isolation.ts 171: ##[error] 28:25 error Unexpected any. Specify a different type @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any 172: ##[error] 38:25 error Unexpected any. Specify a different type @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any 173: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/src/app/api/sandbox/[...path]/route.ts 174: ##[warning] 1:23 warning 'NextResponse' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 175: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/src/components/status/ProjectHub.tsx 176: ##[warning] 94:13 warning 'loadFile' is assigned a value but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 177: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/src/lib/db/context-store.ts 178: ##[error] 836:18 error Unexpected any. Specify a different type @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any 179: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/src/lib/engine/rlm-engine.ts 180: ##[warning] 3:10 warning 'readFile' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 181: ##[warning] 4:10 warning 'resolveSandboxPath' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 182: ##[warning] 12:5 warning 'ROOT_SYSTEM_PROMPT' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 183: /home/runner/work/Turtlez/Turtlez/rlm-chat/src/lib/runtime/tool-runtime.ts 184: ##[error] 245:25 error Unexpected any. Specify a different type @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any 185: ##[warning] 390:33 warning 'sessionId' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 186: ##[warning] 422:37 warning 'sessionId' is defined but never used @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars 187: ✖ 12 problems (5 errors, 7 warnings) 188: error: script "lint" exited with code 1 189: ##[error]Process completed with exit code 1. 190: Post job cleanup.

[zenchantlive]

@openhands-agent review this for prompting and tooloing logic

[zenchantlive]

@OpenHands review this for prompting and tooloing logic

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @zenchantlive, 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 significantly advances the RLM Chat System by transforming it into a more robust and controllable agentic coding environment. It introduces comprehensive multi-project support, enforces a strict sandbox for all agent operations, and integrates a full-featured code editor and file explorer directly into the user interface. These changes are designed to improve agent reliability, provide users with greater transparency and control over the development process, and ensure system stability through hardened architectural patterns.

Highlights

• Approval UI Enhancement: Introduced a refined approval gate UI for user-in-the-loop workflows, featuring shared workspace state, 'Edit' button navigation to relevant files, and a 'Request Changes' feedback mechanism to guide agent planning.
• Multi-Project Support & Sandbox Enforcement: Implemented robust multi-project capabilities and a strict sandbox environment for agent operations. All file system interactions are now confined to a dedicated 'workspace/' directory, enhancing security and isolating agent-generated code from the core application.
• Integrated Code Editor & File Explorer: Integrated the Monaco Editor and a file tree component into the UI, allowing users to directly view and edit files within the agent's workspace. This provides immediate transparency and control over the agent's output.
• Enhanced File System Tools with Diff Persistence: The agent now utilizes advanced file system tools (read_file, write_file, list_files) that persist changes as Git-like unified diffs in the context store. This creates a high-fidelity, auditable history of all code modifications.
• Database-Backed Task Registry: Transitioned from a soft TODO.md checklist to a hard database-backed task registry. This enforces a structured engineering lifecycle (Specs -> Plans -> Tasks) and provides the agent with a clear, persistent mission, reducing hallucination loops.
• Approval Gate Remediation: Addressed and verified fixes for critical bugs in the approval gate's path normalization and status detection logic, ensuring reliable gating for agent-generated specifications and plans.

🧠 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 Assist

The 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 /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

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 .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

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

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[openhands-ai]

I'm on it! zenchantlive can track my progress at all-hands.dev

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a significant set of features, transforming the application into a more robust and capable agentic development environment. The introduction of a dedicated workspace, project management, a task registry, and an approval gate UI are major steps forward. The code quality is generally high, with good use of modern React patterns and a clear focus on security through sandboxing. I've identified a critical bug in the tool dispatch logic and a high-risk database migration strategy that need attention. Additionally, there are a few opportunities to improve consistency and encapsulation.

[gemini-code-assist]

There are duplicate switch cases for read_file and write_file in the dispatchToolCall method. The first set of cases (lines 601-631) contains special logic for TODO.md, while this second set are generic implementations. Due to the nature of a switch statement, this block of code is unreachable and should be removed to avoid confusion and future maintenance issues.

[gemini-code-assist]

This migration is destructive as it uses DROP TABLE (also on lines 54 and 83) which will result in the loss of all existing data in the sessions, context_entries, and run_traces tables. While the comment "Data is not preserved per user request" suggests this might be intentional for a development environment, this is a high-risk approach.

For any environment with valuable data, a non-destructive migration using ALTER TABLE to add the project_id column and then backfilling the data would be required. Please confirm that this data loss is acceptable for all target environments before merging.

[gemini-code-assist]

The syncTaskRegistryToDisk method directly accesses the raw database connection via this.contextStore.rawDb. This breaks the encapsulation of the ContextStore, which should ideally be the sole manager of database interactions.

To maintain a clean separation of concerns, consider adding a dedicated method to ContextStore, such as getTaskSummaries(projectId: string), that performs this query and returns the structured data. This would keep all SQL logic within the db layer.

[gemini-code-assist]

When a user edits a file via the UI, this POST handler logs a system_meta entry with a simple character count difference. However, when the agent edits a file via the write_file tool, a much more informative unified diff is generated and stored as a file_diff entry. This creates an inconsistency in how file changes are audited.

For a more consistent and powerful audit trail, I recommend refactoring this block to use the DiffService (similar to how tool-runtime.ts does it) to generate a proper unified diff for user edits. The entry type should also be file_diff to align with agent-based edits.

[openhands-ai]

Code Review: PR #4 - Work/rlm c6s approval-ui

Summary

This PR introduces significant tooling enhancements including a shell execution capability (run_shell), migration from file-based to API-based task management, and improved sandbox file serving. While the changes demonstrate good architectural intent, there are critical security vulnerabilities in the shell execution implementation that must be addressed before merging.

---

🔴 Critical Issues

Issue: Command Injection Vulnerability in run_shell

Location: rlm-chat/src/lib/runtime/tool-runtime.ts:212-247

Impact: The command whitelist is trivially bypassable. An attacker can execute arbitrary shell commands by passing them as arguments to whitelisted commands.

Problematic Code:

const ALLOWED_COMMANDS = ['node', 'bun', 'npm', 'ls', 'cat', 'mkdir', 'dir'];
const baseCommand = command.split(' ')[0];

if (!ALLOWED_COMMANDS.includes(baseCommand)) {
    return { error: `Command '${baseCommand}' is not allowed...` };
}
// ... executes command directly

Attack Vector:

run_shell({ command: "node -e 'require(\"child_process\").exec(\"rm -rf /\")'" })
run_shell({ command: "bun -e \"Deno.execSync('rm -rf /')\"" })
run_shell({ command: "npm exec -- echo h4cked" })

Fix:

// Option 1: Remove run_shell entirely - it's inherently dangerous
// Option 2: Implement strict argument validation
const SAFE_PATTERNS = {
    'node': /^node\s+(?:--version|-v)$/,
    'bun': /^bun\s+(?:--version|-v)$/,
    'npm': /^npm\s+(?:--version|-v|run|ci)$/,
    'ls': /^ls\s+[-laR0-9\/.\w\s-]+$/,
    'cat': /^cat\s+[\/\w.-]+$/,
    'mkdir': /^mkdir\s+[-p]?\s+[\/\w.-]+$/,
    'dir': /^dir\s+[\/\w.-]*$/,
};

if (!SAFE_PATTERNS[baseCommand]?.test(command)) {
    return { error: 'Command pattern not allowed' };
}

Why: The current implementation provides a false sense of security. A whitelist that only checks the first token is equivalent to no security control for shell commands.

---

Issue: Missing Input Validation in Task API Integration

Location: rlm-chat/src/components/status/ProjectHub.tsx:140-153

Impact: Potential for race conditions and stale data issues during optimistic updates.

Problematic Code:

// Optimistic update
setTasks(prev => prev.map(t => t.id === item.id ? { ...t, status: newCompleted ? 'done' : 'pending' } : t));

// Save back to DB
try {
    await apiClient.updateTask(sessionId, item.id, newCompleted);
} catch (err) {
    console.error('Failed to update task:', err);
    // Revert on error
    await refreshTasks();
}

Problems:

1. No validation that item.id exists before update
2. No version/etag check for concurrent modifications
3. Race condition: multiple rapid toggles could cause inconsistent state
4. Error handling only reverts on failure but doesn't show user feedback

Fix:

const handleToggleTodo = async (item: TaskItem) => {
    if (!sessionId || !item.id) return;
    
    const previousStatus = item.status;
    const newStatus = previousStatus === 'done' ? 'pending' : 'done';
    
    // Optimistic update with validation
    setTasks(prev => {
        const target = prev.find(t => t.id === item.id);
        if (!target || target.status !== previousStatus) return prev;
        return prev.map(t => t.id === item.id ? { ...t, status: newStatus } : t);
    });

    try {
        await apiClient.updateTask(sessionId, item.id, newStatus === 'done');
    } catch (err) {
        // Revert with toast notification
        await refreshTasks();
        showToast('Failed to update task', 'error');
    }
};

---

🟠 High Priority

Issue: Incomplete Sandbox Path Resolution

Location: rlm-chat/src/app/api/sandbox/[...path]/route.ts:35-42

Impact: Potential path traversal if resolveSandboxPath implementation is flawed or if project.rootPath is user-controlled.

Code:

const projectId = request.nextUrl.searchParams.get('projectId');
let rootPath = '.';

if (projectId) {
    const store = getContextStore();
    const project = store.getProject(projectId);
    if (project) {
        rootPath = project.rootPath;
    }
}

const fullPath = resolveSandboxPath(relativePath, rootPath);

Concerns:

1. No validation that projectId is a valid UUID or matches expected format
2. If project.rootPath can be set by users, path traversal is possible
3. Missing null check on project before accessing rootPath

Fix:

const projectId = request.nextUrl.searchParams.get('projectId');
if (!projectId) {
    return new Response('projectId required', { status: 400 });
}

// Validate projectId format (UUID v4)
const uuidRegex = /^[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-4[0-9a-f]{3}-[89ab][0-9a-f]{3}-[0-9a-f]{12}$/i;
if (!uuidRegex.test(projectId)) {
    return new Response('Invalid projectId format', { status: 400 });
}

const store = getContextStore();
const project = store.getProject(projectId);
if (!project) {
    return new Response('Project not found', { status: 404 });
}

// Validate rootPath is an absolute path within allowed directory
const rootPath = path.isAbsolute(project.rootPath) 
    ? project.rootPath 
    : path.join(process.cwd(), project.rootPath);

---

Issue: Shell Execution Timeout Hardcoded

Location: `rlm-chat/src/lib/runtime/tool-runtime.ts:228**

Impact: 30-second timeout may be too short for legitimate operations (e.g., npm install), causing false failures.

Code:

const { stdout, stderr } = await execAsync(command, {
    cwd: projectRoot,
    timeout: 30000 // 30s limit
});

Recommendation: Make timeout configurable per command or use different defaults per command type:

const COMMAND_TIMEOUTS: Record<string, number> = {
    'npm': 120000,  // 2 min for installs
    'bun': 120000,
    'node': 30000,
    'ls': 5000,
    'cat': 5000,
    'mkdir': 5000,
    'dir': 5000,
};

const timeout = COMMAND_TIMEOUTS[baseCommand] || 30000;

---

🟡 Medium Priority

Issue: Inconsistent Type Naming

Location: rlm-chat/src/components/status/ProjectHub.tsx:94

Impact: Confusing naming that doesn't match API response structure.

Code:

const [tasks, setTasks] = useState<TaskItem[]>([]);
// ...
const res = await apiClient.getTasks(sessionId);
if (res.success && res.data) {
    setTasks(res.data.tasks);  // Nested property
}

Issue: The state is named tasks but the API returns { tasks: TaskItem[] }. Consider renaming for clarity:

const [taskList, setTaskList] = useState<TaskItem[]>([]);
// or
const [tasks, setTasks] = useState<{ tasks: TaskItem[] }>({ tasks: [] });

---

Issue: Missing Error Boundary for ProjectHub

Location: rlm-chat/src/components/status/ProjectHub.tsx

Impact: Any error in task loading or toggling could crash the entire status panel.

Recommendation: Wrap the component content in an error boundary or add try-catch with graceful degradation:

<TaskErrorBoundary>
    <ProjectHub sessionId={sessionId} ... />
</TaskErrorBoundary>

---

Issue: CSP Headers Too Permissive for Production

Location: rlm-chat/src/app/api/sandbox/[...path]/route.ts:54-57

Code:

'Content-Security-Policy': "default-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval' blob:; img-src 'self' data: blob:;",

Concern: unsafe-inline and unsafe-eval defeat CSP protections. This is acceptable for development but should be tightened for production.

Recommendation: Make CSP configurable per environment:

const CSP_DEV = "default-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval' blob:;";
const CSP_PROD = "default-src 'self'; script-src 'self'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline';";

const cspHeader = process.env.NODE_ENV === 'production' ? CSP_PROD : CSP_DEV;

---

⚠️ Test Quality Issues

Missing Tests for Shell Execution

Location: No test file found for tool-runtime.ts

Missing Coverage:

• Command whitelist bypass attempts
• Timeout behavior
• Error handling for non-existent commands
• Working directory validation
• Concurrent execution scenarios

Test Example:

describe('run_shell', () => {
    it('rejects malicious command patterns', async () => {
        const runtime = new ToolRuntime(/* mock deps */);
        
        const result = await runtime.run_shell('session-1', "node -e 'exec(\"rm -rf /\")'");
        expect(result.error).toContain('not allowed');
    });

    it('times out long-running commands', async () => {
        const runtime = new ToolRuntime(/* mock deps */);
        
        const result = await runtime.run_shell('session-1', 'sleep 60');
        expect(result.error).toContain('timeout');
    });
});

Missing Tests for Task State Management

Location: No test file found for ProjectHub.tsx

Missing Coverage:

• Optimistic update rollback on API failure
• Race condition handling
• Empty state rendering
• Session ID validation

---

🟢 Strengths

• Good architectural separation: Moving from file-based TODO.md to API-based task management is a solid improvement for multi-user scenarios
• Proper error handling in ProjectHub: The try-catch with rollback pattern is good
• Security headers: Adding X-Frame-Options and improving CSP shows security awareness
• Context logging: Shell execution results are properly logged to context store for audit trails
• TypeScript usage: Consistent typing throughout changes

---

Next Steps

1. IMMEDIATE: Remove or completely rewrite run_shell with proper command validation
2. HIGH: Add input validation for projectId in sandbox API
3. MEDIUM: Add comprehensive tests for shell execution and task management
4. MEDIUM: Implement error boundaries for ProjectHub
5. LOW: Standardize type naming conventions
6. LOW: Make CSP configurable per environment

View full conversation