`ui-question`'s node half called `ctx.tools.register` on the host context.
`ScopedLayers.merge()` combines the global layer with the agent's exact-scope
layer, and an unscoped registration lands in the global one — so the tool
reached every agent no matter which preset composed it. `core-web`, sold as
a two-tool benchmark surface, really presented three, and a locally authored
`bash-only` preset presented two.
Rendering a question is a host UI capability; having the tool is an agent
capability, and only a preset decides that. The node half is now empty and
the `tool-ask-user` row moved into the presets that want it. The TUI keeps
its own row, having no presets.
The web composition test now asserts the global tool layer is EMPTY, which
is the invariant that would have caught this: any tool outside a preset
reaches every agent.
Review follow-ups on the presentation intent.
The card claimed any single-question request declaring the intent, then sent one
of two labels — so a producer offering a third option, or a multi-select batch,
lost answers the generic flow would have shown. That contradicts the intent's
own contract, so `planReviewOf` now claims only a binary single choice and
leaves everything else to the flow that can express it.
`ask()` also rejects a plan-review intent on a question with no `detail`: the
intent declares detail IS the plan, and without one a honouring UI asks the
user to approve something invisible. The client keeps its own fallback — it sits
downstream of a wire boundary — but the misconfiguration now fails at the asker.
`planReviewOf` stops being a value export of the client contract face (client
export discipline: pure helpers stay internal; the tests already import it
relatively), and the ui-question README fallback list, both languages, now
states every condition the code enforces.
The Web composer now renders a request that declares the `plan-review` intent
as its own surface: the waiting-approval card language — amber "Plan review"
strip, the plan as the scrolling markdown body, the question as the card's
accessible name — over one decision row of Chat about it / Refuse / Approve.
Gone from that surface are the 1/1 pager, the numbered radio rows, the custom
answer row, and Skip/Submit, which made approving a plan read as sitting an
exam.
Approve and Refuse answer with the asker's own option labels and keep its
descriptions as tooltips; Chat about it cancels the request so the composer
returns and the user can simply say what they want. Copy is bilingual under the
existing `question` namespace.
The shape choice lives inside the single composer entry rather than a second
chain registration, so the two surfaces cannot race the same carrier, and
`planReviewOf` falls back to the generic flow for any request it cannot render
as a card — the client sits downstream of a wire boundary and every request
must stay answerable.
The pending question now owns exactly two surfaces: the redesigned
QuestionComposer takeover (footer pager, checkbox multi-select,
always-visible custom input, locale-injected bilingual chrome) collects
the answers, and a dedicated ask_user_question toolview row reports the
interaction outcome — waiting, N/M answered, cancelled (ASK_CANCELLED),
or interrupted with stopped semantics (ASK_ABORTED). PendingCard narrows
to approval waits only. Toolview leading icons and the hover chevron
unify on the tertiary label color, the checklist glyph matches the
14px figma extract, and dev-watch registers CSS modules so css-only
edits rebuild.
Resolution follows the reattachment plan: the #587 wire layer (planMode/
setPlanMode RPC, prompt.planMode, client Session projection fences) is
dropped in favor of the session-projection base now on master; master
structure wins in all shared files. Kept from the PR side: the approval-only
pending filter in ChatView (questions render solely through the composer
takeover) and the auto-merged QuestionComposer improvements. The deleted
host/runtime package and retired test carriers are removed with master.
