refactor: migrate clearCommand hook calls to HookSystem

[ved015]

Summary

Refactors the /clear command to use HookSystem wrapper methods instead of directly calling fireSessionStartHook and fireSessionEndHook with boilerplate checks.

Related Issues

Part of #14317

Pre-Merge Checklist

• Updated relevant documentation and README (if needed)
• Added/updated tests (if needed)
• Noted breaking changes (if any)
• Validated on required platforms/methods:
  • MacOS
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
    • Podman
    • Seatbelt
  • Windows
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
  • Linux
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker

@scidomino please have a look

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @ved015, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the /clear command to centralize and simplify its interaction with the application's hook system. By transitioning to dedicated HookSystem wrapper methods, the change reduces redundant checks and improves the overall maintainability and clarity of the hook invocation logic within the command.

Highlights

• Refactor Hook Calls: Migrated the /clear command to use the HookSystem wrapper methods (fireSessionEndEvent and fireSessionStartEvent) instead of directly calling fireSessionEndHook and fireSessionStartHook.
• Removed Boilerplate: Eliminated boilerplate checks for config?.getEnableHooks() and messageBus when firing session hooks, simplifying the code and reducing conditional logic.
• Updated Hook Output Handling: Adjusted the access path for the system message from result?.systemMessage to result?.finalOutput?.systemMessage to align with the HookSystem's structured output.
• Test Updates: Modified clearCommand.test.ts to mock the getHookSystem method and its fireSessionEndEvent and fireSessionStartEvent functions, ensuring tests reflect the new hook integration.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly refactors the /clear command to use the HookSystem abstraction, which simplifies the code and improves consistency. The initial concerns regarding error handling for fireSessionEndEvent and fireSessionStartEvent have been reviewed against the provided rules. Based on Rule 3, which advises against wrapping each call in a separate try...catch block for sequential cleanup operations, the suggested try...catch blocks are not necessary. If one operation in a sequence of cleanup tasks fails, subsequent operations are also likely to fail, making individual error handling redundant in this context.