Captain now saves agent session records when a user message includes an
image. The saved record keeps the image URL and excludes downloaded
image bytes, so image replies no longer report a JSON serialization
error after delivery.
Fixes:
https://chatwoot-p3.sentry.io/issues/7618423184/?alert_rule_id=13673680&alert_type=issue¬ification_uuid=d22a7ab9-95d6-4bba-85e0-733a28466775&project=6382945
## Root cause
RubyLLM downloads image attachments and caches the binary bytes inside
`RubyLLM::Content`. `SessionCaptureService` passed the live object to
the `run_context` JSON column. Rails then tried to encode the cached
JPEG bytes as UTF-8 and raised `JSON::GeneratorError`.
The error did not block replies, handoffs, or credit updates because
session capture rescues its own failures. The failed write meant that
Chatwoot lost the agent session record for the response.
## How to reproduce
1. Send an image to a Captain V2 assistant.
2. Let RubyLLM load the image during the model request.
3. Save the resulting conversation history in an agent session.
4. Observe the JSON encoding error when Rails reaches the cached image
bytes.
## What changed
`SessionCaptureService` now converts `RubyLLM::Content` to its JSON safe
hash before saving the current turn. The hash contains the message text
and attachment URL without the cached bytes. Other message content is
unchanged.
The focused service spec covers a cached JPEG byte payload and passes
with 12 examples. RuboCop reports no offenses in the changed service and
spec.
Records a `Captain::Session` row for every Captain V2 assistant response
delivered in a conversation, so we can show how a response was generated
and report on credit, FAQ, and document usage. Stacked on #14970 (the
`captain_sessions` model).
## What changed
- `FaqLookupTool` now records the retrieved FAQ ids (and their backing
document ids) into the shared run state, accumulated across tool calls.
- `AgentRunnerService` exposes the raw ai-agents run result via
`last_run_result`; the `generate_response` return shape is unchanged, so
the playground path is unaffected.
- New `Captain::Assistant::SessionCaptureService` builds the session:
scenario resolved from the answering agent name, model from
`assistant.agent_model`, token usage plus the trimmed current-turn
conversation history stored in `run_context`.
- `ResponseBuilderJob` captures after delivery: `credits_consumed`
mirrors the actual charge (1.0 for a billed response, 0.0 for handoffs,
where the session points at the customer-facing handoff message).
Capture runs outside the delivery transaction and swallows its own
failures, so a logging bug can never block or roll back a customer
reply.
V1 responses and copilot are out of scope; copilot capture comes next.
## How to test
On an account with `captain_integration_v2` enabled and an inbox
connected to an assistant with approved FAQs, send a customer message on
a pending conversation. After the assistant replies, a
`Captain::Session` row should exist with the conversation as subject,
the reply message as result, the FAQs/documents used, and the run
context for that turn. Asking for a human agent should produce a
zero-credit session pointing at the handoff message.
<img width="2428" height="1058" alt="CleanShot 2026-07-15 at 17 25
40@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d8e44923-c17b-494f-8c33-c8fa4219438c"
/>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Tightens v2 prompt and config to match v1
## 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.
locally
## 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
~~Note: merge only after https://github.com/chatwoot/ai-agents/pull/74
has been merged~~
## Description
Before:
<img width="436" height="617" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fd5be8dc-abab-4e01-b251-366648b998ea"
/>
After:
<img width="446" height="577" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8d96d2f2-c126-4cca-b3a2-f2a62b204adf"
/>
<img width="441" height="558" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/89da4157-48a5-4fdc-9c67-9bf987e31638"
/>
## 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.
locally and specs
## 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: Sony Mathew <sony@chatwoot.com>
HandoffTool changes conversation status but only posts a private note.
ResponseBuilderJob now detects the tool flag and creates the public
handoff message that was previously only shown in V1.
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Captain V2 was silently forwarding conversations to humans without
showing a handoff message to the customer. The conversation appeared to
just stop
responding.
Root cause: In V2, HandoffTool calls bot_handoff! during agent
execution, which changes conversation status from pending to open. By
the time control returns
to ResponseBuilderJob#process_response, the conversation_pending? guard
returns early - skipping create_handoff_message entirely. The V1 flow
didn't have this
problem because AssistantChatService just returns a string token
(conversation_handoff) and lets ResponseBuilderJob handle everything.
What changed:
1. AgentRunnerService now surfaces the handoff_tool_called flag (already
tracked internally for usage metadata) in its response hash.
2. ResponseBuilderJob#handoff_requested? detects handoffs from both V1
(response token) and V2 (tool flag).
3. ResponseBuilderJob#process_response checks handoff_requested? before
the conversation_pending? guard, so V2 handoffs are processed even when
the status has
already changed.
4. ResponseBuilderJob#process_action('handoff') captures
conversation_pending? before calling bot_handoff! and uses that snapshot
to guard both bot_handoff!
and the OOO message - preventing double-execution when V2's HandoffTool
already ran them.
New V2 handoff flow:
AgentRunnerService
→ agent calls HandoffTool (creates private note, calls bot_handoff!)
→ returns response with handoff_tool_called: true
ResponseBuilderJob#process_response
→ handoff_requested? detects the flag
→ process_action('handoff')
→ create_handoff_message (public message for customer)
→ bot_handoff! skipped (conversation_pending? is false)
→ OOO skipped (conversation_pending? is false)
Fixes#13881
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality not to work as expected)
- [ ] This change requires a documentation update
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Update existing response_builder_job_spec.rb covering the V2 handoff
path, V2 normal response path, and V1 regression
- Updated existing agent_runner_service_spec.rb expectations for the new
handoff_tool_called key and added a context for when the flag is true
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] 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
- [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: Aakash Bakhle <48802744+aakashb95@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: aakashb95 <aakashbakhle@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Captain v1 does not have access to contact attributes. Added a toggle to
let user choose if they want contact information available to Captain.
## Type of change
- [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 and locally
<img width="1924" height="740" alt="CleanShot 2026-03-19 at 18 48 19@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/353cfeaa-cd58-40eb-89e7-d660a1dc1185"
/>
![Uploading CleanShot 2026-03-19 at 18.53.26@2x.png…]()
## 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
Extract and pass image attachments from the latest user message to the
runner,
excluding the last user message from the context for processing.
Fixes#13588
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Adds image support to captain v2
## 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 and local testing
<img width="754" height="1008" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/914cbc2c-9d30-42d0-87d4-9e5430845c87"
/>
langfuse also shows media correctly with the instrumentation code:
<img width="1800" height="1260" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ce0f5fa6-b1a5-42ec-a213-9a82b1751037"
/>
## 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Adds channel type to Captain assistant traces in Langfuse
## 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.
<img width="906" height="672" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/224cee95-56aa-4672-8f74-0c0052251db9"
/>
<img width="908" height="611" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ddd8ef0d-47c1-450c-a09f-27e82a34d04d"
/>
## 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: Claude Opus 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>
