GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

GeezerVison is showing github.com — refactor(coderd): share chat updates with in-process callers by ethanndickson · Pull Request #30731 · coder/coder

Conversation

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member

An in-process caller (say, a Slack bot) also needs to unarchive a chat before it sends to it, so this adds api.UpdateChatAsUser next to the send and interrupt functions from #30730. Like those, it's a Go method rather than an endpoint, and nothing calls it yet. It runs with the given user's own roles, so it can only do what that user could already do with PATCH /api/v2/chats/{chat}.

Rather than a narrow unarchive helper, it shares the whole PATCH handler body. The handler validates every field before it applies any of them, so a narrow copy would just duplicate that logic. It writes the same audit entry as the endpoint, and the endpoint's behaviour doesn't change.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions

ethanndickson added this pull request to stack #30732

October 14, 2026 01:32

github-actions Bot assigned ethanndickson

Oct 14, 2026

ethanndickson force-pushed the ethanndickson/chat-update-as-user branch from a80d0a5 to bde53ec Compare

October 14, 2026 03:00

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member Author

@codex review

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member Author

@codex security review

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-16T06:40:02.868542Z	`bde53ec`	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-14T03:13:19.501399Z	`bde53ec`	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

Reviewed commit: bde53ec68c

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bde53ec68c

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

You comment "@codex security review"
A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ethanndickson marked this pull request as ready for review

October 16, 2026 06:36

pr-queue-manager Bot requested a review from jakehwll

October 16, 2026 06:47

ethanndickson force-pushed the ethanndickson/chat-update-as-user branch from bde53ec to 88d55e2 Compare

October 19, 2026 03:37

pr-queue-manager Bot requested review from ibetitsmike and removed request for jakehwll

October 19, 2026 07:43

ibetitsmike approved these changes

Oct 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

ethanndickson mentioned this pull request

Oct 19, 2026

feat: serve internal MCP servers to chats in process #29828

Merged

linear-code Bot commented Oct 21, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

CODAGT-1098

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ethanndickson force-pushed the ethanndickson/chat-update-as-user branch 2 times, most recently from 0291dc8 to affbb23 Compare

October 23, 2026 00:25

ethanndickson and others added 4 commits

October 23, 2026 00:54


          refactor(coderd): move the patchChat body into updateChat

757c2a7

Split patchChat like the send handler: checkUpdateChat runs the checks
that come before the body is read, and updateChat validates and applies
the request for a given caller. Both return response errors, so an
in-process caller can share them. The HTTP responses and audit entries
do not change.


          feat(coderd): add UpdateChatAsUser

a6d4fda

UpdateChatAsUser updates a chat as a given user with the checks, errors,
and audit entry of PATCH /api/v2/chats/{chat}. An in-process caller can
then unarchive a chat before it sends a message, as the send endpoint
refuses an archived chat.


          test(coderd): drop in-process update rows that replay shared checks

UnarchiveChatNotArchived replays TestUnarchiveChat/NotArchived through
the shared update body, and UpdateAuditOnFailure already makes the same
call. UnarchiveReadOnlyMember proves more than UnarchiveOtherUsersChat:
it fails when checkUpdateChat is skipped and when the call runs as the
system.


          chore(coderd): trim comments on the in-process chat update path

5fd333a

ethanndickson force-pushed the ethanndickson/chat-update-as-user branch from affbb23 to 5fd333a Compare

October 23, 2026 00:57

ethanndickson merged commit 9d5f0cd into main

Oct 23, 2026

36 of 56 checks passed

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ethanndickson deleted the ethanndickson/chat-update-as-user branch

October 23, 2026 01:53

ethanndickson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Oct 23, 2026


          feat: serve internal MCP servers to chats in process (#29828)

15a160a

This lets coderd give a chat MCP tools that it serves itself, in
process. The first user will be an in-process integration, say a Slack
bot. Nothing uses it yet.

coderd now takes a list of internal MCP servers when it's built, each
with a slug and a `ServerForChat` function. At every step, chatd asks
each one for a server for the chat and connects to it over an in-memory
transport, so the server knows which chat it's serving without any
headers. Nothing is stored on the chat, so the public API doesn't
change, and the chat owner can't remove an internal server.

As only coderd can add one, internal servers ignore the
`chat-inline-mcp-servers` experiment and the
`--disable-chat-caller-supplied-tools` kill switch. Their tools come
straight after the built-in tools, so they win any name clash with
admin, workspace or caller tools. Admin and workspace tools now follow
the same first-wins rule, so the model never sees two tools with the
same name. If `ServerForChat` returns an error, we fail the turn, as we
do when any other read during turn setup fails.

I've put this on top of #30730 and #30731 in the stack. It doesn't need
anything from them, but the Slack bot needs all three.

github-actions Bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators

Oct 23, 2026

Reviewers

ibetitsmike

ibetitsmike approved these changes

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

ethanndickson

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

2 participants

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.

You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.

GeezerVison

Conversation

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026

Uh oh!

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codex Review Summary

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Uh oh!

linear-code Bot commented Oct 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

ethanndickson commented Oct 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.