Only report user messages

coder · code-asher · Jun 13, 2025 · Jun 10, 2025 · Jun 10, 2025 · Jun 11, 2025
commit c8dc0dd7e94e347c331519bd15ff0cbea9e57d3b
diff --git a/cli/exp_mcp.go b/cli/exp_mcp.go
@@ -493,6 +493,9 @@ func (r *RootCmd) mcpServer() *serpent.Command {
 }
 
 func (s *mcpServer) startReporter(ctx context.Context, inv *serpent.Invocation) {
+	// lastMessageID is the ID of the last *user* message that we saw.  A user
+	// message only happens when interacting via the API (as opposed to
+	// interacting with the terminal directly).
 	var lastMessageID int64
 	shouldUpdate := func(item reportTask) codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatusState {
 		// Always send self-reported updates.
@@ -505,18 +508,17 @@ func (s *mcpServer) startReporter(ctx context.Context, inv *serpent.Invocation)
 			codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatusStateFailure:
 			return item.state
 		}
-		// Always send "working" when there is a new message, since this means the
-		// user submitted a message through the API and we know the LLM will begin
-		// work soon if it has not already.
+		// Always send "working" when there is a new user message, since we know the
+		// LLM will begin work soon if it has not already.
 		if item.messageID > lastMessageID {
 			return codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatusStateWorking
 		}
-		// Otherwise, if the state is "working" and there have been no new messages,
-		// it means either that the LLM is still working or it means the user has
-		// interacted with the terminal directly.  For now, we are ignoring these
-		// updates.  This risks missing cases where the user manually submits a new
-		// prompt and the LLM becomes active and does not update itself, but it
-		// avoids spamming useless status updates.
+		// Otherwise, if the state is "working" and there have been no new user
+		// messages, it means either that the LLM is still working or it means the
+		// user has interacted with the terminal directly.  For now, we are ignoring
+		// these updates.  This risks missing cases where the user manually submits
+		// a new prompt and the LLM becomes active and does not update itself, but
+		// it avoids spamming useless status updates.
 		return ""
 	}
 	var lastPayload agentsdk.PatchAppStatus
@@ -599,12 +601,14 @@ func (s *mcpServer) startWatcher(ctx context.Context, inv *serpent.Invocation) {
 						return
 					}
 				case agentapi.EventMessageUpdate:
-					err := s.queue.Push(reportTask{
-						messageID: ev.Id,
-					})
-					if err != nil {
-						cliui.Warnf(inv.Stderr, "Failed to queue update: %s", err)
-						return
+					if ev.Role == agentapi.RoleUser {
+						err := s.queue.Push(reportTask{
+							messageID: ev.Id,
+						})
+						if err != nil {
+							cliui.Warnf(inv.Stderr, "Failed to queue update: %s", err)
+							return
+						}
 					}
 				}
 			case err := <-errCh:

diff --git a/cli/exp_mcp_test.go b/cli/exp_mcp_test.go
@@ -790,11 +790,12 @@ func TestExpMcpReporter(t *testing.T) {
 			}
 		}
 
-		makeMessageEvent := func(id int64) *codersdk.ServerSentEvent {
+		makeMessageEvent := func(id int64, role agentapi.ConversationRole) *codersdk.ServerSentEvent {
 			return &codersdk.ServerSentEvent{
 				Type: ServerSentEventTypeMessageUpdate,
 				Data: agentapi.EventMessageUpdate{
-					Id: id,
+					Id:   id,
+					Role: role,
 				},
 			}
 		}
@@ -813,7 +814,7 @@ func TestExpMcpReporter(t *testing.T) {
 				return
 			}
 			// Send initial message.
-			send(*makeMessageEvent(0))
+			send(*makeMessageEvent(0, agentapi.RoleAgent))
 			listening <- send
 			<-closed
 		}))
@@ -902,13 +903,17 @@ func TestExpMcpReporter(t *testing.T) {
 					URI:     "https://dev.coder.com",
 				},
 			},
-			// Terminal becomes active again according to the screen watcher, but
-			// message length is the same.  This could be the LLM being active again,
-			// but it could also be the user messing around.  We will prefer not
-			// updating the status so the "working" update here should be skipped.
+			// Terminal becomes active again according to the screen watcher, but no
+			// new user message.  This could be the LLM being active again, but it
+			// could also be the user messing around.  We will prefer not updating the
+			// status so the "working" update here should be skipped.
 			{
 				event: makeStatusEvent(agentapi.StatusRunning),
 			},
+			// Agent messages are ignored.
+			{
+				event: makeMessageEvent(1, agentapi.RoleAgent),
+			},
 			// LLM reports that it failed and URI is blank.
 			{
 				state:   codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatusStateFailure,
@@ -923,10 +928,10 @@ func TestExpMcpReporter(t *testing.T) {
 			{
 				event: makeStatusEvent(agentapi.StatusRunning),
 			},
-			// ... but this time the message length has increased so we know there is
-			// LLM activity.  This time the "working" update will not be skipped.
+			// ... but this time we have a new user message so we know there is LLM
+			// activity.  This time the "working" update will not be skipped.
 			{
-				event: makeMessageEvent(1),
+				event: makeMessageEvent(2, agentapi.RoleUser),
 				expected: &codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatus{
 					State:   codersdk.WorkspaceAppStatusStateWorking,
 					Message: "oops",