Also fixes double-scheduling bug in scheduler_spec and delivery_spec caused by
after_create_commit hook firing while rules already exist — reservation is now
created before rules in setup so the hook finds nothing to schedule.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Adds concierge.* and reservation.* Liquid variables to agent_instructions
so Sofia's orchestrator_prompt receives unit persona/knowledge/variables
and reservation data resolved from conversation.custom_attributes.current_unit_id.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Replace no-op stub with full perform body: find delivery by id, skip if
blank, delegate to Captain::Lifecycle::Dispatcher#call. Add retry_on
with polynomially_longer backoff (3 attempts). Spec covers dispatcher
delegation and graceful skip for missing records.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Orchestrates guards → render (Liquid) → send pipeline for one delivery.
Handles skip, reschedule, sent, failed states and re-enqueues on reschedule.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Implement guards following the same pass/reschedule/too_stale pattern as QuietHours.
Also fix belongs_to :conversation on Delivery to use class_name: '::Conversation' to avoid namespace resolution failure inside Captain::Lifecycle module.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Add after_commit callbacks to call Captain::Lifecycle::Scheduler on
create, status change (cancelled/no_show), and check_in_at change.
Each handler wraps in rescue StandardError to preserve existing behavior.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Pure function mapping reservation events to timestamps; used by Scheduler (T9) to compute fire_at.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
TDD: 16 examples passing. Adds EVENTS constant, active/for_event scopes,
and matches_reservation? with unit_ids/categorias/permanencias filters.
Also adds captain_reservation factory used by the spec.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
## Type of change
typo fix
## How Has This Been Tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide
instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details
for your test configuration.
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [x] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Instruments captain v2
## Type of change
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide
instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details
for your test configuration.
Local testing:
<img width="864" height="510" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/855ebce5-e8b8-4d22-b0bb-0d413769a6ab"
/>
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [x] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Shivam Mishra <scm.mymail@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR reduces duplicate failure noise for audio transcription jobs
that fail with permanent HTTP 400 responses, and fixes a file-format
edge case causing intermittent 400s.
Sentry issue: [CHATWOOT-99E /
6660541334](https://chatwoot-p3.sentry.io/issues/6660541334/)
## Confirmed root cause
For some attachments, the stored filename had no extension (example:
`speech`, content type `audio/mpeg`).
When the temporary transcription upload file was created without an
extension, OpenAI returned:
`Unrecognized file format` (HTTP 400).
## Scope of changes
1. `Messages::AudioTranscriptionJob`
- Keeps `discard_on Faraday::BadRequestError` to avoid retry storms on
permanent request errors.
- Adds explicit Rails warning logs for discarded jobs with
attachment/job/status context.
2. `Messages::AudioTranscriptionService`
- Keeps guaranteed temp file cleanup via `ensure`.
- Ensures temp upload files include an extension when the original
filename has none, derived from blob `content_type`.
- This addresses intermittent failures like extensionless `audio/mpeg`
files.
## Reproduction
Enable audio transcription for an account and process an audio
attachment whose stored filename has no extension (for example `speech`)
but valid audio content type (`audio/mpeg`).
Before this fix, OpenAI transcription could return HTTP 400
`Unrecognized file format` for that attachment while similar attachments
with extensions succeeded.
## Testing
Ran:
`bundle exec rubocop
enterprise/app/jobs/messages/audio_transcription_job.rb
enterprise/app/services/messages/audio_transcription_service.rb`
Result: both modified files pass lint with no offenses.
## Linear Ticket:
https://linear.app/chatwoot/issue/CW-6081/review-feedback
## Description
Assignment V2 Service Enhancements
- Enable Assignment V2 on plan upgrade
- Fix UI issue with fair distribution policy display
- Add advanced assignment feature flag and enhance Assignment V2
capabilities
## Type of change
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
This has been tested using the UI.
## Checklist:
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---
> [!NOTE]
> **Medium Risk**
> Changes auto-assignment execution paths, rate limiting defaults, and
feature-flag gating (including premium plan behavior), which could
affect which conversations get assigned and when. UI rewires inbox
settings and policy flows, so regressions are possible around
navigation/linking and feature visibility.
>
> **Overview**
> **Adds a new premium `advanced_assignment` feature flag** and uses it
to gate capacity/balanced assignment features in the UI (sidebar entry,
settings routes, assignment-policy landing cards) and backend
(Enterprise balanced selector + capacity filtering).
`advanced_assignment` is marked premium, included in Business plan
entitlements, and auto-synced in Enterprise accounts when
`assignment_v2` is toggled.
>
> **Improves Assignment V2 policy UX** by adding an inbox-level
“Conversation Assignment” section (behind `assignment_v2`) that can
link/unlink an assignment policy, navigate to create/edit policy flows
with `inboxId` query context, and show an inbox-link prompt after
creating a policy. The policy form now defaults to enabled, disables the
`balanced` option with a premium badge/message when unavailable, and
inbox lists support click-to-navigate.
>
> **Tightens/adjusts auto-assignment behavior**: bulk assignment now
requires `inbox.enable_auto_assignment?`, conversation ordering uses the
attached `assignment_policy` priority, and rate limiting uses
`assignment_policy` config with an infinite default limit while still
tracking assignments. Tests and i18n strings are updated accordingly.
>
> <sup>Written by [Cursor
Bugbot](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot) for commit
23bc03bf75ee4376071e4d7fc7cd564c601d33d7. This will update automatically
on new commits. Configure
[here](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Pranav <pranav@chatwoot.com>
Co-authored-by: iamsivin <iamsivin@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Shivam Mishra <scm.mymail@gmail.com>
The index is already added in production.
Adds a new reporting API that returns conversation counts grouped by
channel type and first response time buckets (0-1h, 1-4h, 4-8h, 8-24h,
24h+).
- GET /api/v2/accounts/:id/reports/first_response_time_distribution
- Uses SQL aggregation to handle large datasets efficiently
- Adds composite index on reporting_events for query performance
Tested on production workload.
Request: GET
`/api/v2/accounts/1/reports/first_response_time_distribution?since=<since>&until=<until>`
Response payload:
```
{
"Channel::WebWidget": {
"0-1h": 120,
"1-4h": 85,
"4-8h": 32,
"8-24h": 12,
"24h+": 3
},
"Channel::Email": {
"0-1h": 12,
"1-4h": 28,
"4-8h": 45,
"8-24h": 35,
"24h+": 10
},
"Channel::FacebookPage": {
"0-1h": 50,
"1-4h": 30,
"4-8h": 15,
"8-24h": 8,
"24h+": 2
}
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Fixes # (issue)
When we migrated to RubyLLM, images weren't being sent properly in
RubyLLM format to the model, so it did not understand images.
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide
instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details
for your test configuration.
specs + local testing
Current behaviour on staging:
<img width="772" height="1012" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7b7d360f-dea4-48af-b20b-ee4c98a38a85"
/>
local testing with fix:
<img width="792" height="1216" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5ef82452-015e-4bda-a68f-884d00acb014"
/>
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [x] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Sojan Jose <sojan@pepalo.com>
We are expanding Chatwoot’s automation capabilities by
introducing **Conversation Workflows**, a dedicated section in settings
where teams can configure rules that govern how conversations are closed
and what information agents must fill before resolving. This feature
helps teams enforce data consistency, collect structured resolution
information, and ensure downstream reporting is accurate.
Instead of having auto‑resolution buried inside Account Settings, we
introduced a new sidebar item:
- Auto‑resolve conversations (existing behaviour)
- Required attributes on resolution (new)
This groups all conversation‑closing logic into a single place.
#### Required Attributes on Resolve
Admins can now pick which custom conversation attributes must be filled
before an agent can resolve a conversation.
**How it works**
- Admin selects one or more attributes from the list of existing
conversation level custom attributes.
- These selected attributes become mandatory during resolution.
- List all the attributes configured via Required Attributes (Text,
Number, Link, Date, List, Checkbox)
- When an agent clicks Resolve Conversation:
If attributes already have values → the conversation resolves normally.
If attributes are missing → a modal appears prompting the agent to fill
them.
<img width="1554" height="1282" alt="CleanShot 2025-12-10 at 11 42
23@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4cd5d6e1-abe8-4999-accd-d4a08913b373"
/>
#### Custom Attributes Integration
On the Custom Attributes page, we will surfaced indicators showing how
each attribute is being used.
Each attribute will show badges such as:
- Resolution → used in the required‑on‑resolve workflow
- Pre‑chat form → already existing
<img width="2390" height="1822" alt="CleanShot 2025-12-10 at 11 43
42@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b92a6eb7-7f6c-40e6-bf23-6a5310f2d9c5"
/>
#### Admin Flow
- Navigate to Settings → Conversation Workflows.
- Under Required attributes on resolve, click Add Required Attribute.
- Pick from the dropdown list of conversation attributes.
- Save changes.
Agents will now be prompted automatically whenever they resolve.
<img width="2434" height="872" alt="CleanShot 2025-12-10 at 11 44 42@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/632fc0e5-767c-4a1c-8cf4-ffe3d058d319"
/>
#### NOTES
- The Required Attributes on Resolve modal should only appear when
values are missing.
- Required attributes must block the resolution action until satisfied.
- Bulk‑resolve actions should follow the same rules — any conversation
missing attributes cannot be bulk‑resolved, rest will be resolved, show
a notification that the resolution cannot be done.
- API resolution does not respect the attributes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Sivin Varghese <64252451+iamsivin@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: iamsivin <iamsivin@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Pranav <pranav@chatwoot.com>
CSAT scores are helpful, but on their own they rarely tell the full
story. A drop in rating can come from delayed timelines, unclear
expectations, or simple misunderstandings, even when the issue itself
was handled correctly.
Review Notes for CSAT let admins/report manager roles add internal-only
context next to each CSAT response. This makes it easier to interpret
scores properly and focus on patterns and root causes, not just numbers.
<img width="2170" height="1680" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/56df7fab-d0a7-4a94-95b9-e4c459ad33d5"
/>
### Why this matters
* Capture the real context behind individual CSAT ratings
* Clarify whether a low score points to a genuine service issue or a
process gap
* Spot recurring themes across conversations and teams
* Make CSAT reviews more useful for leadership reviews and
retrospectives
### How Review Notes work
**View CSAT responses**
Open the CSAT report to see overall metrics, rating distribution, and
individual responses.
**Add a Review Note**
For any CSAT entry, managers can add a Review Note directly below the
customer’s feedback.
**Document internal insights**
Use Review Notes to capture things like:
* Why a score was lower or higher than expected
* Patterns you are seeing across similar cases
* Observations around communication, timelines, or customer expectations
Review Notes are visible only to administrators and people with report
access only. We may expand visibility to agents in the future based on
feedback. However, customers never see them.
Each note clearly shows who added it and when, making it easy to review
context and changes over time.
## Description
Adds the ability to sort companies by the number of contacts they have
(contacts_count) in ascending or descending order. This is part of the
Chatwoot 5.0 release requirements for the companies feature.
The implementation uses a scope-based approach consistent with other
sorting implementations in the codebase (e.g., contacts sorting by
last_activity_at).
## Type of change
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Available Sorting Options
After this change, the Companies API supports the following sorting
options:
| Sort Field | Type | Ascending | Descending |
|------------|------|-----------|------------|
| `name` | string | `?sort=name` | `?sort=-name` |
| `domain` | string | `?sort=domain` | `?sort=-domain` |
| `created_at` | datetime | `?sort=created_at` | `?sort=-created_at` |
| `contacts_count` | integer (scope) | `?sort=contacts_count` |
`?sort=-contacts_count` |
**Note:** Prefix with `-` for descending order. Companies with NULL
contacts_count will appear last (NULLS LAST).
## CURL Examples
**Sort by contacts count (ascending):**
```bash
curl -X GET 'https://app.chatwoot.com/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/companies?sort=contacts_count' \
-H 'api_access_token: YOUR_API_TOKEN'
```
**Sort by contacts count (descending):**
```bash
curl -X GET 'https://app.chatwoot.com/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/companies?sort=-contacts_count' \
-H 'api_access_token: YOUR_API_TOKEN'
```
**Sort by name (ascending):**
```bash
curl -X GET 'https://app.chatwoot.com/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/companies?sort=name' \
-H 'api_access_token: YOUR_API_TOKEN'
```
**Sort by created_at (descending):**
```bash
curl -X GET 'https://app.chatwoot.com/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/companies?sort=-created_at' \
-H 'api_access_token: YOUR_API_TOKEN'
```
**With pagination:**
```bash
curl -X GET 'https://app.chatwoot.com/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/companies?sort=-contacts_count&page=2' \
-H 'api_access_token: YOUR_API_TOKEN'
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Added RSpec tests for both ascending and descending sort
- All 24 existing specs pass
- Manually tested the sorting functionality with test data
**Test configuration:**
- Ruby 3.4.4
- Rails 7.1.5.2
- PostgreSQL (test database)
**To reproduce:**
1. Run `bundle exec rspec
spec/enterprise/controllers/api/v1/accounts/companies_controller_spec.rb`
2. All tests should pass (24 examples, 0 failures)
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
## Technical Details
**Backend changes:**
- Controller: Added `sort_on :contacts_count` with scope-based sorting
- Model: Added `order_on_contacts_count` scope using
`Arel::Nodes::SqlLiteral` and `sanitize_sql_for_order` with `NULLS LAST`
for consistent NULL handling
- Specs: Added 2 new tests for ascending/descending sort validation
**Files changed:**
- `enterprise/app/controllers/api/v1/accounts/companies_controller.rb`
- `enterprise/app/models/company.rb`
-
`spec/enterprise/controllers/api/v1/accounts/companies_controller_spec.rb`
**Note:** This PR only includes the backend implementation. Frontend
changes (sort menu UI + i18n) will follow in a separate commit.
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: iamsivin <iamsivin@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Sivin Varghese <64252451+iamsivin@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Pranav <pranav@chatwoot.com>
When AgentBot responds to customer messages, the `waiting_since`
timestamp is not reset, causing inflated reply time metrics when a human
agent eventually responds. This results in inaccurate reporting that
incorrectly includes periods when customers were satisfied with bot
responses.
### Timeline from Production Data
```
Dec 12, 16:20:14 - Customer sends message (ID: 368451924)
↓ waiting_since = Dec 12, 16:20:14
Dec 12, 16:20:17 - AgentBot replies (ID: 368451960)
↓ waiting_since STILL = Dec 12, 16:20:14 ❌
↓ (Bot response doesn't clear it)
14-day gap - Customer satisfied, no messages
↓ waiting_since STILL = Dec 12, 16:20:14 ❌
Dec 26, 22:25:45 - Customer sends new message (ID: 383522275)
↓ waiting_since STILL = Dec 12, 16:20:14 ❌
↓ (New message doesn't reset it)
Dec 26-27 - More AgentBot interactions
↓ waiting_since STILL = Dec 12, 16:20:14 ❌
Dec 27, 07:36:53 - Human agent finally replies (ID: 383799517)
↓ Reply time calculated: 1,268,404 seconds
↓ = 14.7 DAYS ❌
```
## Root Cause
The core issues is in `app/models/message.rb`, where **AgentBot messages
does not clear `waiting_since`** - The `human_response?` method only
returns true for `User` senders, so bot replies never trigger the
clearing logic. This means once `waiting_since` is set, it stays set
even when customers send new messages after receiving bot responses.
The solution is to simply reset `waiting_since` **after a bot has
responded**. This ensures reply time metrics reflect actual human agent
response times, not bot-handled periods.
### What triggers the rest
This is an intentional "gotcha", that only `AgentBot` and
`Captain::Assistant` messages trigger the waiting time reset. Automation
and campaign messages maintain current behavior (no reset). This is
because interactive bot assistants provide conversational help that
might satisfy customers. Automation and campaigns are one-way
communications and shouldn't affect waiting time calculations.
## Related Work
Extends PR #11787 which fixed `waiting_since` clearing on conversation
resolution. This PR addresses the bot interaction scenario which was not
covered by that fix.
Scripts to clean data:
https://gist.github.com/scmmishra/bd133208e219d0ab52fbfdf03036c48a
This PR fixes the HTTP 500 timeout errors occurring when deleting SLA
policies that have large volumes of historical data.
The fix moves the deletion workflow to asynchronous background
processing using the existing `DeleteObjectJob`.
By offloading heavy cascaded deletions (applied SLAs, SLA events,
conversation nullifications) from the request cycle, the API can now
return immediately while the cleanup continues in the background
avoiding the `Rack::Timeout::RequestTimeoutException`. This ensures that
SLA policies can be deleted reliably, regardless of data size.
### Problem
Deleting an SLA policy via `DELETE
/api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/sla_policies/{id}` fails consistently with
`Rack::Timeout::RequestTimeoutException (15s)` for policies with large
amounts of related data.
Because the current implementation performs all dependent deletions
**synchronously**, Rails processes:
- `has_many :applied_slas, dependent: :destroy` (thousands)
- Each `AppliedSla#destroy` → triggers destruction of many `SlaEvent`
records
- `has_many :conversations, dependent: :nullify` (thousands)
This processing far exceeds the Rack timeout window and consistently
triggers HTTP 500 errors for users.
### Solution
This PR applies the same pattern used successfully in Inbox deletion.
**Move deletion to async background jobs**
- Uses `DeleteObjectJob` for centralized, reliable cleanup.
- Allows the DELETE API call to respond immediately.
**Chunk large datasets**
- Records are processed in **batches of 5,000** to reduce DB load and
avoid job timeouts.
## Description
- Replaces Stripe Checkout session flow with direct card charging for AI
credit top-ups
- Adds a two-step confirmation modal (select package → confirm purchase)
for better UX
- Creates Stripe invoice directly and charges the customer's default
payment method immediately
## Type of change
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Using the specs
- UI manual test cases
<img width="945" height="580" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/52bdad46-cd0e-4927-b13f-54c6b6353bcc"
/>
<img width="945" height="580" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/231bc7e9-41ac-440d-a93d-cba45a4d3e3e"
/>
## Checklist:
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Shivam Mishra <scm.mymail@gmail.com>
