Skip to content

Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22

Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry

Description

@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026

Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?

Possible shape:

  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers

Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.

The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.

If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
})();
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? · Issue #22 · exploreomni/cli · GitHub
Skip to content
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands? #22
Open
Open
Discussion: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?#22
Assignees
hawkfry
Description
@hawkfry
hawkfry
opened on Apr 2, 2026
Question: should cli include a raw authenticated API command alongside spec-generated commands?
Possible shape:
  • arbitrary method/path calls
  • request body input
  • optional custom headers
Value: this would provide a fallback for unsupported endpoints, debugging, and day-zero access to new API surface, while keeping spec-generated commands as the primary interface.
The main architecture question is whether this fits the intended CLI model, or whether the generated command surface should remain the only supported access pattern.
If this direction makes sense, I can propose a minimal design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
No labels
Type
No type
Projects
No projects
Milestone
No milestone
Relationships
None yet
Development
No branches or pull requests
Issue actions