Commit Graph
10 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Dotta 4a641d0980 fix(ui): default human task replies to the latest assigning agent (#15594)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks let agents ask a person for input.
> - The reply composer needs a useful default recipient.
> - A recent comment does not identify the agent that assigned the task.
> - The old fallback can select the person who is writing the reply.
> - This change uses the latest agent assignment and keeps manual
choices.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
When an agent assigns a task to a person, the reply composer can select
that person or a different commenter. A data refresh can also replace a
manual selection.

**Expected behavior**
For a task assigned to the current person, select the latest agent that
assigned it to them. If no such assignment exists, use the latest other
commenter. If neither exists, leave the recipient empty. Keep explicit
choices during refreshes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Have agent Alpha assign a task to a person.
2. Assign it to agent Beta, then have Beta assign it to the same person.
3. Open the task as that person.
4. Check that the reply composer selects Beta.
5. Select another recipient. Refresh task data. Check that the selection
stays.

Related work: #15091 shares task composer controls. This change fixes
recipient defaults.

## What Changed

- Read real assignment changes from REST and native runner task
activity, in time order.
- Record human assignee fields in native create and reassign activity.
- Ignore unchanged assignment fields and assignments to other people.
- Use the assigning agent before comment hints for human-owned tasks.
- Connect the suggestion to current and classic task composers and
pipeline replies.
- Keep manual selections when suggestions change.
- Add regression tests and document the fallback.
- Use tasks with no assignee in the attachment receipt tests. This keeps
the tests on the comment route. Dismiss announcements through the real
UI.
- Record human and agent assignees in REST creation receipts. Include
child creation in the assignment history resolver.

## Verification

- Focused tests cover assignment order, creation, other recipients,
unchanged fields, fallback, and manual selections.
- Browser fixture uses the real composer and assignment resolver. It
selects Beta and keeps a manual human selection after history refresh.
- Passed: 223 focused tests across four suites.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`.
- Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- The initial CI run passed full build, typecheck, Rust, unit tests and
seven E2E shards. The attachment shard exposed tests that relied on the
old self-selection default. The tests now select the recipient
explicitly.
- Native assignment regression tests and resolver tests pass: 40 tests.
- Attachment E2E suite: 10 passed; one page-load timing failure passed
on an isolated rerun. All 11 cases passed across the suite and rerun.
- Previous full CI passed at cc7ed05. New CI must pass on the current
head.
- Latest local checks: 16 resolver tests and 7 workspace policy tests
pass. REST creation audit tests cover both creation routes.
- The latest browser check could not start. The UI build exceeded the
local memory limit (exit 137). Full typecheck, tests, build, and browser
checks will run in CI.

## Risks

- Old activity rows without previous assignment values cannot prove a
reassignment. They use the comment fallback.
- An empty fallback requires the person to choose a recipient or use the
existing no-assignee flow.
- No database or API schema changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The session does not expose an exact model build or
context window. Used code editing, shell tools, tests, and browser
verification.

## 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


Final validation at f83f2f6: 55 checks passed. Two optional Storybook
checks were skipped. All browser shards passed. Both review threads are
resolved. Classic attachment tests use the real no-assignee
confirmation.
2026-10-13 00:56:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2dbaf4a7fa External object references across issue surfaces (#8512)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate
AI agents, issues, approvals, comments, and work products.
> - The involved subsystem is issue context: markdown links, issue
properties, related work, lists, filters, inbox/sidebar status, and
plugin-provided external context.
> - The gap is that URLs to external systems currently remain mostly
plain links, so humans and agents must manually open them to understand
status, identity, and liveness.
> - This matters because external work objects such as GitHub issues and
pull requests are part of the operational state of a Paperclip company.
> - The implementation keeps core provider-neutral: shared contracts,
storage, sync, routes, and UI surfaces live in core while providers can
contribute detection and status resolution.
> - This pull request adds the external object reference foundation,
GitHub provider support, issue-surface rendering, filters,
sidebar/list/inbox signals, and test/story coverage.
> - The benefit is that linked external work becomes inspectable
Paperclip context without hardcoding every provider directly into the
UI.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this work.

Feature request:

- Problem: URLs in Paperclip issues, comments, documents, and related
surfaces do not expose provider status or object identity inline.
- Proposed behavior: detect supported external object URLs, persist
normalized references, refresh provider status, and render concise
status-aware links across issue surfaces.
- Users affected: board users, agents, and maintainers who triage issues
containing external work links.
- Acceptance: external object references are company-scoped,
provider-extensible, visible in key issue surfaces, filterable where
relevant, and covered by focused shared/server/UI tests.

Related PR search:

- No open duplicate PRs found for `external object references`.
- Closed related prior attempt: #4556.

## What Changed

- Added shared external-object contracts, validators, status/liveness
helpers, and plugin protocol declarations.
- Added database schema and additive migrations for external objects,
source mentions, and display metadata.
- Added server services/routes for detecting, syncing, summarizing,
refreshing, and resolving external objects across issues, documents,
comments, projects, and plugins.
- Added a GitHub external-object provider plus plugin SDK authoring
docs.
- Wired UI presentation across markdown links, comments, issue chat,
documents, properties, related work, issue rows, filters, inbox/sidebar
badges, and Storybook stories.
- Rebasing cleanup: moved the branch onto current `master`, repaired
stale worktree provision config, hardened environment-sensitive
tests/mocks, and removed committed screenshot artifacts from the PR
branch to keep the reviewable file set below tool limits.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/external-objects.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/external-object-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/external-objects-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/ExternalObjectPill.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/external-objects.test.ts` passed after rebasing: 5 files, 56
tests.
- Historical branch verification before this PR creation included `pnpm
test:run`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`; this PR body does not
claim those were rerun after the final rebase.

## Risks

- Medium: this adds a new cross-surface sync path on
issue/document/comment writes. The implementation uses safe sync
wrappers so external-object failures warn instead of blocking core
mutations.
- Medium: the migrations introduce new tables and indexes. They are
additive and company-scoped.
- Medium: provider-specific URL parsing can miss or misclassify edge
cases. Shared canonicalization tests and provider tests cover current
GitHub shapes.
- Low: UI badge/filter behavior could add visual noise for object-heavy
issues; component tests and Storybook stories cover the intended
surfaces.

> Roadmap checked: `ROADMAP.md` references the plugin system as the
current extension path and does not list a duplicate core feature.
Related long-range docs discuss external references, work products,
preview URLs, and plugin extension points; this PR implements the scoped
external-object reference foundation.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding-agent runtime, with shell and GitHub CLI tool
use. Reasoning mode: medium. Exact deployed runtime model ID and context
window were not exposed in the environment.

## 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>
2026-06-23 08:27:19 -05:00
Devin Foley 20aea356cc refactor(deps-dev): bump vitest from 3.2.4 to 4.1.8 (#7581)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Test infrastructure across server, ui, packages/* runs on Vitest
> - Dependabot opened a narrow bump (3.2.4 → 3.2.6), but the wider
workspace is on 3.2.4 and the major-version bridge to v4 needs a
coordinated change set across configs and tests
> - Staying on 3.x indefinitely leaves us behind on Vitest 4 (perf,
pool, and config improvements) and forces repeated patch-only dependabot
churn
> - This pull request upgrades Vitest to 4.1.8 across the workspace,
updates `server/vitest.config.ts` and `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`
for the new API, and adjusts two UI tests for the new assertion
semantics
> - The benefit is a single, coherent Vitest 4 upgrade that supersedes
#7570 and gets us on the supported major line

## What Changed

- Bump `vitest` from `3.2.4` to `4.1.8` across root, `server`, `ui`, and
all `packages/*` (including plugin examples and sandbox providers)
- Update `server/vitest.config.ts` for Vitest 4 config surface
- Update `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs` to match the new runner
behavior
- Adjust `ui/src/components/CommentThread.test.tsx` and
`ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx` for Vitest 4 matcher/timing
semantics
- Refresh `pnpm-lock.yaml`

## Verification

- `pnpm install` resolves cleanly with the new lockfile
- `pnpm -w -r test` (server, ui, packages) runs under Vitest 4.1.8

## Risks

- Major-version Vitest bump: behavioral changes in pools, fake timers,
and matcher strictness can surface flake. Test config and the two UI
tests were updated to match v4 semantics; broader test runs should be
watched on CI before merge.
- Supersedes dependabot PR #7570 (3.2.4 → 3.2.6); that PR should be
closed.

## Model Used

- Claude (Anthropic) — `claude-opus-4-7`, extended thinking, tool use
enabled

## 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Closes #7570
2026-06-05 21:11:32 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 454edfe81e Add recovery handoff system notices (#5289)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Agent runs can end productively while the source issue still lacks a
durable final disposition.
> - That leaves the control plane unsure whether to resume, escalate, or
close the work.
> - Issue comments also need a presentation contract so system-authored
recovery notices can render as first-class thread messages without
overloading normal comments.
> - This pull request adds successful-run handoff recovery, comment
presentation metadata, and system notice rendering.
> - The benefit is stricter task liveness with clearer operator-facing
recovery state.

## What Changed

- Added successful-run handoff decisions, wake payloads, escalation
behavior, and recovery tests.
- Added issue comment presentation metadata with migration
`0078_white_darwin.sql` and shared/server/company portability support.
- Rendered recovery/system notices in issue chat with dedicated UI
components, fixtures, tests, and storybook/lab coverage.
- Included the current recovery model-profile hint patch so automatic
recovery follow-ups use the cheap profile.

## Verification

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts
ui/src/components/SystemNotice.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/system-notice-comment.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueChatThreadSystemNotice.test.tsx`

## Risks

- Migration-bearing PR: merge this before any other branch that might
later add a migration.
- The branch touches both recovery services and issue-thread rendering,
so review should pay attention to recovery wake idempotency and comment
metadata compatibility.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with
shell/git/GitHub CLI tool use.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-06 06:05:58 -05:00
Dotta 5a0c1979cf [codex] Add runtime lifecycle recovery and live issue visibility (#4419) 2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6e6f538630 [codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - A core part of that is the operator experience around reading issue
state, agent chat, and sub-task structure
> - The current branch had a long run of issue-detail and issue-list UX
fixes that all improve how humans follow and steer active work
> - Those changes mostly live in the UI/chat surface and should be
reviewed together instead of mixed with workspace/runtime work
> - This pull request packages the issue-detail, chat, markdown, and
sub-issue list improvements into one standalone change
> - The benefit is a cleaner, less jumpy, more reliable issue workflow
on desktop and mobile without coupling it to unrelated server/runtime
refactors

## What Changed

- Stabilized issue chat runtime wiring, optimistic comment handling,
queued-comment cancellation, and composer anchoring during live updates
- Fixed several issue-detail rendering and navigation regressions
including placeholder bleed, local polling scope, mobile inbox-to-issue
transitions, and visible refresh resets
- Improved markdown and rich-content handling with advisory image
normalization, editor fallback behavior, touch mention recovery, and
`issue:` quicklook links
- Refined sub-issue behavior with parent-derived defaults, current-user
inheritance fixes, empty-state cleanup, and a reusable issue-list
presentation for sub-issues
- Added targeted UI tests for the new issue-detail, chat scroll/message,
placeholder-data, markdown, and issue-list behaviors

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-scroll.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/query-placeholder-data.test.tsx
ui/src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx`

## Risks

- Medium: this branch touches the highest-traffic issue-detail UI paths,
so regressions would show up as chat/thread or sub-issue UX glitches
- The changes are UI-heavy and would benefit from reviewer screenshots
or a quick manual browser pass before merge

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact
deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning
enabled, tool use and local code execution enabled

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
dotta 1e4ccb2b1f Improve mobile comment copy button feedback 2026-04-09 06:18:05 -05:00
dottaandPaperclip 365b6d9bd8 Add generic issue-linked board approvals
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-06 21:24:38 -05:00
dottaandPaperclip 65818c3447 Guard closed isolated workspaces on issues
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-04 17:48:54 -05:00
dottaandPaperclip bd6d07d0b4 fix(ui): polish issue detail timelines and attachments
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-02 11:51:40 -05:00