reply-end-controls/reports/phase1-acceptance-success.md

reply-end-controls - Phase 1 Acceptance Success Report

• Date: 2026-05-13
• Scope: Telegram-only, OpenClaw-backed acceptance
• Environment: openclawtest
• Status: Phase 1 acceptance successful

Acceptance result

Phase 1 acceptance is successful.

The project has now demonstrated, on a real Telegram bot and real Telegram chat, the full core interaction path that Phase 1 required.

What was validated

1. Reply-end buttons appear on assistant replies

A live assistant reply was sent through the rebuilt openclawtest runtime, and the user confirmed that the reply contained the expected reply-end buttons.

2. Continue button flow works end-to-end

For the continue acceptance case:

• the user clicked A. 繼續
• raw callback data was recorded
• state persistence succeeded
• button UI update succeeded
• acknowledgement reply succeeded

Observed persisted state shape:

{
  "864811879": {
    "lastChoice": "continue",
    "lastChoiceAt": "...",
    "sourceMessageId": "47",
    "sourceCallbackId": "...",
    "active": true
  }
}

This proves the full callback-to-state path for continue.

3. Stop button flow works end-to-end

For the stop acceptance case:

• the user clicked B. 就這樣吧，不需要額外處理
• raw callback data was recorded as rec:stop
• state persistence succeeded
• button UI update succeeded
• acknowledgement reply succeeded

Observed persisted state shape:

{
  "864811879": {
    "lastChoice": "stop",
    "lastChoiceAt": "...",
    "sourceMessageId": "49",
    "sourceCallbackId": "...",
    "active": true
  }
}

This proves the full callback-to-state path for stop.

4. Stop state affects later assistant behavior

After the stop state was written, a later inbound message was sent to the assistant.

The resulting assistant reply was visibly more restrained and closing-oriented than before, including language such as:

• 好，我先不打擾你。
• 你先這樣沒問題。

This proves that reply-end state is not merely recorded; it influences later behavior.

Rebuild acceptance also succeeded

Acceptance was not only run on a long-lived patched runtime.

The following was also validated:

1. take pristine openclaw@2026.5.7 runtime files
2. apply the project patch set using the repo scripts
3. restart the OpenClaw gateway
4. verify the reply-end-controls interaction on the live Telegram path

This proves the project has crossed from one-off hand patching into a reproducible acceptance-capable integration flow.

Phase 1 scope satisfied

The original Phase 1 feature goals are now met:

• buttons can be attached to replies
• callback clicks can be received
• callback state can be persisted
• later turns can read the state and alter behavior

Known limitations after acceptance

Phase 1 is accepted, but the feature is not yet fully productized.

Remaining limitations include:

• implementation still depends on runtime patching inside OpenClaw
• stop behavior influences later turns but is not yet maximally strict
• only Telegram is supported
• acceptance still involves some manual verification on Telegram UI

These are valid next-phase concerns, but they do not block Phase 1 acceptance.

Final judgment

Phase 1 is complete and accepted.

Further work should now be treated as next-phase hardening and productization, not as unfinished Phase 1 work.