fix(plugin-sharing): label sys_record_share recipient and access options alike

The recipient vocabulary guard holds one rendering per option key across
both sharing objects, so the record share labels its options the same way.

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QUKVainSF9Fx4YDaSPyE64

Author: claude

packages/plugins/plugin-sharing/src/objects/sys-record-share.object.ts

@@ -199,8 +199,14 @@ export const SysRecordShare = ObjectSchema.create({
       // gate reads such a row — since guest access flows through the guest
       // position and share links only (ADR-0090 D11). Held equal to
       // `RecordShareRecipientType` in `@objectstack/spec/contracts`.
-      ['user', 'group', 'position', 'unit_and_subordinates'],
+      // Labelled options, rendered alike on `sys_sharing_rule`.
       {
+        options: [
+          { value: 'user', label: 'User' },
+          { value: 'group', label: 'Group' },
+          { value: 'position', label: 'Position' },
+          { value: 'unit_and_subordinates', label: 'Business unit and subordinates' },
+        ],
         label: 'Recipient Type',
         required: true,
         defaultValue: 'user',
@@ -241,8 +247,11 @@ export const SysRecordShare = ObjectSchema.create({
       // `edit` while claiming more (ADR-0078 declared-but-unenforced; #3865).
       // Rows persisted with `full` are normalised to `edit` (grant-time + boot
       // backfill) and stay honoured by the gates until they are.
-      ['read', 'edit'],
       {
+        options: [
+          { value: 'read', label: 'Read' },
+          { value: 'edit', label: 'Read and edit' },
+        ],
         label: 'Access Level',
         required: true,
         defaultValue: 'read',

packages/plugins/plugin-sharing/src/sharing-rule-option-labels.test.ts

@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
 // Copyright (c) 2026 ObjectStack. Licensed under the Apache-2.0 license.
 
 /**
- * `sys_sharing_rule.recipient_type` and `access_level` offer labelled options.
+ * `sys_sharing_rule.recipient_type` and `access_level` offer labelled options,
+ * and so does `sys_record_share`, which shares that vocabulary
+ * (`recipient-vocabulary-consistency.test.ts` holds the two renderings equal).
  * Declared as the bare-string shorthand, every label equalled its stored value,
  * so the Sharing Rule form showed `unit_and_subordinates` as option text while
  * the help text under it already named the options by their labels. The stored
@@ -11,6 +13,7 @@
 
 import { describe, it, expect } from 'vitest';
 import { SysSharingRule } from './objects/sys-sharing-rule.object.js';
+import { SysRecordShare } from './objects/sys-record-share.object.js';
 
 type Option = { value: string; label: string };
 const optionsOf = (field: 'recipient_type' | 'access_level'): Option[] =>
@@ -42,3 +45,19 @@ describe('sys_sharing_rule select options', () => {
     expect(help).toContain('"Field"');
   });
 });
+
+describe('sys_record_share select options', () => {
+  const optionsOf = (field: 'recipient_type' | 'access_level'): Option[] =>
+    (SysRecordShare.fields[field] as { options: Option[] }).options;
+
+  it('keeps the stored values', () => {
+    expect(optionsOf('recipient_type').map((o) => o.value)).toEqual(['user', 'group', 'position', 'unit_and_subordinates']);
+    expect(optionsOf('access_level').map((o) => o.value)).toEqual(['read', 'edit']);
+  });
+
+  it.each(['recipient_type', 'access_level'] as const)('%s labels no option with its machine value', (field) => {
+    for (const o of optionsOf(field)) {
+      expect(o.label, o.value).not.toBe(o.value);
+    }
+  });
+});