fix(logos): ship every provider mark as colour/light/dark PNG triplets

[jaywedgeworth22]

The symptom

The owner: "The logos are NOT SHOWING UP it seems like no matter what y'all do to fix it other than the custom logo for MiniMax I uploaded." Every bundled mark drew questionmark.square.dashed — the fallback glyph.

What four previous fixes got wrong

PRs #160, #167, #176 and #180 all assumed a bundle-resolution failure. Measurement ruled that out:

Checked	Result
Marks present in the installed app?	Yes — all 17
Do the SVGs decode?	Yes — every one rasterises to real pixels (claude 274/576 opaque, cursor 306/576)
Does Bundle.url(forResource:) find them?	Yes, every one, in the installed app
Does PlatformLogoImage.load return an image?	Yes — all 18 provider keys, both styles
Is the owner on a stale build?	No — installed build 156 is main HEAD, and already includes the #180 logo fix
Did the failure path log?	Never in 48h — and that's meaningful, the app emits ~39k log entries/day

So resolution worked. Delivery didn't. Two defects, both found by measuring:

1. The marks were SVGs, which come back as _NSSVGImageRep — a private AppKit class. The prior fixes were chasing the wrong layer.
2. muse-code.png, muse.png and muse-assist.png ship a baked-in opaque white background, so they drew as a white box on any non-white surface.

The fix

Every mark now ships as three PNGs:

<base>-color.png   brand colours (Standard style)
<base>-light.png   silhouette in Theme.ink's Light value
<base>-dark.png    silhouette in Theme.ink's Dark value

Appearance is now chosen from data, not from the hardcoded monochromeKeys Set. That Set was the guesswork that made some marks invisible and others fine — it no longer decides which file loads.

Two more fixes found along the way:

• Third-Party Antigravity resolved through templateResourceNames to a Muse mark. Both pools now map to their own star.
• muse-code is rasterised from the Meta vector, not the shipped PNG, which was visibly soft at small sizes. Coverage went 100% → 19% once the white background was knocked out from the border inward (white that belongs to the mark is preserved).

The custom-mark path is untouched — an owner-supplied mark still wins over the bundled one and still adapts to Light/Dark. A first pass at this PR merged .custom into the .standard case and broke exactly that path; the 6 test failures caught it before merge.

Verification

• 366 tests pass, 3 skipped, 0 failures, plus 4 new ones asserting that all 18 providers resolve in every style and appearance, every delivered mark is an NSBitmapImageRep rather than a private rep, none carries an opaque background, and Light and Dark are genuinely different files.
• Those tests pin the contract, not an implementation, so a private rep cannot creep back in through any path.

Note

This does not touch the CodeCaps app icon or the menu bar mark.

[kody-ai]

Code Review Completed! 🔥

The code review was successfully completed based on your current configurations.

Kody Guide: Usage and Configuration

Interacting with Kody

• Request a Review: Ask Kody to review your PR manually by adding a comment with the @kody start-review command at the root of your PR.

• Validate Business Logic: Ask Kody to validate your code against business rules by adding a comment with the @kody -v business-logic command.

• Provide Feedback: Help Kody learn and improve by reacting to its comments with a 👍 for helpful suggestions or a 👎 if improvements are needed.

Current Kody Configuration

Review Options

The following review options are enabled or disabled:

Options	Enabled
Bug	✅
Performance	✅
Security	✅
Business Logic	✅

Access your configuration settings here.

​

[kody-ai]

Single ASCII space between sentences in the PR body collapses under GitHub-flavored markdown rendering, violating the owner's 2026-08-19 ruling that rendered agent-written paragraphs use   followed by a normal space between sentences. Replace literal single spaces with   at both transitions.

Kody rule violation: Use two spaces between sentences in every human-facing string and agent-written paragraph

[kody-ai]

🤔 Insufficient Task Context

I found a task linked to this PR, but it only contains minimal information (title only, no description or acceptance criteria). To perform a meaningful business rules validation, I need more details.

🔍 What I need to validate:

• Business requirements and acceptance criteria
• Expected behavior and business rules
• Edge cases and constraints to consider

💡 How to improve the task context:

• Add a description to the linked ticket
• Include acceptance criteria or business rules
• Describe the expected behavior after the change

⚠️ Important:

A task title alone is not sufficient to determine whether the implementation is correct or complete.

---

💡 This validation runs automatically only on the first review of a pull request. To run it again, comment @kody -v business-logic.