Commit Graph
1 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
bermudalambandClaude Opus 5 f42ea70d88 docs(admin): plan background removal in the inventory editor (#293)
Three tasks: the two per-item functions, the endpoints plus a small admin config route, and the button.

The config route is the piece the spec did not anticipate. The inventory screen has no way to learn the feature is configured — GET /api/admin/item-drafts carries that flag for the review queue, but GET /api/admin/items answers a bare array with several consumers, and reshaping it for one boolean is the worse trade. routes/adminVersion.ts is the precedent for exactly this: a small admin-only GET, deliberately not folded into the public /api/config, with the reason written down beside it.

Two decisions the plan pins that the spec left as prose. The render condition is "configured OR every photo already cut out", not the flag alone, because gating on the flag would hide Restore originals the moment REMBG_URL is unset and strand cut-out photos with no way back — the same shape DraftQueue already uses for the same reason. And the button re-reads the item afterwards, because the editor is a modal changing files on the server while it is open, and without that the thumbnails keep showing the previous files and the button looks inert.

Self-review caught the mistake I have now made three times this session, which is naming something that does not exist. Task 3's end-to-end case called createItem(page, { withImage: true }); createItem actually takes an APIRequestContext rather than a page, and CreateItemOptions has no image field at all. Since the control only renders for an item that has photos, the item now gets seeded through the admin API with a real PNG attached, which is a thing that works rather than a thing that reads well.

It also records a spec requirement that is deliberately not implemented as written. The spec asks for an end-to-end assertion that the control is absent when the feature is unconfigured; that would mean restarting the backend mid-suite, which the run has no way to do and should not gain one. It is covered where it can be, in the integration test for GET /api/admin/config, and the plan says so rather than dropping it quietly.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-04 10:08:23 -05:00