PaperClipAI

5,531 Commits 1,184 Branches 1,864 Tags

2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
TonioandClaude Opus 5	55464204a6	test(ui): wait for conditions in the last four fixed-turn loops (#11523 ) The remaining instances of the pattern #11499 and #11521 replaced in the routing tests, found by grepping `attempt < N` across the suite. Budgets of 20, 25 and 30 turns rather than 3 and 5, which is why they surfaced far less often - SkillStudio was among the failures seen while verifying the earlier PRs. Three of the four were reimplementations of `vi.waitFor` down to rethrowing the last error, differing only in bounding on turns rather than on time. The fourth was the text variant. Two `flushReact` helpers became dead with the loops that used them and are removed. Verified on the mechanism, since budgets this large pass until the machine is loaded and so prove nothing by passing: a throwaway probe drove a 30-turn loop and `vi.waitFor` against a value landing at turn 60. The loop throws, `vi.waitFor` reaches it. Not a lateral move between arbitrary bounds. This closes one spelling of the pattern, not the class, and the sweep that found these was too narrow. Two other shapes do the same thing and a grep for `attempt < N` cannot see either: a fixed-cycle helper, `flushReact(cycles = 4)` in AgentToolsTab.test.tsx, and fixed-duration sleeps in AgentToolsTab, CompanyContext, AgentConfigForm.render, Artifacts, Search and ImportFromVaultDialog. `AgentToolsTab > autosaves installed apps for the current agent` failed one of three full-suite runs here, holds both shapes, and is untouched by this change. Refs #11484. ui typecheck clean; the four files pass; full suite passes two of three runs, the third failing only on that pre-existing instance. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-17 00:58:16 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	7ea2068ef8	fix(files): only highlight accessible workspace file links (#11090 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task comments can contain references to files in project and execution workspaces. > - Paperclip detected path-shaped inline code and showed it as an actionable file chip. > - The UI did not first confirm that the current board session could open the file. > - Missing, denied, ambiguous, remote, and unsupported files therefore looked actionable and failed after a click. > - This pull request adds an issue-scoped availability check and promotes only confirmed files to chips. > - The benefit is that the task thread shows a file action only when that action can succeed. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? Task comments promoted path-shaped inline code to file chips before Paperclip checked the file. A chip could point to a missing, denied, ambiguous, remote, or non-previewable file. The action then failed after the user selected it. Expected behavior Paperclip must show a file chip only after the server confirms that the current board session can open the exact file reference. All other path-shaped text must stay ordinary inline code. Steps to reproduce 1. Add a task comment that contains inline code with a missing or inaccessible workspace path. 2. Open the task thread as a board user. 3. Observe that the path looks like an actionable file chip. 4. Select the chip and observe that the file cannot open. Paperclip version or commit `19be4cf927` and earlier. Deployment mode Local dev and self-hosted server. Access context Board user. ## What Changed - Added shared request, response, and validation contracts for batched workspace-file availability checks. - Added an issue-scoped server endpoint that resolves file references with company, issue, workspace, and preview-access checks. - Added bounded batch concurrency and tests for missing, denied, ambiguous, remote, unsupported, and available files. - Added an issue-scoped UI availability registry that deduplicates, batches, caches, and invalidates file checks. - Changed task-comment markdown rendering so only confirmed files get chip styling and file-viewer behavior. - Bound each chip to the exact workspace target that passed the availability check. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/workspace-file-resource.test.ts server/src/__tests__/file-resources.test.ts ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileMarkdownBody.availability.test.tsx ui/src/lib/remark-workspace-file-refs.test.ts ui/src/lib/workspace-file-availability.test.ts` — 93 passed, 35 skipped. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — clean. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed. - `pnpm test:run` — all server and UI groups passed. One unchanged CLI test saw the run-injected static AWS credentials and expected only its local `AWS_PROFILE`. The same test passed, 8 of 8, after removing only `AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID` and `AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY` from its process environment. ## Risks - File chips now appear after an asynchronous availability check, so path-shaped text can briefly render as inline code. - Availability results use the existing 30-second file-resource cache window. File-resource invalidation forces a new check. - The endpoint limits each request to 100 references and the client chunks larger sets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The service did not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode, repository tools, command execution, and test execution. ## 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-08-11 12:11:45 -04:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

TonioandClaude Opus 5

55464204a6

test(ui): wait for conditions in the last four fixed-turn loops (#11523 )

The remaining instances of the pattern #11499 and #11521 replaced in the routing
tests, found by grepping `attempt < N` across the suite. Budgets of 20, 25 and
30 turns rather than 3 and 5, which is why they surfaced far less often -
SkillStudio was among the failures seen while verifying the earlier PRs.

Three of the four were reimplementations of `vi.waitFor` down to rethrowing the
last error, differing only in bounding on turns rather than on time. The fourth
was the text variant. Two `flushReact` helpers became dead with the loops that
used them and are removed.

Verified on the mechanism, since budgets this large pass until the machine is
loaded and so prove nothing by passing: a throwaway probe drove a 30-turn loop
and `vi.waitFor` against a value landing at turn 60. The loop throws,
`vi.waitFor` reaches it. Not a lateral move between arbitrary bounds.

This closes one spelling of the pattern, not the class, and the sweep that found
these was too narrow. Two other shapes do the same thing and a grep for
`attempt < N` cannot see either: a fixed-cycle helper, `flushReact(cycles = 4)`
in AgentToolsTab.test.tsx, and fixed-duration sleeps in AgentToolsTab,
CompanyContext, AgentConfigForm.render, Artifacts, Search and
ImportFromVaultDialog. `AgentToolsTab > autosaves installed apps for the current
agent` failed one of three full-suite runs here, holds both shapes, and is
untouched by this change. Refs #11484.

ui typecheck clean; the four files pass; full suite passes two of three runs,
the third failing only on that pre-existing instance.

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

2026-08-17 00:58:16 -07:00

DottaandPaperclip

7ea2068ef8

fix(files): only highlight accessible workspace file links (#11090 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task comments can contain references to files in project and
execution workspaces.
> - Paperclip detected path-shaped inline code and showed it as an
actionable file chip.
> - The UI did not first confirm that the current board session could
open the file.
> - Missing, denied, ambiguous, remote, and unsupported files therefore
looked actionable and failed after a click.
> - This pull request adds an issue-scoped availability check and
promotes only confirmed files to chips.
> - The benefit is that the task thread shows a file action only when
that action can succeed.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Task comments promoted path-shaped inline code to file chips before
Paperclip checked the file. A chip could point to a missing, denied,
ambiguous, remote, or non-previewable file. The action then failed after
the user selected it.

**Expected behavior**

Paperclip must show a file chip only after the server confirms that the
current board session can open the exact file reference. All other
path-shaped text must stay ordinary inline code.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Add a task comment that contains inline code with a missing or
inaccessible workspace path.
2. Open the task thread as a board user.
3. Observe that the path looks like an actionable file chip.
4. Select the chip and observe that the file cannot open.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`19be4cf927` and earlier.

**Deployment mode**

Local dev and self-hosted server.

**Access context**

Board user.

## What Changed

- Added shared request, response, and validation contracts for batched
workspace-file availability checks.
- Added an issue-scoped server endpoint that resolves file references
with company, issue, workspace, and preview-access checks.
- Added bounded batch concurrency and tests for missing, denied,
ambiguous, remote, unsupported, and available files.
- Added an issue-scoped UI availability registry that deduplicates,
batches, caches, and invalidates file checks.
- Changed task-comment markdown rendering so only confirmed files get
chip styling and file-viewer behavior.
- Bound each chip to the exact workspace target that passed the
availability check.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/workspace-file-resource.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/file-resources.test.ts
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileMarkdownBody.availability.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/remark-workspace-file-refs.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workspace-file-availability.test.ts` — 93 passed, 35 skipped.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — clean.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — all server and UI groups passed. One unchanged CLI
test saw the run-injected static AWS credentials and expected only its
local `AWS_PROFILE`. The same test passed, 8 of 8, after removing only
`AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID` and `AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY` from its process
environment.

## Risks

- File chips now appear after an asynchronous availability check, so
path-shaped text can briefly render as inline code.
- Availability results use the existing 30-second file-resource cache
window. File-resource invalidation forces a new check.
- The endpoint limits each request to 100 references and the client
chunks larger sets.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The service did not expose a more specific
model ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode,
repository tools, command execution, and test execution.

## 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
- [ ] 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>

2026-08-11 12:11:45 -04:00