Skip to content

Add per-segment review reasons for plugins - #1600

Open
Dicur3x wants to merge 1 commit into
chidiwilliams:mainfrom
Dicur3x:codex/segment-review-reasons
Open

Add per-segment review reasons for plugins#1600
Dicur3x wants to merge 1 commit into
chidiwilliams:mainfrom
Dicur3x:codex/segment-review-reasons

Conversation

@Dicur3x

@Dicur3x Dicur3x commented Aug 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • add a review_reasons list to transcription segments for post-processing plugins
  • persist the reasons as JSON across completed, skipped, replaced, and legacy cached transcriptions
  • migrate existing databases with an empty-list default, preserving existing segment text
  • highlight affected rows in the transcription viewer and show every reason in a tooltip

Motivation

after_transcription plugins can currently rewrite segments, but they have no non-destructive way to ask the user to review a specific row. This adds that viewer integration without implementing or coupling Buzz to a particular detector.

This supports #1570. A repetition/hallucination detector can be proposed separately after the segment contract is agreed on.

Tests

  • database migration from the previous segment schema
  • review-reason persistence through all three segment save paths
  • viewer background and tooltip roles
  • Python compile check and Ruff check on the changed files

@Dicur3x
Dicur3x marked this pull request as ready for review August 30, 2026 11:24
@raivisdejus

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@Dicur3x Thanks for your contribution!

Let's make the new data field more universal, say metadata not review_reasons and let's make it store key-value pairs, say a list of dicts. This will let us store more data for different future plugins.

I would also add such metadata field on the transcription DB entries for the same future flexibility

Tooltip could show Key: vaue list for now.

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.

2 participants