PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-11-03 09:37:19 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
TonioandPaperclip	043f2514e6	fix(ui): keep task tabs steady when switching views (#17068 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - A task side panel contains properties, artifacts, and document views. > - These views share one row of tabs. > - Selecting Artifacts adds an upload control beside the row. > - That control reduces the space available to the tabs and changes their widths. > - This pull request reserves the upload control space while the Artifacts tab is open. > - Switching views now keeps the tab widths and positions stable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14949. This fixes a layout shift observed after that PR merged. What happened? In a narrow task panel, tabs shrink when Artifacts is selected. They expand when another tab is selected. The upload control enters and leaves the header during selection. Expected behavior Tab selection must not change the space available to the tab row. Tabs must keep equal widths while the panel width and open tabs remain unchanged. Steps to reproduce 1. Open Properties, Artifacts, and a document or attachment in a task side panel. 2. Make the side panel narrow enough for tabs to compress. 3. Switch between Artifacts and the other tabs. 4. Observe the tab widths and positions as the upload control appears and disappears. ## What Changed - Keep an upload control slot in the header while an upload-capable Artifacts tab is open. - Hide the control and make it inert when another tab is active. Remove the slot when Artifacts is closed. Agent conversations do not reserve upload space. - Add a component regression test for selection, focus exclusion, and closing the Artifacts tab. - Add a constrained production-panel Storybook case with assertions for equal widths, stable widths across selections, and upload-control visibility. ## Verification - The focused TaskSidePanel and SidePanelTabs suites passed: 52 tests. - UI typecheck, UI build, and token gates passed after replaying the fix onto current master. - The Storybook catalog check and all 28 map/catalog tests passed. - The browser ran `html-artifacts-03-task-journey--stable-tab-widths` successfully. All three tabs measured 71.328125px before and after selecting Properties, the report, and Artifacts. - Review the Stable Tab Widths story under HTML artifacts / 03 Task journey. The fixture mounts the production task panel. Upload requests are outside its scope. - Full repository typecheck, tests, and build were not rerun locally. This machine has no Cargo, and an earlier broad test run hit unrelated server workspace/runtime failures. Full PR CI passed on commit `019e324c0eca815f90d9797194e768fb48cb46b6`. - All 55 successful PR checks are green on the latest head, with no pending or failing checks. The failed end-to-end shard passed on one rerun after a transient database lock timeout during test cleanup; no code changes were needed for the rerun. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39557963507). ## Risks - A blank upload-control space remains when Artifacts is open but inactive. This keeps the tab row stable. - Hidden controls use both visibility and inert state to exclude them from keyboard navigation and accessibility exposure. - No API, database, upload permission, or saved-tab format changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID or context window. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser inspection. ## 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>	2026-10-21 22:21:42 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	433d94ee0b	refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior, examples, and verification steps. > - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs, indexes, and review hashes. > - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping during parallel work. > - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story, then generates the combined views. > - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple agents change different features. Current behavior A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two unrelated changes then conflict in the same files. Proposed behavior Each story declares capability links and classification in `parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages. Reason and benefit A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain. Breaking changes The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use `ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation. Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable. ## What Changed - Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs. - Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table. - Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`. - Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically. - Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and revision-specific PR/CI evidence. - Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser navigation checks. This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No product API or authorization behavior changes. ## Verification Passed: - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485 authored stories after incorporating current master. - `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated output and no tracked changes. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests. - `pnpm check:token-gates`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase. - `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained. Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories. - Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links; retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite. The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it. All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6` incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation, catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or production acceptance are claimed. To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server: ```sh PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts ``` ## Risks - Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from current master. - Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck. - The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract. - Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the published Storybook provides a browsable guide. - Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and context window were 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 on the previously reviewed head `00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	88bf4c6c1d	refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry points. > - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components, proposals, and retained history. > - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and sidebar still use unrelated groups. > - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar. > - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles change. > - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure without losing examples. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged. This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change organizes existing suites and adds no product capability. ## What Changed - Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label. - Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of the sidebar. - Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative imports and active documentation. - Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports. - Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog. Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the maintenance skill and review evidence. ## Verification - Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent `75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries, IDs, and names. - UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`). - UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed. - Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed. - Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached `storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered, sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue` opened its preserved story link. - Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative references, and updated fixture path text in story files. - To inspect: build Storybook, start `node scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links. - The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation, without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was not run. ## Risks - Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one primary home and retain related capability references. - Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated references to source paths may need the new location. - This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves. It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated. - Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged. - Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and local browser automation. ## 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-12 22:29:22 +00:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

TonioandPaperclip

043f2514e6

fix(ui): keep task tabs steady when switching views (#17068 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - A task side panel contains properties, artifacts, and document
views.
> - These views share one row of tabs.
> - Selecting Artifacts adds an upload control beside the row.
> - That control reduces the space available to the tabs and changes
their widths.
> - This pull request reserves the upload control space while the
Artifacts tab is open.
> - Switching views now keeps the tab widths and positions stable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14949. This fixes a layout shift observed after that PR merged.

**What happened?**

In a narrow task panel, tabs shrink when Artifacts is selected. They
expand when another tab is selected. The upload control enters and
leaves the header during selection.

**Expected behavior**

Tab selection must not change the space available to the tab row. Tabs
must keep equal widths while the panel width and open tabs remain
unchanged.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open Properties, Artifacts, and a document or attachment in a task
side panel.
2. Make the side panel narrow enough for tabs to compress.
3. Switch between Artifacts and the other tabs.
4. Observe the tab widths and positions as the upload control appears
and disappears.

## What Changed

- Keep an upload control slot in the header while an upload-capable
Artifacts tab is open.
- Hide the control and make it inert when another tab is active. Remove
the slot when Artifacts is closed. Agent conversations do not reserve
upload space.
- Add a component regression test for selection, focus exclusion, and
closing the Artifacts tab.
- Add a constrained production-panel Storybook case with assertions for
equal widths, stable widths across selections, and upload-control
visibility.

## Verification

- The focused TaskSidePanel and SidePanelTabs suites passed: 52 tests.
- UI typecheck, UI build, and token gates passed after replaying the fix
onto current master.
- The Storybook catalog check and all 28 map/catalog tests passed.
- The browser ran `html-artifacts-03-task-journey--stable-tab-widths`
successfully. All three tabs measured 71.328125px before and after
selecting Properties, the report, and Artifacts.
- Review the Stable Tab Widths story under HTML artifacts / 03 Task
journey. The fixture mounts the production task panel. Upload requests
are outside its scope.
- Full repository typecheck, tests, and build were not rerun locally.
This machine has no Cargo, and an earlier broad test run hit unrelated
server workspace/runtime failures. Full PR CI passed on commit
`019e324c0eca815f90d9797194e768fb48cb46b6`.

- All 55 successful PR checks are green on the latest head, with no
pending or failing checks. The failed end-to-end shard passed on one
rerun after a transient database lock timeout during test cleanup; no
code changes were needed for the rerun. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39557963507).

## Risks

- A blank upload-control space remains when Artifacts is open but
inactive. This keeps the tab row stable.
- Hidden controls use both visibility and inert state to exclude them
from keyboard navigation and accessibility exposure.
- No API, database, upload permission, or saved-tab format changes.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime did not expose a more specific model
ID or context window. Used reasoning, code execution, and browser
inspection.

## 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>

2026-10-21 22:21:42 -07:00

DottaandPaperclip

433d94ee0b

refactor(maps): generate indexes from local story and feature metadata (#16214 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Feature recipes and Storybook help contributors find behavior,
examples, and verification steps.
> - Independent feature changes currently update shared catalogs,
indexes, and review hashes.
> - Those shared files cause merge conflicts and repeated bookkeeping
during parallel work.
> - This pull request stores metadata in each feature recipe and story,
then generates the combined views.
> - Contributors can merge independent work without editing a common
index. Git and PR evidence retain change and review history.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintaining the product, agent-access, and Storybook maps while multiple
agents change different features.

**Current behavior**

A story or recipe change can update `catalog.json`, `INDEX.md`, review
hashes, verification tables, and tracked generated navigation. Two
unrelated changes then conflict in the same files.

**Proposed behavior**

Each story declares capability links and classification in
`parameters.paperclip`. Each feature recipe declares its navigation and
optional verification guidance. Startup, build, and UI typechecking
discover these sources and generate ignored indexes and Storybook pages.

**Reason and benefit**

A routine change edits its own source files. Aggregate metadata is
rebuilt from the merged checkout. There is no sidecar registry, shared
review journal, or hash acknowledgment to maintain.

**Breaking changes**

The tracked Storybook catalog and index paths are retired. Consumers use
`ui/storybook/generated/` or `maps/generated/` after generation.
Contributor instructions and the existing feature-gap browser suite use
the new paths. Story and overview IDs remain stable.

## What Changed

- Move the existing annotations into 262 story files. Preserve
classifications, capability associations, exports, and explicit IDs.
- Discover all 35 feature recipes. Store section/order beside each
recipe and move durable verification routes out of the shared table.
- Remove tracked catalogs, inventories, overview pages, and inline
preview ordering. Keep authored preview behavior in `preview-base.tsx`.
- Generate the Storybook guide, feature/access Markdown indexes, gap
report, page-reference inventory, and preview wrapper automatically.
- Update the map contracts and maintenance skills to use Git history and
revision-specific PR/CI evidence.
- Add schema, identity, regeneration, and actual Git merge tests. Run
these through the existing UI Vitest suite. Add focused browser
navigation checks.

This is one coordinated migration. Most of the 367 changed files contain
only moved metadata or deleted generated content. Review the generator
scripts, map contracts, Storybook configuration, and tests first. No
product API or authorization behavior changes.

## Verification

Passed:

- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: 35 paired areas and 175 capabilities.
- `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check`: 262 suites and 2,485
authored stories after incorporating current master.
- `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs
scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs`: 28 tests, including
independent branches merged in both orders with identical generated
output and no tracked changes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
storybook/map-tooling.test.ts`: the CI entrypoint runs those map tests.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` before the final master rebase.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: all 2,517 original story/docs URLs retained.
Current master contributes exactly four additional recovery stories.
- Focused Playwright navigation checks: search and open a feature
without examples; expand verification guidance and check source links;
retain capability order and follow a related Foundations suite.

The final clean Storybook build passed after deleting every ignored map
output. Post-rebase UI typechecking and both browser tests passed. The
working tree stays clean after generation. The concurrent-cleanup
regression fails with `ENOENT` without the fix and passes with it.

All GitHub CI gates passed on `00fc7ec18e`, which also received Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved findings. The final merge commit `1c3c5143a6`
incorporates master and resolves only the two modify/delete conflicts by
retaining removal of the aggregate index and catalog. Master’s new
workspace feature and access guidance is preserved. Map validation,
catalog generation, overview generation, all 28 map tests, and diff
checks pass after conflict resolution. The maintainer explicitly
requested merging without another Greptile review. CI has not been rerun
to completion on this merge commit. The local repository-wide `pnpm
test:run` was stopped before completion after the earlier CI matrix
passed; it is not reported as a local pass. No screenshot baselines or
production acceptance are claimed.

To repeat the browser check against an owned Storybook server:

```sh
PAPERCLIP_GAP_STORYBOOK_URL=http://127.0.0.1:6136 pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/feature-gap-stories.config.ts map-navigation.spec.ts
```

## Risks

- Existing branches need a one-time rebase to move their catalog changes
into local annotations. The PR incorporates the recovery changes from
current master.
- Changing the same story or capability can still produce a meaningful
conflict. This removes the shared aggregate bottleneck.
- The generator uses Storybook's existing CSF parser. Literal-only
annotations and parser regression tests protect the current contract.
- Generated Markdown is available after running the generator; the
published Storybook provides a browsable guide.
- Shared source changes still require review. Removing hashes removes
mechanical acknowledgments; it does not establish runtime parity.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code
execution, and browser-test tools. The exact deployment model ID and
context window were 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 on the previously reviewed head
`00fc7ec18e`; final conflict-resolution checks are documented above
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on `00fc7ec18e`; another review was waived by the maintainer
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-10-13 15:27:23 -05:00

DottaandPaperclip

88bf4c6c1d

refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry
points.
> - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components,
proposals, and retained history.
> - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and
sidebar still use unrelated groups.
> - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and
uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar.
> - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles
change.
> - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure
without losing examples.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged.
This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased
onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged
by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change
organizes existing suites and adds no product capability.

## What Changed

- Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature
area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label.
- Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview
first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of
the sidebar.
- Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative
imports and active documentation.
- Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit
CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports.
- Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog.
Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the
maintenance skill and review evidence.

## Verification

- Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent
`75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries,
IDs, and names.
- UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked
as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`).
- UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed.
- Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token
gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed.
- Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached
`storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered,
sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue`
opened its preserved story link.
- Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative
references, and updated fixture path text in story files.
- To inspect: build Storybook, start `node
scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview
guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links.
- The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization
change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation,
without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked
by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was
not run.

## Risks

- Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a
feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one
primary home and retain related capability references.
- Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated
references to source paths may need the new location.
- This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves.
It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would
leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated.
- Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing
production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged.
- Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh
checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation
and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and
checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, and local browser automation.

## 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
- [ ] 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>

2026-10-12 22:29:22 +00:00