add policies content, may need further styling #804
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Changes requested ❌
Reviewed everything up to 8f27165 in 3 minutes and 1 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
1200lines of code in4files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. frontend/app/policies/cookies/page.tsx:5
- Draft comment:
Consider using semantic HTML for headings instead of wrappingin and elements; this can improve accessibility and simplify styling.
- Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:33%<= threshold50%None
2. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:575
- Draft comment:
Typo detected: 'Wewill' should be corrected to 'We will' for clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% While the comment is technically correct about the typo, the review rules emphasize focusing on code changes that require action, not purely informative comments. This is a new file, but it's a static privacy policy text file. Typos in legal/policy text don't affect functionality and are more of a content/copy editing concern rather than a code review issue. The typo could potentially cause confusion for users reading the privacy policy. Legal documents should be precise and error-free. While accuracy is important, code review is not the appropriate venue for copy editing. This should be handled through content review processes, not code review. Delete the comment. While the typo exists, fixing typos in policy text is not within the scope of code review according to the rules.
3. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:660
- Draft comment:
The mailing address ('22611 Market Street') in the Privacy Policy appears inconsistent with other documents; please verify for accuracy. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%The comment is asking the PR author to verify the accuracy of an address, which falls under asking the author to double-check something. This violates the rule against asking the author to confirm or verify details.
4. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:23
- Draft comment:
Address discrepancy: Terms page shows '2261 Market Street' which may be a typo compared to the Privacy Policy's address. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The key issues are: 1) We don't have access to the Privacy Policy file to verify if there's actually a discrepancy 2) The comment is speculative ("may be a typo") 3) The rules say to ignore cross-file issues and to delete comments if understanding requires seeing other files 4) The rules say we need STRONG EVIDENCE to keep a comment. I could be wrong about ignoring cross-file issues - maybe address consistency is important enough to be an exception to that rule? No, the rules are very clear that we should ignore cross-file issues and delete comments that require seeing other files to understand. We can't verify this without seeing the Privacy Policy. Delete the comment because it requires seeing another file to verify, and the rules explicitly say to ignore cross-file issues.
5. frontend/eslint.config.ts:52
- Draft comment:
Disabling 'react/no-unescaped-entities' may hide potential issues with unescaped characters in content; confirm if this is intentional. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This comment violates several rules. It's asking for confirmation of intention ("confirm if this is intentional"). It's speculative about potential issues. It's not providing clear evidence of a problem. ESLint rules are often disabled for valid reasons, and without seeing actual problems caused by this, we shouldn't question it. Maybe disabling this rule could lead to actual rendering problems in React components? Maybe there's a security concern I'm missing? Even if there were potential issues, asking for confirmation of intention isn't helpful. If there were specific security or rendering concerns, they should be demonstrated with concrete examples. This comment should be deleted as it violates our rules about asking for confirmation of intention and making speculative comments without clear evidence of problems.
6. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:576
- Draft comment:
Typo: 'Wewill' should be 'We will' (add a missing space). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This is a new file being added, so any issues in it are part of the changes. The typo is real and clear. However, it's an extremely minor formatting issue in a legal privacy policy document. The meaning is still completely clear even with the missing space. The rules say not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant. The typo does technically make the text less polished and professional looking. Since this is a legal document, one could argue that perfect formatting is important. While polish is good, this is such a minor formatting issue that it doesn't meaningfully impact readability or legal validity. The rules explicitly say not to make unimportant comments. This comment should be deleted as it points out an extremely minor formatting issue that doesn't meaningfully impact the document.
Workflow ID: wflow_YkfS0KMR34V5wW6o
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
Co-authored-by: ellipsis-dev[bot] <65095814+ellipsis-dev[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Important
Looks good to me! 👍
Reviewed ef60c05 in 2 minutes and 13 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
22lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:22
- Draft comment:
Consider wrapping the URL 'https://laminar.sh' in an anchor () tag to improve usability. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% This is a legal terms document where the URL primarily serves to identify the service, not as a navigation element. Making it clickable would be a minor UI enhancement but may not be appropriate in a legal context where precise text formatting matters. The URL is also mentioned early in the document where the company is being introduced, so navigation is less relevant. The suggestion could improve usability slightly. However, I may be underestimating the value of consistent clickable links throughout a document. While clickable links can be helpful, in a legal document the primary purpose is clear communication of terms, not navigation. The minor usability gain doesn't justify modifying the carefully formatted legal text. The comment should be removed. The URL serves an identificational purpose in legal text rather than a navigational one, making the suggested change unnecessary and potentially inappropriate.
2. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:229
- Draft comment:
Clarify the phrase '12 MONTHS WORTH OF SERVICE FEES' for legal precision—consider rewording to 'the equivalent of 12 months of service fees'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This is a legal document where precise wording matters. However, both phrasings effectively communicate the same legal meaning. The suggested change is a minor stylistic preference that doesn't substantively improve clarity or legal precision. Making unnecessary changes to legal text can introduce risks. The current wording could be seen as slightly more informal. The suggested wording is more formal and explicit. The existing wording is clear and legally sound. The minor increase in formality does not justify modifying established legal text. Delete this comment as it suggests an unnecessary stylistic change to legal text that doesn't materially improve clarity or precision.
3. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:24
- Draft comment:
Typo: There's an extra space within the parentheses in( "<strong>you</strong>"). Consider removing the space so it reads( "<strong>you</strong>")->( "<strong>you</strong>")(with no space after(). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was on unchanged code.
4. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:25
- Draft comment:
Typo: There is an extra space before the period in "for any reason .". Please remove the extra space so it becomes "for any reason.". - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was on unchanged code.
Workflow ID: wflow_g2fHFwAHRQrZcnkW
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Important
Looks good to me! 👍
Reviewed ec771e2 in 2 minutes and 5 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
46lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
5draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:575
- Draft comment:
Fix typo: change 'Wewill' to 'We will'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
2. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:660
- Draft comment:
Correct the address from '22611 Market Street' to '2261 Market Street'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
3. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:23
- Draft comment:
Standardize Legal Terms text: remove extra spaces and ensure proper quotation formatting. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%This comment is purely informative and does not provide a specific suggestion or ask for a specific action. It seems to be a general statement about standardizing text, which does not align with the rules for useful comments.
4. frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx:226
- Draft comment:
Clarify liability cap by adding 'the equivalent of' to reference 12 months of service fees. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
5. frontend/app/policies/privacy/page.tsx:663
- Draft comment:
Typographical issue: The street address has changed from "22611 Market Street" to "2261 Market Street". Please double-check if the removal of one '1' is intentional. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
Workflow ID: wflow_sWNIyonT95RL09KY
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
olzhik11
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2025
olzhik11
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 21, 2025
* feat: disable realtime in presence of filters, search (#806) * feat: disable realtime in presence of filters, search * feat: stretch custom renderer * feat: add comment * add policies content, may need further styling (#804) * add policies content, may need further styling * Update frontend/app/policies/terms/page.tsx Co-authored-by: ellipsis-dev[bot] <65095814+ellipsis-dev[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix missing bits * address ellipsis draft comments as well --------- Co-authored-by: ellipsis-dev[bot] <65095814+ellipsis-dev[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * remove image for agent manager (#810) --------- Co-authored-by: Dinmukhamed Mailibay <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: ellipsis-dev[bot] <65095814+ellipsis-dev[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Important
Add detailed content for cookies, privacy, and terms of use policy pages, and update ESLint configuration.
CookiesPageincookies/page.tsxwith detailed cookie policy content.PrivacyPageinprivacy/page.tsxwith comprehensive privacy policy details.TermsPageinterms/page.tsxoutlining terms of use.react/no-unescaped-entitiesrule ineslint.config.ts.This description was created by
for ec771e2. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.