mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-10 12:37:55 +01:00
5a92d53f7dd4dc1ea3aaec600ea02b360d831009
2
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
4696ff4990 |
fix: reserve agent In Progress display for active runs (#19453)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task status must tell operators whether an agent is working or waiting. > - A task can retain its in-progress lifecycle status after its run stops. > - The shared read projection only handled scheduled monitoring waits. > - The UI also ignored other projected statuses for in-progress tasks. > - This pull request requires an active task run for the In Progress display. > - Operators can see waits without changing execution or recovery authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** An agent task still showed In Progress after its run ended with an access failure and left a pending connection request. Stale execution locks and saved lifecycle state could show the same false activity. **Expected behavior** An agent task shows In Progress only with a task-linked queued or running run. Otherwise, it shows Blocked for recovery, In Review for a pending response or review, Monitoring for a scheduled check, or Todo for remaining work. Human ownership keeps its selected status. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create an agent-owned task with an in-progress lifecycle status. 2. End its run and retain a pending human request. 3. Read the task, its summary, and search results. Before this change, they still show In Progress. ## What Changed - Derive visible activity from company-scoped, task-linked runs in the existing shared SQL projection. - Project inactive tasks to existing waiting or todo states. Preserve lifecycle status, locks, admission, and recovery. - Make the shared UI resolver use the projection while preserving explicit and optimistic status changes. - Cover stopped runs, stale locks, human waits, company isolation, monitoring, filters, counts, search, and UI labels. - Document the presentation rule in the product and execution contracts. ## Verification - Red before the server fix: 7 new regression cases failed because they returned in_progress. The 10 existing cases passed. - Green after the server fix: 20 cases passed in issue-display-status.test.ts, using embedded Postgres and real task APIs/search. Seven nearby active-question cases also passed. - Review regression: dismissed requests, historical questions, and returned review work each failed before the follow-up fix. All three now pass using the existing active-interaction rule and pending review state. - Red before the UI fix: 4 label cases failed. Five additional safety cases caught stale projections hiding explicit transitions. - Green after the UI fix: 43 tests passed across task-status-presentation, issue-filters, and issue-detail-subissues. - pnpm -r typecheck passed. All UI token gates and synchronization checks passed. - pnpm build passed. Server typecheck and build passed again after the review fixes. - Full CI passed on |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
40b8075916 |
feat(ui): show scheduled task waits as Monitoring (#18624)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task indicators tell an operator whether work is active, waiting, or
complete.
> - An agent can yield until a saved monitor checks CI or another
external result.
> - The task currently keeps the In Progress icon between those runs.
> - Changing the stored status would affect monitor admission and
recovery.
> - This pull request adds a read-only Monitoring display state with a
blue clock.
> - Operators can see and filter scheduled waits while execution keeps
its existing rules.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Task status indicators, task collection filters, board columns, and
search facets.
**Current behavior**
A task that waits for a scheduled monitor shows the same In Progress
icon as active work.
**Proposed behavior**
Show Monitoring with a static blue clock when an agent-owned task has a
saved ordinary monitor and no active run, execution lock, review
participant, or active recovery action. Return to the normal task
indicator when the check starts. Preserve review, blocked, terminal, and
quota-recovery states.
**Reason and benefit**
Operators can distinguish scheduled waits from current agent work
without reading the task history.
**Breaking changes**
None to stored task statuses or execution rules. Task reads gain
optional displayStatus. Collections and search gain a separate read
filter. Existing status filters keep their lifecycle meaning.
Related historical work: #4396 covered a monitoring label exemption.
This change uses the saved monitor and a read projection.
## What Changed
- Add one SQL projection for task detail, compact lists, summaries,
relations, search results, and display-status counts.
- Show the blue clock in shared task icons and chips, task detail and
breadcrumbs, properties, references, list rows, recent navigation, and
agent task cards.
- Add Monitoring to task filtering, grouping, sorting, board columns,
and search facets. Prevent a drag from creating this derived state.
- Keep stored lifecycle statuses, monitor scheduling, checkout,
recovery, permissions, and agent status filters unchanged.
- Add database and UI regression coverage, full-page Storybook examples,
and product and access-map documentation.
## Verification
- Passed `pnpm -r typecheck`.
- Passed `pnpm build`.
- Passed `pnpm check:token-gates` and the map/catalog structural checks.
- Ran the new database suite on a disposable PostgreSQL 17 database. It
covers read surfaces, filter pagination/counts, queued/running checks,
rescheduling, completion, retained monitors, review, and recovery holds.
- Ran existing search, list, board, sidebar, task status, and filter
tests. Corrected board queries use displayStatus and eight columns.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` stopped in a chat integration shard: 12
failures (four timeouts and eight FIFO publication assertions). That run
spanned a rebase. A focused rerun on the current source passed all 21
selected cases without assertion or timeout changes. The original cause
is not established; this does not claim the full local suite passed.
Final-head required CI passed (ci / verify and ci / e2e, run
41488267209).
- Passed 82 tests for task API summaries, recovery precedence, search,
and optimistic updates; 54 tests for status cards, database reads, and
board moves; and 27 tests for blocker relations and recent-task cache
updates. One intermediate database setup hit its 20-second hook timeout;
the serial rerun passed.
- Greptile is 5/5 on
|