Settle published, successful Slack turns as Idle; resume the same conversation on an admitted message. Preserve unfinished work, delivery errors, and explicit dispositions.
Verified through focused lifecycle/API/UI tests, full CI, and a real staging Slack conversation in the embedded browser.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Version recent-task snapshots separately from activity, reject stale cache updates, and publish only on query or membership changes. Migrate history into an isolated storage namespace while preserving restart retries.
Add regression coverage for conflicting caches, migration, comments, unchanged writes, and storage implementations on Node 24 and Node 26.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The recent tasks sidebar helps operators return to active and
completed work.
> - Task detail refreshes update the activity timestamps used to sort
that list.
> - Older responses can undo newer activity. Concurrent updates can move
rows repeatedly.
> - This pull request preserves the newest observed activity and
debounces row moves.
> - Operators can select a stable row while task text and live state
stay current.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Recent task rows can repeatedly swap positions when two tasks receive
updates. Older detail responses can also move a task below another task
after a newer comment promoted it.
**Expected behavior**
Rows remain stable during an update burst. The final activity order
appears after one second of quiet. Old responses never reduce the
recorded activity time.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the streamlined UI and open multiple tasks.
2. Send alternating updates to two tasks in the recent list.
3. Observe row order while those updates arrive and while older detail
data refreshes.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Base commit: 1cc45086d.
**Deployment mode**
Board UI. The behavior is independent of the server deployment mode.
Related work: #12854 and #12746 introduced the current navigation.
#12314 is an earlier experimental sidebar proposal; this fix targets the
implementation already on master.
## What Changed
- Keep stored activity timestamps at their newest observed value in both
recording paths.
- Debounce activity-driven row moves for one second. Keep additions and
removals immediate.
- Keep detail query observers in a fixed order and resolve task text by
task ID.
- Add regression coverage for alternating updates, stale data,
additions, and removals.
- Document recent task ordering in the development guide.
## Verification
- Passed: 17 focused recent task tests.
- Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`.
- Passed: Greptile 5/5 on commit
`8861961de9aaa7e9a8184826bc5ce367450f9e8a`, with no review threads or
actionable findings.
- Passed: all 31 remote checks, including all general and serialized
test shards, browser tests, release verification, and build. The opt-in
Storybook visual check was skipped by policy.
- One unrelated concurrent artifact-document test failed on the first CI
attempt. Its 11-test suite passed locally, and the single CI retry
passed without code changes.
- The duplicate full local `pnpm test:run` was started; the completed CI
suite provides the full-suite result.
- Regression tests use fake timers to check that rows remain fixed
during alternating activity, text refreshes immediately, and the final
order appears after one second of quiet.
## Risks
- Continuous activity intentionally delays row moves until updates
settle. New and removed tasks still appear immediately.
- Storage format and server contracts stay compatible. No migration is
needed.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context
window size are not exposed in this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The main navigation and task detail view are core operator surfaces.
> - Several controls used different hover states, popover layouts, and
spacing rules.
> - Recent task actions also needed a compact menu and correct inbox
archive behavior.
> - These differences made the interface feel inconsistent and caused
some content to look crowded or clipped.
> - This pull request aligns these surfaces with the Paperclip design
tokens and current interaction patterns.
> - The benefit is a simpler and more consistent operator experience in
light and dark modes.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Profile and organization popovers used inconsistent layouts. Navigation
controls used different hover and selected backgrounds. Task warnings
and the composer could crowd nearby content. Archiving a recent task
could also remove it from more than the inbox.
**Expected behavior**
Popover menus should use the same compact visual language. Navigation
controls should share readable hover and selected tokens. Task detail
content should keep consistent spacing. Archiving should hide a task
from the inbox while keeping it in the task list.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the main sidebar in light or dark mode.
2. Open the profile and organization menus.
3. Hover navigation items, the organization trigger, the profile
trigger, and the feedback flag.
4. Open a task with a warning banner and a long thread.
5. Use the recent task overflow menu and archive a task.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` before this branch.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
## What Changed
- Rebuilt the profile and organization popovers with compact token-based
layouts.
- Matched organization popover width and alignment to the profile
popover.
- Unified sidebar hover and selected states in light and dark modes.
- Added a recent task overflow menu with rename, archive, and pause or
restart actions.
- Kept archived tasks in the task list while removing them from the
inbox.
- Improved warning banner and composer spacing in task detail views.
- Added and updated focused UI tests for the changed behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- The seven affected UI test files passed with 216 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed.
- GitHub CI passed the full build, typecheck and release registry,
general test, serialized server, canary dry-run, and end-to-end
matrices.
- Greptile reviewed commit `6e296be85` at 5/5 with no outstanding
actionable findings.
## Risks
- Risk is limited to sidebar presentation, recent task actions, and task
detail layout.
- The recent task archive action now follows inbox-only archive
semantics.
- No database schema or public API contract changed.
> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This pull request does not
duplicate planned core work.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6. The model used high reasoning, tool use, and
code execution. The context window size was not exposed.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
