Summary

• Problem: /btw without a side question returns Usage: /btw <side question>, and plain-text channel sanitization treats <side question> as an HTML-like tag.
• Why it matters: users on sanitized outbound channels can see only Usage: /btw , losing the helpful placeholder.
• What changed: changed the producer string to Usage: /btw [side question], updated the /btw command test, added a sanitizer regression, and added a changelog entry.
• What did NOT change (scope boundary): no sanitizer rules, command parsing, /side alias behavior, or live channel delivery plumbing changed.

AI-assisted: yes.

Change Type (select all)

• Bug fix
• Feature
• Refactor required for the fix
• Docs
• Security hardening
• Chore/infra

Scope (select all touched areas)

• Gateway / orchestration
• Skills / tool execution
• Auth / tokens
• Memory / storage
• Integrations
• API / contracts
• UI / DX
• CI/CD / infra

Linked Issue/PR

• Closes BTW usage string <side question> placeholder eaten by markdown channels #62877
• Related #
• This PR fixes a bug or regression

Real behavior proof (required for external PRs)

• Behavior or issue addressed: the /btw missing-question usage placeholder must remain visible after outbound plain-text sanitization.
• Real environment tested: local OpenClaw source checkout on macOS with Node v25.9.0 and pnpm 10.33.2 via npx; actual sanitizeForPlainText implementation imported with tsx.
• Exact steps or command run after this patch:
  • npx pnpm@10.33.2 exec tsx -e 'import { sanitizeForPlainText } from "./src/infra/outbound/sanitize-text.ts"; console.log("old:", JSON.stringify(sanitizeForPlainText("Usage: /btw <side question>"))); console.log("new:", JSON.stringify(sanitizeForPlainText("Usage: /btw [side question]")));'
• Evidence after fix (screenshot, recording, terminal capture, console output, redacted runtime log, linked artifact, or copied live output):

old: "Usage: /btw "
new: "Usage: /btw [side question]"

• Observed result after fix: the old tag-shaped placeholder is still stripped by the sanitizer, while the new bracketed placeholder remains visible exactly as delivered to plain-text channels.
• What was not tested: a live WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal send; this patch is isolated to the command producer text plus the shared sanitizer behavior.
• Before evidence (optional but encouraged): the same terminal capture above includes the pre-fix string shape as old: "Usage: /btw ".

Root Cause (if applicable)

• Root cause: the usage placeholder was written with angle brackets, so the outbound sanitizer's remaining-HTML stripping pattern interpreted <side question> as a tag.
• Missing detection / guardrail: no regression asserted that command usage examples with placeholders survive the plain-text sanitizer.
• Contributing context (if known): inline code/backticks would not be enough if the inner placeholder remains tag-shaped before the final stripping pass.

Regression Test Plan (if applicable)

• Coverage level that should have caught this:
  • Unit test
  • Seam / integration test
  • End-to-end test
  • Existing coverage already sufficient
• Target test or file: src/auto-reply/reply/commands-btw.test.ts and src/infra/outbound/sanitize-text.test.ts.
• Scenario the test should lock in: /btw with no question returns the bracketed usage string, and that usage string survives sanitizeForPlainText unchanged.
• Why this is the smallest reliable guardrail: the regression is caused by the specific producer text plus the shared plain-text sanitizer, so focused coverage locks both sides without requiring a live channel.
• Existing test that already covers this (if any): the existing /btw missing-question test covered the producer output, but expected the unsafe placeholder.
• If no new test is added, why not: N/A.

User-visible / Behavior Changes

/btw with no side question now replies with Usage: /btw [side question] instead of Usage: /btw <side question>.

Diagram (if applicable)

Before:
/btw -> Usage: /btw <side question> -> sanitizer strips placeholder -> Usage: /btw 

After:
/btw -> Usage: /btw [side question] -> sanitizer preserves placeholder -> Usage: /btw [side question]

Security Impact (required)

• New permissions/capabilities? (Yes/No) No
• Secrets/tokens handling changed? (Yes/No) No
• New/changed network calls? (Yes/No) No
• Command/tool execution surface changed? (Yes/No) No
• Data access scope changed? (Yes/No) No
• If any Yes, explain risk + mitigation: N/A

Repro + Verification

Environment

• OS: macOS
• Runtime/container: Node v25.9.0, pnpm 10.33.2 via npx
• Model/provider: N/A
• Integration/channel (if any): shared plain-text outbound sanitizer path; no live channel credentials used
• Relevant config (redacted): N/A

Steps

1. Run the live sanitizer command from the real behavior proof section.
2. Run npx pnpm@10.33.2 test src/auto-reply/reply/commands-btw.test.ts src/infra/outbound/sanitize-text.test.ts.
3. Run npx pnpm@10.33.2 exec oxfmt --check --threads=1 src/auto-reply/reply/commands-btw.ts src/auto-reply/reply/commands-btw.test.ts src/infra/outbound/sanitize-text.test.ts CHANGELOG.md.
4. Run npx pnpm@10.33.2 check:changed.

Expected

• The bracketed usage placeholder stays visible after sanitization.
• Focused tests, formatting, and changed-file checks pass.

Actual

• old: "Usage: /btw "
• new: "Usage: /btw [side question]"
• Focused tests passed 2 Vitest shards: 39 tests total.
• oxfmt --check reported all matched files use the correct format.
• check:changed completed successfully.

Evidence

Attach at least one:

• Failing test/log before + passing after
• Trace/log snippets
• Screenshot/recording
• Perf numbers (if relevant)

Human Verification (required)

What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:

• Verified scenarios: old placeholder shape strips in the actual sanitizer, new placeholder shape survives; /btw missing-question command now returns the bracketed usage string; focused sanitizer and command tests pass.
• Edge cases checked: formatting, whitespace, and repo changed-file checks.
• What you did not verify: live external-channel delivery with real credentials.

Review Conversations

• I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
• I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.

Compatibility / Migration

• Backward compatible? (Yes/No) Yes
• Config/env changes? (Yes/No) No
• Migration needed? (Yes/No) No
• If yes, exact upgrade steps: N/A

Risks and Mitigations

None.