mavend: a clarify asks differently the second time (V-457)

Every clarify turn said one sentence per gap, and a re-ask repeated it word
for word. A question he already failed to answer is the worst one to ask
again unchanged: the second wording is what tells him which part she missed.

clarifytemplates.go holds three wordings per slot, picked by attempt rather
than at random — short first, then naming the gap, then spelling it out with
an example. Past the end she keeps the most explicit one instead of wrapping
back to the short question he has already not answered.

The intents with nothing identifiable to ask about (note, query, chat,
system) kept the stub's single "не совсем поняла — можешь переформулировать?",
which is the line he hears whenever she misses him completely. Four wordings
now, picked by a hash of the utterance so one question asked twice reads the
same and two different misses do not.

Still no model call on this path: the resident model would wander, and this
text has to be right every time. No schema_version either, unlike the nudge
templates — these are Go constants, so no file can drift out of step with the
code that reads it. The persona test already in clarify_test.go covers the
new lines.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

cmd/mavend/clarify.go

@@ -33,19 +33,10 @@ var wantedSlots = map[router.Intent][]dialogue.Slot{
 	router.IntentAct:      {dialogue.SlotFn},
 }
 
-// clarifyQuestions — one short question per missing slot.
-//
-// These are fixed templates, not model output. The resident model is a 0.8B; it
-// would wander, and a question whose wording changes every time is harder to
-// answer than a blunt one that always reads the same. They are infinitive
-// questions, so there is no gender agreement to get wrong; the feminine
-// self-reference lives in the reply she gives when she drops the request.
-var clarifyQuestions = map[dialogue.Slot]string{
-	dialogue.SlotTime: "Когда?",
-	dialogue.SlotText: "О чём напомнить?",
-	dialogue.SlotKey:  "Что записать?",
-	dialogue.SlotFn:   "Что сделать?",
-}
+// The questions themselves live in clarifytemplates.go, one list per slot,
+// picked by attempt (Vikunja #457). The first ask is the short one this map
+// used to hold; a re-ask says it differently, because a question he already
+// failed to answer is the worst one to repeat unchanged.
 
 // clarifyGaveUp — she is out of questions and still does not have the slot. She
 // says so out loud: dropping the request in silence would leave him thinking it
@@ -147,7 +138,7 @@ func clarifyQuestion(dec router.Decision) (dialogue.Slot, string, bool) {
 	if len(missing) == 0 {
 		return "", "", false
 	}
-	q, ok := clarifyQuestions[missing[0]]
+	q, ok := clarifyQuestionFor(missing[0], 1)
 	if !ok {
 		return "", "", false
 	}
@@ -266,7 +257,9 @@ func (h *reactiveHandler) askRemainingGap(ctx context.Context, q *dialogue.Pendi
 	if len(remaining) == 0 {
 		return "", false
 	}
-	question, ok := clarifyQuestions[remaining[0]]
+	// Attempts+1 is the question she is about to ask, and the budget is shared
+	// with the re-ask path, so the second gap is worded like a second try.
+	question, ok := clarifyQuestionFor(remaining[0], q.Attempts+1)
 	if !ok || !q.CanAsk() {
 		return "", false
 	}
@@ -290,7 +283,7 @@ func (h *reactiveHandler) askRemainingGap(ctx context.Context, q *dialogue.Pendi
 func (h *reactiveHandler) reaskOrGiveUp(ctx context.Context, q *dialogue.PendingQuestion, merged dialogue.Slots, text string) string {
 	question := ""
 	if len(q.Missing) > 0 {
-		question = clarifyQuestions[q.Missing[0]]
+		question, _ = clarifyQuestionFor(q.Missing[0], q.Attempts+1)
 	}
 	if question == "" || !q.CanAsk() {
 		h.clarifyStore.Delete(dialogueIDOf(ctx))

cmd/mavend/clarify_test.go

@@ -156,8 +156,14 @@ func TestClarifyAsksThreeTimesThenSaysSo(t *testing.T) {
 		if !handled {
 			t.Fatalf("answer %d must be consumed as an answer", i)
 		}
-		if reply != "Когда?" {
-			t.Fatalf("attempt %d should ask again, got %q", i, reply)
+		// The wording changes with the attempt (Vikunja #457): repeating a
+		// question he already failed to answer is the worst way to ask it.
+		want, _ := clarifyQuestionFor(dialogue.SlotTime, i)
+		if reply != want {
+			t.Fatalf("attempt %d should ask again as %q, got %q", i, want, reply)
+		}
+		if first, _ := clarifyQuestionFor(dialogue.SlotTime, 1); reply == first {
+			t.Fatalf("attempt %d repeated the first wording: %q", i, reply)
 		}
 		if h.clarifyStore.Get(voiceDialogueID, h.now()) == nil {
 			t.Fatalf("attempt %d must leave the question armed", i)
@@ -349,8 +355,11 @@ func TestClarifyAsksAboutTheSecondGapToo(t *testing.T) {
 	if !handled {
 		t.Fatal("the answer must be consumed as an answer")
 	}
-	if reply != "Когда?" {
-		t.Fatalf("a filled subject with no time must ask about the time, got %q", reply)
+	// Second gap, second attempt, so it is the second wording of the time
+	// question — the attempt budget is shared between the two paths.
+	want, _ := clarifyQuestionFor(dialogue.SlotTime, 2)
+	if reply != want {
+		t.Fatalf("a filled subject with no time must ask about the time as %q, got %q", want, reply)
 	}
 	q := h.clarifyStore.Get(voiceDialogueID, h.now())
 	if q == nil {
@@ -411,8 +420,9 @@ func TestClarifyProseHoldsThePersona(t *testing.T) {
 		eval.CheckCringe:    true,
 	}
 	lines := append([]string{clarifyGaveUp}, clarifyExpiredVariants...)
-	for _, q := range clarifyQuestions {
-		lines = append(lines, q)
+	lines = append(lines, clarifyMissedVariants...)
+	for _, variants := range clarifyQuestionVariants {
+		lines = append(lines, variants...)
 	}
 	for _, line := range lines {
 		for _, r := range eval.RunChecks(eval.Case{}, line, "neutral") {

cmd/mavend/clarifytemplates.go

@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+package main
+
+import (
+	"github.com/kami/maven/internal/dialogue"
+	"github.com/kami/maven/internal/router"
+)
+
+// The clarify copy deck (Vikunja #457).
+//
+// Every clarify turn used to say one sentence per gap, and a re-ask repeated
+// that sentence word for word. A question he already failed to answer is the
+// worst one to ask again unchanged: the second wording is the one that tells
+// him which part she missed.
+//
+// Fixed templates, not model output, for the reason clarifyQuestions has always
+// given: the resident model would wander, and a question whose wording changes
+// at random is harder to answer than a blunt one. What changes here is that the
+// wording varies with the attempt rather than with a die roll — the first ask is
+// short, the second names the gap, the third spells it out.
+//
+// No schema_version, unlike internal/phraser/nudge_templates.go. These are Go
+// constants compiled into the daemon, so there is no file that can drift out of
+// step with the code that reads it.
+//
+// Persona holds: infinitive and imperative questions, so there is no gender
+// agreement to get wrong, "ты" throughout, and no pet names.
+var clarifyQuestionVariants = map[dialogue.Slot][]string{
+	dialogue.SlotTime: {
+		"Когда?",
+		"Во сколько напомнить?",
+		"Скажи время — например, «в семь вечера» или «через час».",
+	},
+	dialogue.SlotText: {
+		"О чём напомнить?",
+		"Что сказать тебе в это время?",
+		"Скажи одной фразой, о чём напомнить.",
+	},
+	dialogue.SlotKey: {
+		"Что записать?",
+		"Что именно отметить?",
+		"Назови, что записать — например, «выпил воды».",
+	},
+	dialogue.SlotFn: {
+		"Что сделать?",
+		"Какое действие выполнить?",
+		"Назови действие — я умею только то, что ты мне разрешил.",
+	},
+}
+
+// clarifyQuestionFor picks the wording for this attempt. attempt is 1-based, as
+// PendingQuestion.Attempts counts it; anything past the list uses the last and
+// most explicit phrasing rather than wrapping round to the short one, because
+// wrapping would ask the same short question he has already not answered.
+//
+// Deterministic on purpose, unlike clarifyExpiredLine: an expiry notice is the
+// same statement however it is worded, and a re-ask is not.
+func clarifyQuestionFor(slot dialogue.Slot, attempt int) (string, bool) {
+	variants, ok := clarifyQuestionVariants[slot]
+	if !ok || len(variants) == 0 {
+		return "", false
+	}
+	i := attempt - 1
+	if i < 0 {
+		i = 0
+	}
+	if i >= len(variants) {
+		i = len(variants) - 1
+	}
+	return variants[i], true
+}
+
+// clarifyMissedVariants — she is asking for the whole utterance again, because
+// the gate fired on an intent with nothing identifiable to ask about (note,
+// query, chat, system are not in wantedSlots).
+//
+// Rotated like the expiry lines and for the same reason: this is the line he
+// hears whenever she misses him completely, so it is a line that repeats, and
+// the same sentence every time is what makes a house assistant sound like a
+// kiosk. All of them say the same two things — she did not catch it, and he
+// should say it again — because the wording may vary and the meaning may not.
+var clarifyMissedVariants = []string{
+	"Не совсем поняла — скажи, пожалуйста, ещё раз.",
+	"Я тебя не разобрала. Повтори, пожалуйста.",
+	"Не уловила. Скажи это по-другому?",
+	"Прости, не поняла — попробуй сказать иначе.",
+}
+
+// clarifyMissedFor picks a wording by the utterance itself, so the same words
+// asked twice get the same answer and two different misses sound different.
+//
+// A hash, not rand: a test that drives an utterance twice must not depend on a
+// die roll, and the point of rotating is only that consecutive misses differ.
+func clarifyMissedFor(utterance string) string {
+	var sum int
+	for _, r := range utterance {
+		sum += int(r)
+	}
+	return clarifyMissedVariants[sum%len(clarifyMissedVariants)]
+}
+
+// clarifyMissedLine is the canned reply for a clarify decision she cannot turn
+// into a question. Returns "" for a decision that is not a clarify, so the
+// caller keeps its own reply.
+func clarifyMissedLine(dec router.Decision) string {
+	if !dec.Clarify {
+		return ""
+	}
+	return clarifyMissedFor(dec.Utterance)
+}

cmd/mavend/clarifytemplates_test.go

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+package main
+
+import (
+	"testing"
+
+	"github.com/kami/maven/internal/dialogue"
+	"github.com/kami/maven/internal/router"
+)
+
+// Every slot she can ask about has a wording for every attempt she is allowed,
+// and no two attempts on one slot read the same. A deck with a repeated line is
+// the defect this deck exists to fix (Vikunja #457).
+func TestClarifyQuestionsVaryByAttempt(t *testing.T) {
+	for slot, variants := range clarifyQuestionVariants {
+		seen := map[string]bool{}
+		for _, v := range variants {
+			if v == "" {
+				t.Errorf("%s: empty wording in the deck", slot)
+			}
+			if seen[v] {
+				t.Errorf("%s: repeated wording %q", slot, v)
+			}
+			seen[v] = true
+		}
+		for attempt := 1; attempt <= len(variants); attempt++ {
+			got, ok := clarifyQuestionFor(slot, attempt)
+			if !ok || got != variants[attempt-1] {
+				t.Errorf("%s attempt %d = %q ok=%v, want %q", slot, attempt, got, ok, variants[attempt-1])
+			}
+		}
+	}
+}
+
+// Past the end she keeps the most explicit wording. Wrapping round would ask
+// the short question he has already not answered twice.
+func TestClarifyQuestionPastTheEndKeepsTheLastWording(t *testing.T) {
+	last := clarifyQuestionVariants[dialogue.SlotTime][len(clarifyQuestionVariants[dialogue.SlotTime])-1]
+	for _, attempt := range []int{0, 4, 9} {
+		if got, _ := clarifyQuestionFor(dialogue.SlotTime, attempt); attempt > 1 && got != last {
+			t.Errorf("attempt %d = %q, want the last wording %q", attempt, got, last)
+		}
+	}
+	if _, ok := clarifyQuestionFor("nonesuch", 1); ok {
+		t.Error("an unknown slot must have no question")
+	}
+}
+
+// The missed line is stable for one utterance and absent for a decision that is
+// not a clarify.
+func TestClarifyMissedLine(t *testing.T) {
+	d := router.Decision{Clarify: true, Utterance: "мгм"}
+	first := clarifyMissedLine(d)
+	if first == "" || first != clarifyMissedLine(d) {
+		t.Fatalf("the missed line must be stable for one utterance, got %q", first)
+	}
+	if got := clarifyMissedLine(router.Decision{Intent: router.IntentNote}); got != "" {
+		t.Errorf("a decision that is not a clarify got %q", got)
+	}
+	// The empty utterance still gets a line: she has to say something.
+	if got := clarifyMissedLine(router.Decision{Clarify: true}); got == "" {
+		t.Error("an empty utterance must still be answered out loud")
+	}
+}

cmd/mavend/replier_llm.go

@@ -24,7 +24,12 @@ func newLLMReplier(c phraser.Completer, block func() string) *llmReplier {
 // answer from the stub, which is what keeps a turn from breaking on the model.
 func (r *llmReplier) Reply(d router.Decision) string {
 	if d.Clarify {
-		return r.stub.Reply(d)
+		// The deck, not the stub's single sentence: a clarify she cannot turn
+		// into a question is the line he hears most often when she misses him,
+		// and it used to be the same words every time (Vikunja #457). Still no
+		// model call — this text has to be right every time, and it is not worth
+		// a generation to say something this small.
+		return clarifyMissedLine(d)
 	}
 	out, err := r.p.PhraseReply(context.Background(), d)
 	if err != nil || out == "" {

cmd/mavend/replier_llm_test.go

@@ -37,9 +37,21 @@ func TestLLMReplierFallsBackToStubOnEmpty(t *testing.T) {
 	assertStub(t, r, router.Decision{Intent: router.IntentNote}, "empty llm")
 }
 
-func TestLLMReplierClarifyUsesStub(t *testing.T) {
+// A clarify never reaches the model, and since Vikunja #457 it is answered from
+// the clarify deck rather than the stub's single sentence.
+func TestLLMReplierClarifyReadsTheDeck(t *testing.T) {
 	r := newLLMReplier(stubCompleter{out: "я всё поняла"}, nil)
-	assertStub(t, r, router.Decision{Clarify: true}, "clarify")
+	got := r.Reply(router.Decision{Clarify: true, Utterance: "мгм"})
+	if got == "я всё поняла" {
+		t.Fatal("a clarify must not be phrased by the model")
+	}
+	if want := clarifyMissedFor("мгм"); got != want {
+		t.Errorf("on clarify: got %q, want %q", got, want)
+	}
+	// Two different misses do not sound identical.
+	if same := r.Reply(router.Decision{Clarify: true, Utterance: "а"}); same == got {
+		t.Log("two utterances hashed to the same line, which is allowed but should be rare")
+	}
 }
 
 func assertStub(t *testing.T, r *llmReplier, d router.Decision, what string) {