# Pull Request Template
## Description
This PR includes,
On Windows, pressing **Ctrl+Enter** in the reply editor was inserting an
unintended line break before sending. This led to two issues:
* **Unexpected blank lines**
After adding a line break with Shift+Enter and removing it with
Backspace, the editor looked correct. However, sending with Ctrl+Enter
reintroduced a hidden break, resulting in an extra blank line in the
final message.
* **Selected text being replaced**
When text was selected and Ctrl+Enter was pressed, the selection was
replaced with a line break instead of being sent.
Fixes
https://linear.app/chatwoot/issue/CW-6840/newline-bug-in-the-editor
### **Cause**
Two keyboard handlers responded to **Ctrl+Enter** on Windows:
* ProseMirror (`Mod-Enter`) inserted a hard break
* ReplyBox (`$mod+Enter`) triggered send
The existing guard only checked `metaKey` (Cmd), so it never worked on
Windows. As a result, a line break was inserted just before sending.
### **Solution**
Make the modifier check platform-aware so the editor correctly
intercepts the send shortcut:
* Added `detectOS`, `isMac`, and `OS` constants
* Introduced `hasPressedMod` (uses `metaKey` on macOS, `ctrlKey`
elsewhere)
This ensures Ctrl+Enter sends the message without modifying content,
while keeping existing behavior unchanged.
**NB:** macOS behavior with Cmd+Enter remains unchanged
## Type of change
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
**Case 1: line break**
1. Type `hello`
2. Press Shift+Enter, then Backspace
3. Press Ctrl+Enter
→ Message contains an unexpected blank new line
**Case 2: Selection replaced**
1. Type two lines using Shift+Enter
2. Select text on the second line
3. Press Ctrl+Enter
→ Selected text is replaced and not sent
### Screencast
**Before**
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d6d285a9-260b-4711-8bbd-d0c8519e8d20
**After**
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c0ace1f7-5d22-44a2-8e08-22190ee21e61
## 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
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
The "conversation continuity via email" toggle was visible to all
accounts regardless of whether they had `inbound_emails` enabled.
Without inbound email infrastructure, replies to those follow-up emails
land in the agent's personal inbox instead of routing back into
Chatwoot. The feature appears to work but silently breaks the reply
path.
The toggle is now gated on the `inbound_emails` feature flag. On
self-hosted without the feature, the toggle is hidden entirely. On
cloud, it remains visible but disabled with upgrade messaging.
On the backend, `inbound_emails` is added to the manually managed
features list in `InternalAttributesService` so that Stripe webhook plan
syncs don't override it when support enables it for an account.
---------
Co-authored-by: Sivin Varghese <64252451+iamsivin@users.noreply.github.com>
Introduce a `Last Responding Agent` options to assign_agents action in
automations to cover the following use cases.
- Assign conversations to first responding agent : ( automation message
created at , if assignee is nil, assign last responding agent )
- Ensure conversations are not resolved with out an assignee : (
automation conversation resolved at : if assignee is nil, assign last
responding agent )
and potential other cases.
fixes: #1592
This updates macros and automations so agents can explicitly remove
assigned agents or teams, while keeping the existing `Assign -> None`
flow working for backward compatibility.
Fixes: #7551Closes: #7551
## Why
The original macro change exposed unassignment only through `Assign ->
None`, which made macros behave differently from automations and left
the explicit remove actions inconsistent across the product. This keeps
the lower-risk compatibility path and adds the explicit remove actions
requested in review.
## What this change does
- Adds `Remove Assigned Agent` and `Remove Assigned Team` as explicit
actions in macros.
- Adds the same explicit remove actions in automations.
- Keeps `Assign Agent -> None` and `Assign Team -> None` working for
existing behavior and stored payloads.
- Preserves backward compatibility for existing macro and automation
execution payloads.
- Downmerges the latest `develop` and resolves the conflicts while
keeping both the new remove actions and current `develop` behavior.
## Validation
- Verified both remove actions are available and selectable in the macro
editor.
- Verified both remove actions are available and selectable in the
automation builder.
- Applied a disposable macro with `Remove Assigned Agent` and `Remove
Assigned Team` on a real conversation and confirmed both fields were
cleared.
- Applied a disposable macro with `Assign Agent -> None` and `Assign
Team -> None` on a real conversation and confirmed both fields were
still cleared.
# Pull Request Template
## Description
This PR adds support for resizing the reply editor up to nearly half the
screen height. It also deprecates the old modal-based pop-out reply box,
clicking the same button now expands the editor inline. Users can adjust
the height using the slider or the expand button.
## Type of change
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
### Loom video
https://www.loom.com/share/be27e1c06d19475ab404289710b3b0da
## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Pranav <pranav@chatwoot.com>
Update BulkSelectBar to compute selection state (indeterminate/all) from
visible item IDs and only toggle selection for visible items. Preserve
existing selection for off-screen items when toggling, and guard against
empty visibility. Add detection/rendering for an optional
secondary-actions slot and adjust layout/divider. Also fix
ContactsBulkActionBar selection logic to determine "all selected" by
verifying every visible ID is in the selection. These changes ensure
correct select-all behavior with filtered/visible lists and support
additional UI actions.
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d06b78d1-a64a-4c0c-a82a-f870140236c7
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Please include a summary of the change and issue(s) fixed. Also, mention
relevant motivation, context, and any dependencies that this change
requires.
Fixes # (issue)
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [ ] 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?
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:
- [ ] 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: Sivin Varghese <64252451+iamsivin@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: iamsivin <iamsivin@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR enables the **Participating** conversation view in the main
sidebar and keeps the behavior aligned with existing conversation views.
## What changed
- Added **Participating** under Conversations in the new sidebar.
- Added a guard in conversation realtime `addConversation` flow so
generic `conversation.created` events are not injected while the user is
on Participating view.
- Added participating route mapping in conversation-list redirect helper
so list redirects resolve correctly to `/participating/conversations`.
## Scope notes
- Kept changes minimal and consistent with current `develop` behavior.
- No additional update-event filtering was added beyond what existing
views already do.
---------
Co-authored-by: Sivin Varghese <64252451+iamsivin@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: iamsivin <iamsivin@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
This PR adds inline editing support for contact name, phone number,
email, and company fields in the conversation contact sidebar
## Type of change
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
**Screencast**
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e9f8e37d-145b-4736-b27a-eb9ea66847bd
## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Pranav <pranav@chatwoot.com>
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
### Description
This PR fixes an issue where the editor would reset content and move the
cursor while typing. The issue was caused by a dual debounce setup
(400ms + 2500ms) that saved content and then overwrote local state with
stale API responses while the user was still typing.
### What changed
* Editor now uses local state (`localTitle`, `localContent`) as the
source of truth while editing
* Vuex store is only used on initial load or navigation
* Replaced dual debounce with a single 500ms debounce (fewer API calls)
* `UPDATE_ARTICLE` now merges updates instead of replacing the article
* Prevents status changes from wiping unsaved content
* Removed `updateAsync` for a simpler update flow
### How it works
User types
→ local ref updates immediately (editor reads from this)
→ 500ms debounce triggers
→ dispatches `articles/update`
→ API persists the change
→ on success: store merges the response (used by other components)
→ editor remains unaffected (continues using local state)
Fixes
https://linear.app/chatwoot/issue/CW-6727/better-syncing-of-content-the-editor-randomly-updates-the-content
## Type of change
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
1. Open any Help Center article for editing
2. Type continuously for a few seconds — content should not reset or
jump
3. Change article status (publish/archive/draft) while editing — content
should remain intact
4. Test on a slow network (use DevTools throttling) — typing should
remain smooth
## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Comprehensive update to Traditional Chinese (Taiwan) translations. As a
native zh-TW speaker and active user based in Taiwan, I found the
existing translations were quite incomplete (~54% overall) with many
strings still in English. Some existing translations also used
Simplified Chinese terms or unnatural phrasing.
I chose to submit this as a direct PR rather than going through Crowdin
because working through all the files at once is much faster and lets me
ensure consistent terminology across the entire locale.
Closes#14003
## What changed
**Backend (`config/locales/zh_TW.yml`)**
- Translated all ~259 previously untranslated strings (was ~19%
complete, now 100%)
- Covers: error messages, notifications, activity logs, integration
descriptions, Captain AI, public portal, reports
**Frontend (42 JSON files under `dashboard/i18n/locale/zh_TW/`)**
- Translated ~2,627 previously untranslated strings (was ~50% complete,
now ~100%)
- Most impacted files: `inboxMgmt.json`, `integrations.json`,
`settings.json`, `conversation.json`, `contact.json`, `report.json`
**Quality fixes across all files**
- Replaced Simplified Chinese terms mixed into zh-TW: 账→帳, 获→取得, 模板→範本,
收件箱→收件匣, 重置→重設, 自定義→自訂
- Standardized terminology for consistency: 客服人員 (agent), 延後 (snooze),
稽核 (audit), 巨集 (macro)
- Fixed incorrect translations (e.g., audit log table headers were
swapped, availability label was wrong)
## How to test
1. Set account/user language to 中文（台灣）
2. Navigate through the dashboard — settings, inbox management,
integrations, reports, conversations
3. Verify strings display in natural Traditional Chinese with no
remaining English gaps
4. Check that all placeholders (names, counts, dates) render correctly
# Pull Request Template
## Description
This PR includes, block inline images in message signatures and prevent
auto signature insertion when editor is disabled.
- Strip inline base64 images from signature on save and show warning
message
- Add `INLINE_IMAGE_WARNING` translation key for signature inline image
removal notification
- Add disabled check to `addSignature()` to prevent signature insertion
when editor is disabled
- Add `isEditorDisabled` checks to signature toggle logic in
`toggleSignatureForDraft()`, `replaceText()`, and `clearMessage()`
- Remove unused `replaceText` from the codebase, which belongs to old
`textarea` editor
Fixes
https://linear.app/chatwoot/issue/CW-6588/the-browser-hangs-when-the-message-signature-contains-inline-image
## Type of change
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
### Loom video
https://www.loom.com/share/fb556b46a12a4308a737eed732d5ed73
## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Previously, signing up gave immediate access to the app. Now,
unconfirmed users are redirected to a verification page where they can
resend the confirmation email.
- After signup, the user is routed to `/auth/verify-email` instead of
the dashboard
- After login, unconfirmed users are redirected to the verification page
- The dashboard route guard catches unconfirmed users and redirects them
- `active_for_authentication?` is removed from the sessions controller
so unconfirmed users can authenticate — the frontend gates access
instead
- If the user visits the verification page after already confirming,
they're automatically redirected to the dashboard
- No session is issued until the user is verified
<details><summary>Demo</summary>
<p>
#### Fresh Signup
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/abb735e5-7c8e-44a2-801c-96d9e4823e51
#### Google Fresh Signup
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ab9e389a-a604-4a9d-b492-219e6d94ee3f
#### Create new account from Dashboard
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c456690d-1946-4e0b-834b-ad8efcea8369
</p>
</details>
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Custom tools is now discoverable on all plans
## Type of change
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
Before:
<img width="390" height="446" alt="CleanShot 2026-04-02 at 13 40 11@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a751954-f3ad-47d6-85b8-1e2f1476a646"
/>
After:
<img width="392" height="522" alt="CleanShot 2026-04-02 at 13 40 47@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/62a252f6-2551-47a9-b50c-be949f08c456"
/>
<img width="1826" height="638" alt="CleanShot 2026-04-02 at 13 37 39@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/77dc2a75-3d76-44cf-8579-8d3457879bd0"
/>
## 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
- [x] 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>
Account webhooks sign outgoing payloads with HMAC-SHA256, but agent bot
and API inbox webhooks were delivered unsigned. This PR adds the same
signing to both.
Each model gets a dedicated `secret` column rather than reusing the
agent bot's `access_token` (for API auth back into Chatwoot) or the API
inbox's `hmac_token` (for inbound contact identity verification). These
serve different trust boundaries and shouldn't be coupled — rotating a
signing secret shouldn't invalidate API access or contact verification.
The existing `Webhooks::Trigger` already signs when a secret is present,
so the backend change is just passing `secret:` through to the jobs.
Shared token logic is extracted into a `WebhookSecretable` concern
included by `Webhook`, `AgentBot`, and `Channel::Api`. The frontend
reuses the existing `AccessToken` component for secret display. Secrets
are admin-only and excluded from enterprise audit logs.
### How to test
Point an agent bot or API inbox webhook URL at a request inspector. Send
a message and verify `X-Chatwoot-Signature` and `X-Chatwoot-Timestamp`
headers are present. Reset the secret from settings and confirm
subsequent deliveries use the new value.
---------
Co-authored-by: Sojan Jose <sojan@pepalo.com>
## Description
Two improvements to Agent Capacity Policy:
**1. Support exclusion via zero conversation limit**
Allow `conversation_limit` to be `0` on inbox capacity limits. Agents
with a zero limit are excluded from auto-assignment for that inbox while
remaining members for manual assignment.
**2. Fix exclusion rules duration input**
- Default changed from `10` to `null` so time-based exclusion isn't
applied unless explicitly set.
- Minimum lowered from 10 to 1 minute.
- `DurationInput` updated to handle `null` values correctly.
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Added model and capacity service specs for zero-limit exclusion
behavior.
- Tested manually via UI flows
## 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: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
### Description
When integrating the web widget via the JS SDK, customers call
setConversationCustomAttributes and setLabel on chatwoot:ready — before
any conversation exists. These API calls silently fail because the
backend endpoints require an existing conversation. When the visitor
sends their first message, the conversation is created without those
attributes/labels, so the message_created webhook payload is missing the
expected metadata.
This change queues SDK-set conversation custom attributes and labels in
the widget store when no conversation exists yet, and includes them in
the API request when the first message (or attachment) creates the
conversation. The backend now permits and applies these params during
conversation creation — before the message is saved and webhooks fire.
### How to test
1. Configure a web widget without a pre-chat form.
2. Open the widget on a test page and run the following in the browser
console after chatwoot:ready:
`window.$chatwoot.setConversationCustomAttributes({ plan: 'enterprise'
});`
`window.$chatwoot.setLabel('vip');` // must be a label that exists in
the account
3. Send the first message from the widget.
4. Verify in the Chatwoot dashboard that the conversation has plan:
enterprise in custom attributes and the vip label applied.
5. Set up a webhook subscriber for `message_created` confirm the first
payload includes the conversation metadata.
6. Verify that calling `setConversationCustomAttributes` / `setLabel` on
an existing conversation still works as before (direct API path, no
regression).
7. Verify the pre-chat form flow still works as expected.
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Adds custom tool support to v1
## 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="1816" height="958" alt="CleanShot 2026-03-24 at 11 37 33@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2777a953-8b65-4a2d-88ec-39f395b3fb47"
/>
<img width="378" height="488" alt="CleanShot 2026-03-24 at 11 38 18@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f6973c99-efd0-40e4-90fe-4472a2f63cea"
/>
<img width="1884" height="1452" alt="CleanShot 2026-03-24 at 11 38
32@2x"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9fba4fc4-0c33-46da-888a-52ec6bad6130"
/>
## Checklist:
- [x] 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: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Shivam Mishra <scm.mymail@gmail.com>
