Add a patch to make thinking blocks italic and dim again

[bl-ue]

Resolves #353 (comment)

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Enhanced visual styling for the thinking indicator label to improve readability and presentation.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new patch utility is introduced to transform React code, wrapping a "Thinking…" label in styled Box and Text components. The patch is integrated into the existing patch pipeline in the index file.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Patch pipeline integration src/patches/index.ts	Import and wire new writeThinkingLabel patch writer; applies thinking label styling after thinking visibility patch with result assignment to content
Thinking label styling patch src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts	New utility module for patching React createElement calls; locates "∴ Thinking…" anchor, extracts pattern, resolves Box/Text/React variables, builds nested createElement replacement with italic and dimColor props, applies transformation, and displays diff via showDiff

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

Poem

🐰 A label wrapped in styled delight,
Thinking thoughts now dressed just right,
With italic grace and colors dim,
The patch transforms them, whim by whim! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: adding a new patch that styles thinking blocks by making them italic and dim, which matches the new thinkingLabel.ts patch implementation.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts (1)

81-81: Consider adding a guard for the identifiers array.

The non-null assertion on location.identifiers![2] is currently safe because findThinkingLabelLocation always populates the array when returning non-null. However, for defensive coding, you could add a guard:

🔧 Optional defensive check

+  if (!location.identifiers || location.identifiers.length < 3) {
+    console.error('patch: thinkingLabel: missing identifiers from location');
+    return null;
+  }
+
-  const thinkingTextVar = location.identifiers![2];
+  const thinkingTextVar = location.identifiers[2];

📜 Review details

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 833aa88 and f442ec9.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/patches/index.ts
• src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts

🧰 Additional context used

🧬 Code graph analysis (2)

src/patches/index.ts (1)

src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts (1)

• writeThinkingLabel (56-101)

src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts (1)

src/patches/index.ts (5)

• LocationResult (73-77)
• findBoxComponent (424-450)
• findTextComponent (407-419)
• getReactVar (258-314)
• showDiff (91-129)

🔇 Additional comments (4)

src/patches/index.ts (2)

66-66: LGTM!

The import follows the established pattern used throughout the file.

---

609-611: LGTM!

The patch integration follows the established pattern used by other patches. The placement after writeThinkingVisibility is logical since both patches relate to thinking UI styling.

src/patches/thinkingLabel.ts (2)

18-51: LGTM!

The implementation follows codebase conventions:

• Uses [$\w]+ pattern for identifiers as recommended in the patch-writing notes
• Error handling with console.error is consistent with other component finders
• The 200-char search window is a reasonable heuristic for minified code proximity

---

83-98: LGTM!

The replacement construction and string manipulation are correct. The showDiff call matches the expected signature from the index module.