fix(cli): show dry-run indicator in message send --dry-run output#80966
Closed
stutea02002-droid wants to merge 8 commits into
Closed
fix(cli): show dry-run indicator in message send --dry-run output#80966stutea02002-droid wants to merge 8 commits into
stutea02002-droid wants to merge 8 commits into
Conversation
- Translate index.md (homepage) - Translate start/getting-started.md (quick start guide) - Translate concepts/features.md (full feature list) These are the first three Chinese documentation pages, covering the most visible entry points for new Chinese-speaking users. Co-Authored-By: AI Assistant <[email protected]>
…, feishu, agent - Translate start/wizard.md (CLI onboarding guide, 3.5KB) - Translate channels/index.md (channels overview, 2.5KB) - Translate channels/feishu.md (Feishu/Lark channel docs, 9.5KB) - Translate concepts/agent.md (agent runtime, 3.3KB) Total 4 new pages covering onboarding, channel setup, Feishu-specific configuration, and agent runtime concepts. Co-Authored-By: AI Assistant <[email protected]>
The `openclaw message send --dry-run` command correctly skipped delivery but printed `✅ Sent via <channel>. Message ID: unknown`, misleading users into thinking a real message was sent. The formatMessageCliText function had a dead branch checking `result.handledBy === dry-run`, but the send/poll path never sets handledBy to dry-run — it always returns core or plugin with a separate `dryRun: true` boolean. Now the dryRun flag is checked first, producing: `[dry-run] would send via slack` Fixes openclaw#80507
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
added
docs
Contributor
|
Thanks for the context here. I swept through the related work, and this is now duplicate or superseded. Close as duplicate/superseded: this PR is now a focused formatter change with useful terminal proof, but the same dry-run send/poll formatter fix is already tracked by the older open canonical PR with focused regression tests. So I’m closing this here and keeping the remaining discussion on the canonical linked item. Review detailsBest possible solution: Keep one canonical implementation on #80604 or a maintainer-chosen replacement, land the formatter fix with regression coverage, and preserve this PR’s terminal proof as supporting context if useful. Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue? Yes. Source inspection on current main shows send and poll dry-runs carry Is this the best way to solve the issue? No for this PR as the merge vehicle. The code direction is right, but the same fix is already under review in the older canonical PR with focused regression tests, so this duplicate branch should close rather than split review across two PRs. Security review: Security review cleared: The diff only changes CLI formatter output logic and does not touch dependencies, workflows, scripts, permissions, secrets, network calls, or package metadata. What I checked:
Likely related people:
Codex review notes: model gpt-5.5, reasoning high; reviewed against efacb918180a. |
clawsweeper
Bot
added
the
proof: sufficient
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
removed
the
proof: sufficient
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
removed
the
docs
Author
|
Removed the zh-CN docs files that were unintentionally carried over from a previous branch. Please re-review. |
clawsweeper
Bot
added
the
proof: sufficient
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
removed
the
proof: sufficient
clawsweeper
Bot
added
the
proof: sufficient
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
removed
the
proof: sufficient
This was referenced Jun 18, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
The
openclaw message send --dry-runcommand correctly skipped delivery but printed✅ Sent via <channel>. Message ID: unknown, misleading users into thinking a real message was sent.The
formatMessageCliTextfunction had a dead branch checkingresult.handledBy === "dry-run", but the send/poll path never sets handledBy to "dry-run" — it always returns "core" or "plugin" with a separatedryRun: trueboolean.Change Type
Scope
Linked Issue
openclaw message send --dry-runprints✅ Sent via <channel>. Message ID: unknown— pretty-text formatter never seeshandledBy: "dry-run"and falls through to the success message #80507What changed
src/commands/message-format.ts: Added aresult.dryRuncheck before the deadhandledBy === "dry-run"branch. When dry-run is true, the output is now:instead of:
Real behavior proof
Before:
$ openclaw message send --channel slack --target channel:C00000FAKE --message test --dry-run ✅ Sent via Slack. Message ID: unknownAfter:
$ openclaw message send --channel slack --target channel:C00000FAKE --message test --dry-run [dry-run] would send via slackSecurity Impact