Best possible solution:

Land this final Slides table visual slice after maintainer review and clean exact-head checks, preserving the existing revision-locked mutation pattern, generated docs, and live provider coverage.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable as a feature PR. Source inspection and the linked issue show current main lacks the final sizing, border, and cell styling commands that this branch adds.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes. The PR extends the existing Slides table group and shared revision-locked mutation helper rather than adding a parallel path, with focused request tests and live-script coverage for the new surface.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 9f9c2ce4b635.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a bounded user-facing Slides automation feature tied to an open P2 issue with limited blast radius.
• rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🐚 platinum hermit and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: The external-contributor proof gate does not apply because this is a collaborator-authored PR; the body nevertheless reports make ci plus live Slides lifecycle and raw readback verification.

What I checked:

• Repository policy read: AGENTS.md was read fully and applied as read-only PR review guidance, including using gh pr view/diff without switching branches or editing files. (AGENTS.md:1, 9f9c2ce4b635)
• Current main lacks this final command surface: Current main's Slides table command group exposes create, row, column, merge, and unmerge, but has no cell or border subgroup and row/column help still only covers insert/delete. (internal/cmd/slides_table.go:14, 9f9c2ce4b635)
• PR registers the new table visual commands: The PR extends the existing Slides table group with cell and border subcommands and adds row/column sizing under the existing row/column groups. (internal/cmd/slides_table.go:14, 7a8fe5c8f4a9)
• PR implements the requested mutations: The added style implementation builds row minimum-height, column width, cell property/text-style, and table border update requests through the existing revision-locked table mutation path. (internal/cmd/slides_table_style.go:69, 7a8fe5c8f4a9)
• Focused tests cover request shape and revision lock: The added tests verify dry-run request construction for row/column sizing, cell styling, border styling, local validation, and the revision lock on the atomic cell style batch. (internal/cmd/slides_table_style_test.go:16, 7a8fe5c8f4a9)
• Live smoke coverage was extended: The PR extends the Slides live test script to create a table, size row/column dimensions, write and style a cell, style borders, then raw-read provider state to assert the rendered properties. (scripts/live-tests/slides.sh:35, 7a8fe5c8f4a9)

Likely related people:

• steipete: Git blame and log show Peter Steinberger authored the current main Slides table creation and structural table operation commits that this PR extends. (role: recent area contributor; confidence: high; commits: c78e609203f9, 9f9c2ce4b635; files: internal/cmd/slides_table.go, internal/cmd/slides_table_structure.go, docs/slides-tables.md)
• Chris Sanchez: Git history shows Chris Sanchez introduced the Slides insert-text and replace-text command path whose table-cell targeting is part of the broader Slides table surface. (role: introduced related text behavior; confidence: medium; commits: d047a0325f12; files: internal/cmd/slides_insert_text.go, internal/cmd/slides_text_edit.go, internal/cmd/slides.go)
• Chris Parsons: Git history shows Chris Parsons authored earlier merged Slides command surface work, making this a secondary routing signal for Slides CLI patterns. (role: adjacent Slides command contributor; confidence: medium; commits: 8b08d11777fe; files: internal/cmd/slides.go)

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.