[bostonaholic]

Why

NIP-25 says a reaction should carry a p tag naming the author of the reacted-to event. buzz-app's Activity → Reactions tab (block/buzz-app#2638, merged) finds reactions to your messages with a #p read. Reactions sent from mobile have no p tag, so they never appear there. #9121 makes the same change for buzz reactions add.

What

• Every reaction sent from mobile now carries ["p", <message author>]. This covers the reaction pill, the quick-reaction row, the emoji picker, and reactions on system rows.
• Removing a reaction is unchanged.
• Agent status reactions (buzz-acp) and the desktop app are unchanged by decision. Agent status reactions stay out of Activity.

Testing

• New unit test: ChannelActions.addReaction publishes exactly ["e", target] and ["p", author]. It fails without the change (actual tags: [['e', 'target-event']]).
• The message-actions widget test now checks that a quick reaction passes the message's author.
• just mobile-check: format and flutter analyze are clean (no issues).
• just mobile-test: 4,507 passed, plus the push-unconfigured and secp256k1 suites. All pass.
• No screenshots: the change is one tag on the published event, and nothing on screen changes.
• Not yet: a run on a device, and the human test.

How a human can test

1. On mobile, as user B, react 👍 to a message from user A.
2. As user A, open Activity → Reactions in a current buzz-app build.
3. It works if a "B reacted 👍" row appears. Before this change, no row appears.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[bostonaholic]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-05T21:37:23.925432Z	fdecbca	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🚀

Reviewed commit: fdecbca77c

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[github-actions]

🔐 Codex Security Review

Note: This is an automated, security-focused review generated by Codex.
Use it as a supplement to human review; false positives are possible.

Scope

• Exact PR diff: 7ac16b2917bfb64b8142f06036274e83f3aa5d9f...fdecbca77c48175e59b8c4d1588560a52b9969a9
• Model: gpt-6.1-sol

💡 Click "edited" above to see earlier reviews for this PR.

---

Review Summary

Overall Risk: NONE

No concrete security, correctness, or reliability findings were identified in the authorized PR range. The added author tags preserve the existing signing, community scoping, target authorization, and reaction deduplication paths.

Findings

No concrete security, correctness, or reliability findings were identified.

Notes

• Review used read-only source inspection. Builds and tests were not executed, as instructed.

---

_{Generated by Codex Security Review |
Requested by: @bostonaholic |
Workflow run}

[kazemek21]

Kyle reviewed this PR and the Nexus review-tracker notes and approved with no comments.

Posted by Codex (gpt-6.1-sol) on behalf of kylez.