Skip to content

[FEATURE]: Tab to extend a question option into a custom answer #38295

Closed as not planned

Description

@matthewadem

Feature hasn't been suggested before.

  • I have verified this feature I'm about to request hasn't been suggested before.

The closest existing issues (#30028, #34476) target different mechanisms — see "Relationship to existing issues" below.

Describe the enhancement you want to request

Problem

The question prompt lets you pick an option verbatim, or start a blank "Type your own answer". But very often the right answer is "basically option 1, but…". Today that means ignoring the presented option and retyping the whole thing in the custom field.

Proposed solution

Let people extend a highlighted option in place. Highlight an option, press Tab, and it opens for inline editing seeded with "<label>, ", cursor at the end, so you just add the qualifier.

Do you want to use Three.js to create your app?
> 1. Yes            ── Tab ──▶   1. Yes, ▌   ◀ type the rest
  2. No                          2. No
  3. Chat about it               3. Chat about it

Enter commits the extended answer (e.g. Yes, but only for certain parts of it); Esc cancels.

Behavior (all open to change)

  • Tab on a concrete option → edit in place, prefilled with "<label>, ".
  • Tab still switches questions when on the "Type your own answer" row or the Confirm tab (multi-question prompts).
  • Only enabled when the question allows custom answers (custom !== false).
  • Reuses the existing custom-answer submit path; result is delivered as a custom answer string.
  • Mouse hover no longer moves the selection while editing, so an in-progress edit can't be relocated.

Relationship to existing issues

Status

Working implementation, single file (packages/tui/src/routes/session/question.tsx), passing bun typecheck (whole workspace) and oxlint. Happy to open a PR once the interaction is blessed.

Per CONTRIBUTING.md, raising this for design review before implementation. Preferences welcome on: the key binding (Tab vs. other), submit semantics, and behavior for multi-select questions.

Activity

  1. github-actions commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    This issue doesn't fully meet our contributing guidelines.

    What needs to be fixed:

    • The title should start with [FEATURE]: for feature requests (e.g. [FEATURE]: Tab to extend a question option into a custom answer)
    • The Feature Request template requires a verification checkbox confirming the feature hasn't been suggested before

    Please edit this issue to address the above within 2 hours, or it will be automatically closed.


    This issue might be a duplicate of existing issues. Please check:


    For keybind-related issues, please also check our pinned keybinds documentation: #4997

    If you believe this was flagged incorrectly, please let a maintainer know.

  2. changed the title [-]Proposal: Tab to extend a question option into a custom answer[/-] [+][FEATURE]: Tab to extend a question option into a custom answer[/+] on Jul 22, 2026
  3. github-actions commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    Thanks for updating the issue — it now follows the contributing guidelines. The needs:compliance label has been removed. Looking forward to a potential PR!

  4. github-actions commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    Thanks for updating the issue! It now follows the contributing guidelines and looks good. We'll take a look at the feature request.

  5. github-actions commented on Sep 21, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    To stay organized issues are automatically closed after 60 days of no activity. If the issue is still relevant please open a new one.

  6. antonio-ivanovski commented on Oct 26, 2026

    @antonio-ivanovski

    This solves a different half of the problem than #48820: it lets me qualify one chosen option, but not add context that applies to the whole answer set, which is my common case with multi-question prompts. Both are worth having, but I'd ship the request-level note first.

    The prefill with "<label>, " is a nice touch — retyping the label is the main annoyance today.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions