A page that could not save, and said nothing

The model page has been unable to save anything below the reasoning efforts
since 1.3.0. "Save changes" did nothing at all, so the description, the system
prompt, every capability and tool switch and the whole availability card
silently would not take -- while the fields above it saved normally, which is
what made the page look as though it worked.

"Detect from the endpoint" had stopped detecting too: it submitted the page as
an ordinary save carrying only the top half of the form, so every field below
took its empty default. Pressing it would have cleared that model's description
and system prompt and switched the model off with all of its tools disabled.

One HTML rule causes both. A form inside another form is not allowed, and rather
than complaining a browser discards the inner start tag and lets the matching
end tag close the *outer* form -- so from that point down the page was in no
form, and a button in no form does nothing. The detect form is now declared
before the main one and the button reaches it by id.

Nothing in the markup reads wrong, and no test that posts to a route can see
this, because such a test supplies the fields itself. tests/test_form_structure.py
reads every template the way a browser parses it instead, including that rule,
and was checked against the old markup before being trusted: it reports the same
orphaned "Save changes" that headless Chromium did.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -16,6 +16,29 @@ for 1.0.0 have something to be assembled from.
 
 ## Unreleased
 
+## 1.3.2
+
+- Fixed: **the model page could not save anything below the reasoning efforts**,
+  and had not been able to since 1.3.0. "Save changes" did nothing at all — not
+  slowly, not with an error, simply nothing — so the description, the system
+  prompt, every capability and tool switch, and the whole availability card
+  (enabled, pinned, available to everyone, groups) silently would not take. The
+  fields above it, including the display name and the reasoning efforts, saved
+  normally, which is what made it look like it worked.
+
+  Worse, the **Detect from the endpoint** button had stopped detecting. It
+  submitted the page as an ordinary save instead — a save carrying only the top
+  half of the form, so everything below took its empty default: it would have
+  cleared that model's description and system prompt and switched the model off
+  with all of its tools disabled. If you pressed it, check that model's page.
+
+  The cause was one HTML rule: a form inside another form is not allowed, and
+  rather than complaining, a browser discards the inner tag and lets the closing
+  tag end the *outer* form. Everything after that point was in no form, and a
+  button in no form does nothing. Nothing in the markup looks wrong, and no test
+  that posts to a route can see it — so the fix comes with one that reads every
+  page the way a browser parses it.
+
 ## 1.3.1
 
 - Fixed: **updating to 1.2.0 or later broke every page that lists models**, with

src/lembas/__init__.py

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 """LLeMbas - a Middle-earth themed web UI for OpenAI-compatible LLM endpoints."""
 
-__version__ = "1.3.1"
+__version__ = "1.3.2"

src/lembas/web/templates/admin/model_detail.html

@@ -69,6 +69,12 @@
   </p>
 </section>
 
+{# Empty, hidden, and outside every other form: the Detect button further down
+   is associated with it by `form="detect-efforts"`. It carries no fields on
+   purpose — detection asks the endpoint and needs nothing from this page. #}
+<form id="detect-efforts" method="post"
+      action="/admin/models/{{ model.id }}/detect-efforts" hidden></form>
+
 <form method="post" action="/admin/models/{{ model.id }}">
   <section class="card">
     <h2 class="card__title">Presentation</h2>
@@ -132,13 +138,28 @@
         pretending the model accepts nothing.
 
         Its own form, because this page's main form is a PUT of everything and
-        a detect must not carry half-edited fields with it.
+        a detect must not carry half-edited fields with it — and that form is
+        declared before the main one rather than here, with this button reaching
+        it by id.
+
+        🚨 It was written inline here, nested inside the main form, which HTML
+        does not allow. Nothing complains: the parser *drops* the inner `form`
+        start tag and then lets the matching end tag close the outer one — so
+        from this point down the page was in no form at all. "Save changes"
+        submitted nothing; the description, the system prompt, every capability
+        and the whole availability card could not be saved. And this button
+        submitted the main form's surviving half to the *save* route, where every
+        field it did not carry took its default: description cleared, system
+        prompt cleared, and the model disabled with all of its tools off.
+
+        Shipped in 1.3.0 and found in 1.3.2 by asking a browser which form each
+        control belonged to, which is the only thing that finds it — the markup
+        reads correctly, and a test posting to the route bypasses the parser
+        entirely. `tests/test_form_structure.py` is the guard.
       #}
-      <form method="post" action="/admin/models/{{ model.id }}/detect-efforts">
+      <button class="btn btn--sm" type="submit" form="detect-efforts">
-        <button class="btn btn--sm" type="submit">
         {{ icon('search', 'icon--sm') }} Detect from the endpoint
       </button>
-      </form>
 
       <p class="field__hint">
         The vocabulary is <strong>not the same for every model</strong>, and

tests/test_form_structure.py

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+"""Where a form begins and ends, and which form a button belongs to.
+
+Every other test in this suite talks to a route. That is what let this ship: a
+POST from `TestClient` carries exactly the fields the test names, so a page whose
+fields are not in any form passes every one of them. The browser is the only
+thing that disagrees, and what it disagrees about is a parse rule.
+
+`<form>` inside `<form>` is not allowed in HTML, and the failure is silent and
+inverted: the parser **drops the inner start tag**, and the inner *end* tag then
+closes the outer form. So a nested form does not create a small form inside a big
+one -- it truncates the big one, and everything below becomes unsubmittable.
+
+That is what `admin/model_detail.html` did from 1.3.0 to 1.3.2. "Save changes"
+belonged to no form and did nothing; the description, the system prompt, all
+nineteen capability switches and the availability card could not be saved; and
+the one button that *was* inside the surviving half posted it to the save route,
+where every absent field took its `Form()` default -- clearing the description
+and the system prompt and disabling the model.
+
+The markup reads correctly at every point, which is why this is a test about
+structure rather than about wording.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import re
+from pathlib import Path
+
+import pytest
+
+TEMPLATES = Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1] / "src/lembas/web/templates"
+
+# Jinja comments are not markup. The explanation of this very bug, in
+# `model_detail.html`, contains the words it warns about.
+COMMENT = re.compile(r"\{#.*?#\}", re.S)
+TAG = re.compile(r"<form\b|</form\s*>", re.I)
+SUBMIT = re.compile(r"<button\b[^>]*>", re.I)
+
+
+def _markup(template: Path) -> str:
+    return COMMENT.sub("", template.read_text())
+
+
+def _pages() -> list[Path]:
+    return sorted(TEMPLATES.rglob("*.html"))
+
+
+def test_the_scan_finds_the_forms_it_is_meant_to_police():
+    """A blindness guard. If the tags stop being written the way this matches,
+    every assertion below passes by finding nothing -- which is exactly how the
+    bug it exists for got through its own page's tests."""
+    total = sum(len(TAG.findall(_markup(page))) for page in _pages())
+    assert total > 40, f"only {total} form tags found across the templates"
+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize("page", _pages(), ids=lambda p: p.name)
+def test_no_form_is_nested_inside_another(page: Path):
+    depth = 0
+    for match in TAG.finditer(_markup(page)):
+        if match.group(0).startswith("</"):
+            depth -= 1
+            assert depth >= 0, f"{page.name}: a form ends where none began"
+            continue
+        depth += 1
+        assert depth == 1, (
+            f"{page.name}: a form opens inside another at character {match.start()}. "
+            "HTML drops the inner tag and the matching end tag closes the OUTER "
+            "form, so everything below it stops being submittable. Declare the "
+            "second form outside the first and point the button at it with "
+            'form="its-id".'
+        )
+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize("page", _pages(), ids=lambda p: p.name)
+def test_every_submit_button_can_actually_submit_something(page: Path):
+    """A submit outside every form is inert, and looks exactly like a working one.
+
+    A button may reach its form by id instead of by containment, which is how
+    the fix to the bug above works -- so an `form="..."` is accepted, provided
+    the form it names is declared in the same template.
+    """
+    markup = _markup(page)
+    ids = set(re.findall(r'<form\b[^>]*\bid="([^"]+)"', markup))
+
+    # Open **as a browser would**, which is the whole point. A `<form>` start tag
+    # while a form is already open is a parse error and is *ignored*; the next
+    # end tag therefore closes the one that was already open. Counting nesting
+    # naively instead reports the buttons after it as still inside a form, which
+    # is precisely the wrong answer -- and the reason the first version of this
+    # test passed on the markup it was written for.
+    open_form = False
+    cursor = 0
+    orphans: list[str] = []
+
+    def check(start: int, end: int | None) -> None:
+        for button in SUBMIT.finditer(markup, start, end if end is not None else len(markup)):
+            tag = button.group(0)
+            if 'type="submit"' not in tag:
+                continue
+            named = re.search(r'\bform="([^"]+)"', tag)
+            if named is not None:
+                assert named.group(1) in ids, (
+                    f"{page.name}: a submit button names form "
+                    f"{named.group(1)!r}, which this template does not declare"
+                )
+                continue
+            if not open_form:
+                orphans.append(tag[:90])
+
+    for match in TAG.finditer(markup):
+        check(cursor, match.start())
+        cursor = match.end()
+        if match.group(0).startswith("</"):
+            open_form = False
+        elif not open_form:
+            open_form = True
+    check(cursor, None)
+
+    assert not orphans, (
+        f"{page.name}: {len(orphans)} submit button(s) belong to no form and do "
+        f"nothing when pressed: {orphans}"
+    )
+
+
+def test_the_detect_button_is_associated_with_the_detect_form():
+    """The specific fix, pinned. Not the general rule above: this says the button
+    reaches the *detection* route, which is the half the general rule cannot see.
+    Submitting the page's main form instead is what cleared a model's settings."""
+    markup = _markup(TEMPLATES / "admin/model_detail.html")
+    form = re.search(
+        r'<form\b[^>]*\bid="detect-efforts"[^>]*\baction="([^"]*)"', markup, re.S
+    )
+    assert form, "the detect form is gone; the button below it now saves the page"
+    assert form.group(1).endswith("/detect-efforts")
+    assert 'form="detect-efforts"' in markup