Files
Module-uo/server/commands/guild.command.js
Claude 466842c6f2
Some checks failed
PR Checks / server-tests (pull_request) Successful in 28s
PR Checks / client-build (pull_request) Successful in 17s
PR Checks / frozen-manifest (pull_request) Failing after 35s
fix(guilds): do not offer linking where linking cannot reach
Found on the live rig, with the shard's guild feature gated to staff: the
refusal still read "link your account — this shard shows guild information to
linked players". Signing in reaches `logged_in` and linking a game account
reaches `player`; `staff` and `admin` are roles an operator grants, and no
amount of linking earns them. Inviting someone to do something that changes
nothing is worse than plainly saying no.

Also drops the host name from the list embed's title. `ctx.site` carries a base
URL and no brand name, so naming the deployment there could only ever mean
printing its hostname into a title on the shard's own Discord server.

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 19:08:22 -05:00

202 lines
8.9 KiB
JavaScript

// ── `/guild` — the first chat command through the module contract ──────────
//
// Registered with `api.registerSlashCommands` (MODULE_API 1.6.0, TEAMS.md §7.1).
// The definition and this handler live here; the bot pulls the definition over
// the app's internal API and runs nothing of ours. Nothing in this file knows
// what Discord is — it is handed an `actor` and returns an envelope, and the
// same handler would serve a second platform unchanged.
//
// **Why `/guild` and not `/team`.** Teams are core's primitive and "guild" is
// this module's word for one; core does not own the word, so it does not publish
// the noun in a channel either. That is the same correction that deleted core's
// Team pages in phase 3, applied to the chat surface.
//
// **The audience rungs are enforced here, exactly as they are on the website.**
// A shard whose `guilds` feature is gated to staff does not become public
// because the question arrived over Discord — this handler resolves the caller's
// rung through the same `shardVisibility` config the routes use. It is the one
// piece of this file that is a security boundary rather than presentation.
const core = require('../core')
const db = require('../model/teamProvider/teamProvider.db')
const provider = require('../model/teamProvider/teamProvider.model')
const visibility = require('../utils/shardVisibility')
const log = core.logger('guild-command')
// How many guilds the no-argument form lists. A Discord embed takes 25 fields;
// ten is a summary a person reads rather than a table they scroll past.
const LIST_LIMIT = 10
/**
* Where the caller sits on this module's ladder.
*
* The same resolution `projectRoster` does, and it is duplicated in shape rather
* than shared because the inputs differ: that one is handed a viewer core
* described, this one an actor. Both end at `viewerLevel`, and both answer
* `anonymous` DIRECTLY for a caller with no site account — handing `viewerLevel`
* a synthetic empty request makes it fall through to `auth.getUserFromRequest`,
* which expects real cookies and throws (the phase 3 bug).
*/
async function levelFor(actor) {
if (!actor || !actor.userId) return 'anonymous'
return visibility.viewerLevel({ user: { id: actor.userId, role: actor.role } })
}
// The nudge §9 answer 5 asks for, and only when it is TRUE.
//
// **Linking reaches exactly two rungs and no further.** Signing in gets a caller
// to `logged_in` and linking a game account to `player`; `staff` and `admin` are
// roles an operator grants and no amount of linking will earn. So a shard that
// gates guilds to staff refuses an unlinked caller WITHOUT the invitation —
// telling them to link would be telling them to do something that changes
// nothing, which is worse than saying no.
//
// The live walk found this: gated to `staff`, the refusal still read "this shard
// shows guild information to linked players".
const LINKING_REACHES = new Set(['logged_in', 'player'])
function linkPrompt(actor, audience) {
if (actor.isLinked) return null
if (!LINKING_REACHES.has(audience)) return null
return 'Link your account on the site to see more — this shard shows guild information to linked players.'
}
const pageUrl = (externalId) =>
`${core.baseUrl}${provider.pageUrlTemplate.replace('{externalId}', externalId)}`
// Match on abbreviation first, then an exact name, then a unique prefix. Players
// type the abbreviation — it is what appears over a character's head — and a
// wrong-guild answer is worse than "say which one".
function findByName(rows, wanted) {
const needle = wanted.trim().toLowerCase()
const byAbbr = rows.filter((r) => (r.abbr || '').toLowerCase() === needle)
if (byAbbr.length === 1) return { guild: byAbbr[0] }
const exact = rows.filter((r) => r.name.toLowerCase() === needle)
if (exact.length === 1) return { guild: exact[0] }
const partial = rows.filter((r) => r.name.toLowerCase().includes(needle))
if (partial.length === 1) return { guild: partial[0] }
if (partial.length > 1) return { ambiguous: partial.slice(0, LIST_LIMIT) }
return {}
}
/** The counts for one guild, from the roster rather than the board's assertions. */
async function summarise(guild) {
const members = await db.listGuildMembers(guild.id)
const leaders = members
.filter((m) => Number(m.rank) >= db.LEADER_RANK)
.map((m) => m.name)
// The board's founder-leader is folded in as a floor, the same way
// getTeamLeaders does it: it arrives on a different frame, and a shard whose
// roster predates the rank amendment has no other leadership signal.
if (guild.leader_name && !leaders.includes(guild.leader_name)) leaders.push(guild.leader_name)
return {
// `members`/`online` are the BOARD's counts, which is what the shard asserts;
// the roster is what it enumerated, and the two legitimately disagree for the
// moment between a membership change and the sweep that reports it. The
// assertion is the more current of the two, so it is what is shown.
members: guild.members,
online: guild.online,
linked: members.filter((m) => provider.resolveUserId(m) !== null).length,
leaders,
}
}
async function detail(guild, actor, audience) {
const counts = await summarise(guild)
const fields = [
{ name: 'Members', value: String(counts.members ?? '—'), inline: true },
{ name: 'Online', value: String(counts.online ?? 0), inline: true },
{ name: 'Linked accounts', value: String(counts.linked), inline: true },
]
if (counts.leaders.length) {
fields.push({ name: 'Leaders', value: counts.leaders.join(', ') })
}
return {
title: guild.abbr ? `${guild.name} [${guild.abbr}]` : guild.name,
text: guild.alliance ? `Alliance: ${guild.alliance}` : undefined,
fields,
url: pageUrl(guild.id),
notice: linkPrompt(actor, audience),
}
}
/**
* `/guild [name]` — one guild's summary, or the shard's largest guilds.
*
* Never throws for an ordinary miss: "no such guild" and "the shard is offline"
* are answers, and letting either become an exception would turn a routine
* question into "that command failed" with nothing an operator could act on.
*/
async function handler({ options, actor }) {
const config = await visibility.getConfig()
const feature = config.guilds
// An admin turned guilds off. The switch means "this shard does not publish
// guild data" — over any surface, to anyone, staff included.
if (!feature || !feature.enabled) {
return { text: 'This shard does not publish guild information.', ephemeral: true }
}
const level = await levelFor(actor)
if (!visibility.meets(level, feature.audience)) {
return {
text: 'Guild information on this shard is not shown to your account.',
ephemeral: true,
notice: linkPrompt(actor, feature.audience),
}
}
// The provider's own staleness guard, asked before any board read: an
// unreachable sidecar means the board is a snapshot of unknown age, and
// reporting it as current here would contradict what every other surface says.
const ready = await provider.boardIsCurrent()
if (!ready.ok) {
log.info('guild command answered offline', { reason: ready.reason })
return { text: 'The shard is not connected right now, so guild information may be out of date.', ephemeral: true }
}
const rows = await db.listGuilds()
if (!rows.length) return { text: 'No guilds are on the board yet.', ephemeral: true }
const wanted = options && typeof options.name === 'string' ? options.name : null
if (!wanted) {
const top = [...rows].sort((a, b) => (b.members || 0) - (a.members || 0)).slice(0, LIST_LIMIT)
return {
// Not "Guilds on <host>": `ctx.site` carries a base URL and no brand name,
// so naming the deployment here can only mean printing its hostname into
// an embed title, which is noise on a shard's own Discord server.
title: 'Guilds on this shard',
fields: top.map((g) => ({
name: g.abbr ? `${g.name} [${g.abbr}]` : g.name,
value: `${g.members || 0} members · ${g.online || 0} online`,
inline: true,
})),
notice: linkPrompt(actor, feature.audience),
}
}
const { guild, ambiguous } = findByName(rows, wanted)
if (ambiguous) {
return {
text: `Several guilds match “${wanted}”: ${ambiguous.map((g) => g.name).join(', ')}`,
ephemeral: true,
}
}
if (!guild) return { text: `No guild matches “${wanted}”.`, ephemeral: true }
return detail(guild, actor, feature.audience)
}
module.exports = {
name: 'guild',
description: 'Show a guild on this shard — members, who is online, and its leaders',
options: [
{ name: 'name', type: 'string', description: 'Guild name or abbreviation', required: false },
],
// Everyone, deliberately. The gate that matters is the shard's own audience
// rung, resolved inside the handler — `access: 'linked'` would hide the command
// from exactly the unlinked members §9 answer 5 wants to invite to link.
access: 'everyone',
handler,
}