openclaw - 💡(How to fix) Fix Queue: add sequence markers to queued messages (e.g. [Queued 1/3]) [1 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
openclaw/openclaw#60657Fetched 2026-04-08 02:48:36
View on GitHub
Comments
0
Participants
1
Timeline
0
Reactions
0
Author
Participants

Code Example

[Queued messages while agent was busy — 3 total]

---
[Queued 1/3]
(message content)

---
[Queued 2/3]  
(message content)

---
[Queued 3/3]
(message content)

---

[Queued messages while agent was busy]

---
Queued #1
(content)

---
Queued #2
(content)
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Problem

When the agent is busy and multiple user messages arrive, they are batched into a single [Queued messages while agent was busy] block. The LLM receives all queued messages in one turn but tends to only respond to the most recent/prominent one, silently dropping earlier messages.

Proposal

Add sequence markers to each queued message, e.g.:

[Queued messages while agent was busy — 3 total]

---
[Queued 1/3]
(message content)

---
[Queued 2/3]  
(message content)

---
[Queued 3/3]
(message content)

This makes it easier for the LLM to:

  1. Know exactly how many messages need a response
  2. Track which ones it has addressed
  3. Avoid accidentally skipping earlier messages

Current format

[Queued messages while agent was busy]

---
Queued #1
(content)

---
Queued #2
(content)

The current format uses Queued #N but doesn't include the total count, making it harder for the LLM to verify it addressed all of them.

Impact

Low effort change (queue delivery formatting only), high impact on response quality for multi-message bursts.

extent analysis

TL;DR

Modify the queue delivery formatting to include sequence markers with total count, enabling the LLM to accurately track and respond to all queued messages.

Guidance

  • Implement the proposed format with sequence markers (e.g., [Queued 1/3]) to provide the LLM with a clear indication of the total number of messages and their order.
  • Update the queue delivery formatting to include the total count of messages, as shown in the proposal (e.g., [Queued messages while agent was busy — 3 total]).
  • Verify that the LLM is correctly responding to all queued messages by testing the updated format with multiple message bursts.
  • Consider monitoring response quality metrics to ensure the change has a positive impact on handling multi-message bursts.

Example

[Queued messages while agent was busy — 3 total]

---
[Queued 1/3]
(message content)

---
[Queued 2/3]  
(message content)

---
[Queued 3/3]
(message content)

Notes

The proposed change is a low-effort modification to the queue delivery formatting, but its impact on response quality for multi-message bursts is expected to be significant.

Recommendation

Apply the proposed workaround by modifying the queue delivery formatting to include sequence markers with total count, as this change is expected to have a high impact on response quality with minimal effort required.

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING