Add OpenClaw red-bot brand mark

[bkudiess]

Summary

• Add a shared BrandMark WinUI control backed by the red-bot app asset.
• Replace lobster/generic robot brand marks in Hub, Welcome, Pairing approval, Recording consent, and Agent Events surfaces.
• Remove the dead FluentIconCatalog.Brand emoji constant and update source-text contracts.
• Keep native Windows accent colors unchanged.

Validation

• ./build.ps1 ✅
• dotnet test .\tests\OpenClaw.Shared.Tests\OpenClaw.Shared.Tests.csproj --no-restore ✅ 2703 passed / 31 skipped
• dotnet test .\tests\OpenClaw.Tray.Tests\OpenClaw.Tray.Tests.csproj --no-restore --filter FullyQualifiedName~BrandMarkContractTests ✅ 3 passed
• dotnet build .\src\OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI\OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI.csproj --no-restore -p:RuntimeIdentifier=win-arm64 -v:minimal ✅
• CI Build and Test workflow ✅ all required jobs green on the PR.
• Local full Tray suite note: AssistantBridgeServiceTests.StartListenServiceAsync_KillsTimedOutBackendCommand can fail in the full suite on current origin/main; the same failure reproduced on clean origin/main, and the single test passed when run alone.

Real behavior proof

• ./run-app-local.ps1 -NoBuild -Isolated -AllowNonMain ✅ launched current branch app successfully.
  • PID: 22008
  • Data dir: %TEMP%\OpenClawTray\bkudiess-turbo-doodle-bkudiess-app-wide-icon-branding-onboarding-1b7989ca
  • Process was verified and stopped by PID.
• Current-head visual proof (manual screenshot, 2026-07-08): Hub window title bar shows the red-bot BrandMark immediately before OpenClaw Windows Companion; native Windows accent colors remain unchanged in the NavigationView selection and toggles.
• Current-head accessibility/UI proof via computer-use: OpenClaw Companion Hub window was observed with TitleText = OpenClaw Windows Companion, native sidebar icons, and active Connection surface; screenshot view showed the red-bot title-bar mark in the changed surface.

Review

• Ran dual-model Hanselman review (Claude Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.3-Codex).
• No CRITICAL/HIGH issues found.
• Addressed all findings: root accessibility/hit-test behavior, invalid MarkSize coercion, and stronger BrandMark contract tests.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed July 8, 2026, 3:33 PM ET / 19:33 UTC.

Summary
The branch adds a reusable WinUI BrandMark control backed by the red-bot asset, replaces several lobster or robot placeholder marks in tray UI surfaces, removes FluentIconCatalog.Brand, and updates source-text tests.

Reproducibility: not applicable. This PR changes visual branding rather than reporting a bug. Source inspection of current main still shows the old placeholders, and the inspected screenshots show the changed Hub surface.

Review metrics: 2 noteworthy metrics.

• Merge-result files: 12 files changed, +180/-26. The actual merge result is bounded to WinUI branding and contract tests, which keeps review scope small.
• Visible surfaces: 5 tray surfaces changed. The PR changes user-visible branding in Hub, Welcome, Pairing Approval, Recording Consent, and Agent Events.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🦞 diamond lobster
Proof: 🦞 diamond lobster ✨ media proof bonus
Patch quality: 🦞 diamond lobster
Result: ready for maintainer review.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Next step before merge

• No ClawSweeper repair lane is needed; the PR has sufficient proof, a clean synthetic merge diff, and no blocking review findings.

Security
Cleared: The merge diff only adds a local WinUI image control and source-text tests; no dependency, script, permission, secret, or workflow surface is changed.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Proceed with ordinary maintainer merge review of the bounded BrandMark cleanup, preserving the existing red-bot asset path, native Windows accent behavior, and source-text contracts.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable; this PR changes visual branding rather than reporting a bug. Source inspection of current main still shows the old placeholders, and the inspected screenshots show the changed Hub surface.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes; a shared WinUI control backed by the existing packaged red-bot asset is the narrow maintainable solution for replacing repeated emoji brand placeholders.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 87634727b65b.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• remove rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Current PR rating is rating: 🦞 diamond lobster, so this older rating label is no longer current.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is low-risk visual UI branding polish with no evidence of runtime breakage or urgent regression.
• rating: 🦞 diamond lobster: Overall readiness is 🦞 diamond lobster; proof is 🦞 diamond lobster and patch quality is 🦞 diamond lobster.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Sufficient (screenshot): The PR body includes current-head launch details, and the downloaded screenshots directly show the red-bot BrandMark in the Hub title bar and runtime UI.
• proof: sufficient: Contributor real behavior proof is sufficient. The PR body includes current-head launch details, and the downloaded screenshots directly show the red-bot BrandMark in the Hub title bar and runtime UI.
• proof: 📸 screenshot: Contributor real behavior proof includes screenshot evidence. The PR body includes current-head launch details, and the downloaded screenshots directly show the red-bot BrandMark in the Hub title bar and runtime UI.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• AGENTS.md policy read and applied: The repository policy was read fully; its tray UX validation and visible-proof guidance applies to this PR review, while the review contract keeps the checkout read-only. (AGENTS.md:57, 87634727b65b)
• Current main still has placeholders: Current main still contains the lobster and robot branding placeholders in the surfaces this PR changes, so the central cleanup is not already implemented on main. (src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Windows/HubWindow.xaml:63, 87634727b65b)
• Actual merge result is bounded: The synthetic merge commit applies only the 12-file branding/control-test patch onto current main, avoiding stale-base noise from a raw head-vs-main diff. (f05f9c53223b)
• BrandMark implementation uses existing asset: The merge result sets BrandMark image source through BrandAssets.CreateRedBotMarkSource and points at the existing packaged red-bot PNG asset. (src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Controls/BrandMark.xaml.cs:21, f05f9c53223b)
• Contract coverage added: The PR adds BrandMarkContractTests to pin the shared image asset, accessibility/raw hit-test behavior, known surfaces, and absence of emoji brand marks in cs/xaml sources. (tests/OpenClaw.Tray.Tests/BrandMarkContractTests.cs:14, f05f9c53223b)
• Real behavior proof inspected: The GitHub-hosted screenshots were downloaded to the scratch directory and visually inspected; they show the red-bot mark in the Hub title bar and full Hub window state. (98eecfa757c2)

Likely related people:

• shanselman: Blame and -S history show the current emoji placeholder lines in Hub, Welcome, Pairing Approval, Recording Consent, Agent Events, and FluentIconCatalog.Brand date to commit 4166e0f. (role: introduced baseline behavior; confidence: high; commits: 4166e0fd63f8; files: src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Windows/HubWindow.xaml, src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Dialogs/WelcomeDialog.cs, src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Dialogs/PairingApprovalDialog.cs)
• steipete: Recent onboarding work touched WelcomeDialog and FluentIconCatalog near the changed surfaces, although the central placeholder literals trace mostly to 4166e0f. (role: recent brand-adjacent contributor; confidence: medium; commits: adcb4c378f90; files: src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Dialogs/WelcomeDialog.cs, src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Helpers/FluentIconCatalog.cs)
• karkarl: Recent WCAG and accessibility-test work touched HubWindow and AgentEventsPage, two visible surfaces changed by this PR and relevant to decorative Raw accessibility treatment. (role: recent accessibility-area contributor; confidence: medium; commits: 6045c2d00e1f, e0a2301ce2e8; files: src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Windows/HubWindow.xaml, src/OpenClaw.Tray.WinUI/Pages/AgentEventsPage.xaml)

What the crustacean ranks mean

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

How this review workflow works

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

Review history (4 earlier review cycles)

• reviewed 2026-07-08T05:38:53.189Z sha 98eecfa :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none
• reviewed 2026-07-08T18:22:06.394Z sha 98eecfa :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none
• reviewed 2026-07-08T18:27:19.824Z sha 98eecfa :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none
• reviewed 2026-07-08T19:27:13.284Z sha 98eecfa :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none

[bkudiess]

@clawsweeper re-review

[clawsweeper]

🦞🧹
ClawSweeper re-review requested.

I asked ClawSweeper to review this item again.
Action: item re-review queued (workflow sweep.yml, event repository_dispatch).
Result: the existing ClawSweeper review comment will be edited in place when the review finishes.

[bkudiess]

@clawsweeper re-review

[shanselman]

Reviewed with >90% confidence. BrandMark is decorative/raw for accessibility, hit-test safe, covered by contract tests, and CI is green.