Commit Graph
4 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 24beb00575 feat(runner): add rich ACP transport and durable interaction foundation (#14430)
Add shared rich ACP transport, durable questions and permissions, verified provider packaging, and bounded activity and plan presentation. Keep Cursor, Copilot, and Pi pending their separate provider qualification.

Persist interaction settlement before publication, fence failed writes until fresh recovery, and preserve owned-process cleanup. Incorporate reviewed mainline integration with extended harness coverage.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-29 08:56:21 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ce09ea40b0 feat(ui): show one rolling runner activity per commentary group (#13255)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task chat shows commentary and runner activity as work proceeds.
> - The expanded activity list uses multiple text lines and an indented
rail.
> - The folded view can repeat reasoning and the current tool in
separate places.
> - This pull request shows one rolling activity between commentary
messages.
> - Users can open a group to follow its full history and inspect each
item.
> - The benefit is a compact feed with aligned icons and stable row
height.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The runner activity groups in task chat, during live work and in saved
history.

**Current behavior**

Activity is spread across a group summary, a reasoning ticker, and a
current-tool row. Expanded rows have different alignment and can span
several lines.

**Proposed behavior**

Keep one latest activity per commentary group. Roll new activities
upward. Keep each expanded history row on one line. Use neutral failure
text without an X icon. Keep the full details available by opening an
individual row.

**Additional context**

Refs: #13246. That open PR covers related folded activity, steering
timestamps, and status alignment. This change implements the separately
reviewed activity-group design, including animated replacement,
single-line expanded history, and neutral failures. It does not change
steering timestamps or status pills.

## What Changed

- Add a shared runner activity group with persistent expansion and
reduced-motion support.
- Use the group in the production runner turn and remove duplicate
narration and current-tool rows.
- Preserve commentary, plan cards, request receipts, and final-response
placement.
- Keep tool output, reasoning, research sources, file previews, and
failure details accessible.
- Render the production turn in desktop and mobile animated Storybook
fixtures.
- Add tests for animation identity, failure visibility, expansion
persistence, and timeline order.
- Validate resource link schemes and omit disclosure controls for items
with no details.

## Verification

- Focused activity, runner turn, protocol detail, and task-thread tests
pass: 161 tests.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- Browser checks confirm a 32-pixel compact row, centered icons, and
one-line expanded rows.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The final UI build also
passes.
- Two real native Codex runs completed in an isolated local instance.
Each run created the expected file, performed separate delayed tool
calls, reported a deliberate missing-file failure, recovered, and
finished the task.
- Browser verification confirmed that the open three-row activity group
remained expanded after the second run moved into saved history. Saved
error output remained accessible without red styling or an X.
- The complete UI suite passes: 581 files and 5,979 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` passes for the final
production fixtures.
- Greptile rates the latest commit 5/5, with zero new comments and no
unresolved review threads. The security scan passes.
- All repository test shards pass in CI. The duplicate local `pnpm
test:run` was stopped after CI completed the full test coverage. The CI
build failed twice because the worker ran out of disk space compiling
the Rust runner tests (`No space left on device`, error 28). The build
and its aggregate verify gate remain blocked by CI capacity. GitHub
squash auto-merge is enabled and will wait for required checks to pass.

## Risks

- This changes presentation and disclosure behavior. Users open a group
to see earlier activity.
- Animation uses stable item IDs. A provider that replaces IDs can
trigger another transition.
- No API, database, or runner protocol contracts change.

> Reviewed `ROADMAP.md`. This improves an existing task-chat surface.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution,
and browser testing. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
version or context-window size.

## 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-09-11 20:06:31 +00:00
DottaandPaperclip 5cb4f061dd fix(ui): simplify provider notices and hide completion calls (#13109)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip shows agent work in task feeds.
> - Native tools and provider notices appear in that feed.
> - A routine completion call adds no useful action for the user.
> - A provider notice needs readable text to explain its warning.
> - This change hides the completion call and displays the notice
summary.
> - Saved run events remain available for inspection.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The feed showed paperclip_finish as a normal tool call. Provider notices
showed
a generic name or a large key-value table instead of a clear warning
message.

**Expected behavior**

Hide the routine completion call from the task feed. Show a warning
icon,
a short severity heading, and the full notice summary across the row.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open a native Codex task that calls paperclip_finish.
2. Inspect its tool activity in the task feed.
3. Inspect a run with a repository-trust provider notice.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on the implementation checkout. Replayed onto master at
6abeb6733.
The search found no duplicate PR for this display change.

**Deployment mode**

Local source checkout with native task feeds.

## What Changed

- Hide paperclip_finish calls and results in task-feed adapters.
- Preserve the raw events for run-log inspection.
- Carry provider-notice text into the transcript.
- Render notices with an icon, severity heading, and full-width summary.
- Cover the display and transcript mapping with regression tests.

## Verification

- The affected UI tests and the token gates passed on the implementation
checkout.
- Browser inspection confirmed the warning text is readable and
completion calls are hidden.
- Repository typecheck and build passed. Repository test groups passed
after resource retests.
- On this PR branch, 123 focused UI tests and the token gates passed.
All GitHub checks passed; Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads.

## Risks

- The task feed hides one known internal tool. Raw run events remain
unchanged.
- Long warning text must wrap within the available width.
- No provider warning classification, accounting, or recovery behavior
changes here.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`). Used for reasoning, code edits,
tool use,
and test execution. The exact context-window limit is not exposed in
this
session. Real-provider acceptance used Codex CLI 0.153.4 with
`gpt-5.6-sol`.

## 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
#` 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>
2026-09-09 15:06:20 -05:00
Dotta 39206c0096 feat(ui): complete the task workspace (#12640)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task page is the main place where people guide and review agent
work.
> - Native runner events already project into the existing task chat on
the lower stack.
> - The larger task workspace must support those events without breaking
direct adapters.
> - Legacy questions, final replies, empty transcripts, and classic
controls must keep their behavior.
> - This pull request completes the provider-neutral task workspace
experience.
> - The benefit is one coherent task surface for native and direct
execution paths.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12639.
Refs #12617.
Refs #12352.

**Subsystem affected**

Task chat, task detail, side panels, interaction forms, and transcript
presentation.

**Problem or motivation**

The task page does not provide one complete workspace for live activity,
plans, questions, queued guidance, files, and documents. Earlier native
UI work also exposed compatibility risks in legacy question and reply
paths.

**Proposed solution**

Add the task workspace components and provider-neutral protocol
presentation. Keep runner-only controls behind runtime facts. Preserve
all direct-adapter composer, transcript, interaction, and finalization
behavior.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate runner page would duplicate task behavior. Replacing legacy
transcript logic would create unnecessary adapter regressions.

**Roadmap alignment**

This work supports the unified task experience and the Cloud and Sandbox
agents milestone.

## Stack

- Base PR: #12639.
- Lower PR: #12638.
- This PR contains only its 119-file UI delta against
`runner/remote-wss-transport`.
- The next stack PR adds administrator and observability controls.

## What Changed

- Added a reusable task workspace side panel for files and documents.
- Added provider-neutral cards for tools, plans, questions, protocol
activity, and progress.
- Added queued guidance and richer composer state.
- Added compact and expanded interaction presentation.
- Added live activity, thinking, usage, recovery, and final reply
presentation.
- Added document annotations and task deep links.
- Added bounded question validation and response handling.
- Preserved native runner event projection from master.
- Preserved legacy channel-less replies and explicit final reply
precedence.
- Preserved direct-adapter and classic-interface controls.
- Did not change server execution selection, Rust code, migrations,
workflows, or `pnpm-lock.yaml`.

## Verification

- GitHub Actions will run UI tests, repository tests, typecheck, build,
browser tests, security, and policy gates.
- Tests cover active, settled, empty-transcript, interaction,
queued-message, plan, question, file, document, and classic-interface
states.
- Compatibility tests cover direct adapters and native runner projection
together.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check runner/remote-wss-transport...HEAD` passes.
- The delta contains 119 UI-only files.

## Risks

- This is a large task-page change.
- Most files are new focused components and tests.
- Shared transcript code keeps the lower native projection and legacy
direct-adapter fallbacks.
- Runner-only controls use adapter and runtime facts.
- No execution path or rollout flag changes in this PR.

> 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-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.

## 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 or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] 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 risks above
- [ ] 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
2026-09-01 02:44:19 -05:00