Skip to content

fix: only mark user-set custom titles, not auto ai-titles#13

Merged
brtkwr merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/custom-title-marker
Jun 22, 2026
Merged

fix: only mark user-set custom titles, not auto ai-titles#13
brtkwr merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/custom-title-marker

Conversation

@brtkwr

@brtkwr brtkwr commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

What

The ✎ marker (added in #8) was meant to flag named sessions, but it showed whenever a conversation had any Title. Claude auto-generates an ai-title for almost every session - 215 of 225 files here have one, only 12 have a user-set custom-title - so the marker appeared on ~96% of rows, implying everything was specially named.

Fix

Track IsCustomTitle (true only when the title came from a user-set custom-title) and show the ✎ only for those. ai-titles still display as the TOPIC text - that's the useful part, real session names instead of first messages - just without the marker. So ✎ now honestly means "you named this".

Tests

  • TestParseConversationFileAiTitleNotCustom - an ai-title sets Title but leaves IsCustomTitle false.
  • TestParseConversationFileTitle - a custom-title sets IsCustomTitle true.
  • TestFormatListItemNamedSessionMarker - marker shows for custom, not for ai-title, not for first-message fallback.
  • go test -cover = 70.9%.

Note

Touches the Conversation struct and formatListItem, which the open size-column PR (#12) also touches on nearby lines - they edit different lines so should merge cleanly, but I'll rebase whichever lands second.

The ✎ marker showed whenever a conversation had any Title, but Claude
auto-generates an ai-title for almost every session (215 of 225 files
here), so the marker appeared on nearly every row - implying everything
was a named session.

Track whether the title came from a user-set custom-title and show the
marker only for those. ai-titles still display as the topic text (real
session names instead of first messages), just without the marker, so
✎ now means "you named this".
@brtkwr brtkwr merged commit 921b9c5 into main Jun 22, 2026
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant