2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	953b315dfb	Shorten skill frontmatter descriptions (#9353) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip agents can load repository and catalog skills, and Codex renders skill names and frontmatter descriptions into startup context. > - Long descriptions consume the fixed skill metadata budget before Codex can use the progressively disclosed skill bodies. > - The repo `.agents/skills` descriptions and a few shipped catalog descriptions had grown into operational documentation instead of short trigger metadata. > - This pull request keeps the strongest trigger language in frontmatter while leaving detailed procedures in each skill body. > - The benefit is lower prompt overhead, more reliable skill triggering, and a regression guard that prevents description drift from returning. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue found for this maintenance item. ### Pre-submission checklist - [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a duplicate. - [x] I am working against `master`. - [x] I have confirmed the issue originates in Paperclip's shipped skill metadata, not in a local agent adapter or provider. ### What happened? Codex startup renders discovered skill names and frontmatter descriptions into a fixed skill metadata budget. Several repository skill descriptions and one shipped catalog description had grown into long-form operational guidance, which can force Codex to truncate descriptions before the model has enough trigger signal to select the right skill. ### Expected behavior Skill frontmatter descriptions should stay short trigger summaries: one capability sentence plus a “use when” clause. Detailed procedures should stay in the skill body and load only after the skill triggers. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Inspect `.agents/skills/*/SKILL.md` and `packages/skills-catalog/catalog/**/SKILL.md` frontmatter descriptions. 2. Measure folded YAML `description` values. 3. Observe descriptions above the intended short-trigger range, including descriptions above 300 characters. 4. Run the new shipped catalog test to verify future descriptions stay capped. ### Paperclip version or commit Reproduced on `master` at `cc81eefb6047d8eaf57faf785f421c03dc97073c`. ### Deployment mode Local dev / source checkout metadata inspection. This is not database-related. ### Installation method Built from source. ### Agent adapter(s) involved Codex, because Codex startup uses the skill metadata prompt budget. The metadata source itself is core repository/catalog content. ### Database mode Not database-related. ### Access context Not applicable; this is static repository metadata. ### Node.js version `v22.22.2` in the verification environment. ### Operating system Linux container environment. ### Relevant logs or output Final measurement after this PR: 29 source `SKILL.md` files, max description length 215 chars, 5,449 total description chars, estimated 1,363 description tokens at 4 chars/token. ### Relevant config None. ### Additional context The shipped catalog manifest was regenerated so the generated package metadata matches the edited catalog `SKILL.md` sources. ### Privacy checklist - [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII and redacted where necessary. ## What Changed - Shortened long `.agents/skills/*/SKILL.md` frontmatter descriptions to concise capability plus use-when trigger clauses. - Shortened the over-budget shipped skills catalog descriptions for wireframe, Paperclip capsules, and reflection coach. - Regenerated `packages/skills-catalog/generated/catalog.json` so shipped metadata matches source skill frontmatter. - Added a Vitest regression guard that caps repo skill source descriptions and generated catalog descriptions at 300 characters. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog build:manifest` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog test` — 5 files passed, 19 tests passed - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog typecheck` - Final measurement: 29 source `SKILL.md` files, max description length 215 chars, 5,449 total description chars, estimated 1,363 description tokens at 4 chars/token. Note: the clean PR worktree was created from `origin/master` and contains only this commit, but it does not have `node_modules`; running `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog test` there failed at tool/package resolution (`vitest`, `tsc`, `@paperclipai/shared`). The dependency-equipped workspace passed the commands above before the commit was cherry-picked onto the clean branch. ## Risks Low risk. This changes skill metadata and tests only. The main risk is over-trimming a useful trigger phrase, mitigated by keeping explicit “use when” clauses and leaving detailed guidance in the skill bodies. > 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 GPT-5 Codex coding agent via Paperclip/Codex, with shell and file-edit tool use. Exact API model ID and context window were not exposed in the runtime. ## 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>	2026-07-10 08:46:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	508355b8fc	[codex] Add LLM Wiki plugin package to master (#5716) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The plugin system is the extension surface for optional product capabilities without baking every workflow into core. > - The LLM Wiki plugin package was reviewed in stacked PR #5592, which targeted `pap-9173-llm-wiki-rest`. > - The stack base PR #5597 merged to `master` before #5592 was merged into that branch, so the plugin package never reached `master`. > - A direct PR from `pap-9173-llm-wiki-rest` back to `master` would be noisy because that branch has diverged from current `master`. > - This pull request reapplies the reviewed `packages/plugins/plugin-llm-wiki/` package onto current `master` and updates Docker deps-stage manifest coverage. > - The branch intentionally no longer changes `pnpm-workspace.yaml` after maintainer feedback; because the new package is now a root workspace importer, the remaining integration question is how maintainers want the root lockfile handled under the current PR policy. ## What Changed - Added the LLM Wiki plugin package under `packages/plugins/plugin-llm-wiki/` from the merged PR #5592 head. - Preserved the post-review cleanup from #5592: generated design/screenshot artifacts are not committed, and `src/ui/index.tsx` / `src/wiki.ts` are small public entrypoints. - Added the new plugin package manifest to the Docker deps stage so policy can validate package manifest coverage. - Removed the earlier `pnpm-workspace.yaml` exclusion per maintainer request, so the plugin is included by the existing `packages/plugins/*` workspace glob. ## Verification Current head: - PGlite migration harness: ran migrations 001-003, verified old non-space distillation unique constraints were removed, inserted duplicate cursor and work-item keys in a second space, then reran migration 003 successfully - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` - `git diff --check` Known current-head install result after removing the workspace exclusion: - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` fails because `pnpm-lock.yaml` has no importer for `packages/plugins/plugin-llm-wiki/package.json`. Previously verified on the same plugin source before the workspace-exclusion removal: - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `cd packages/plugins/plugin-llm-wiki && pnpm install --lockfile=false && pnpm test` ## Risks - The branch now includes `packages/plugins/plugin-llm-wiki` in the root workspace but does not update `pnpm-lock.yaml`. Root frozen install will fail until maintainers choose a lockfile path that fits repo policy. - Committing `pnpm-lock.yaml` directly on this PR conflicts with the current PR policy check, while excluding the package from `pnpm-workspace.yaml` was rejected in maintainer feedback. - The package includes UI code already reviewed in #5592; generated screenshot/design artifacts were intentionally removed per maintainer request, so visual review should regenerate screenshots locally if needed. - The package depends on plugin host support from #5597, which is already merged to `master`. > 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 GPT-5 Codex via Codex CLI, tool use and local code execution enabled; context window not exposed. ## 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 the targeted checks listed above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] 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 Stack context: #5592 was merged into `pap-9173-llm-wiki-rest` after #5597 had already merged that branch to `master`, so this follow-up PR is needed to carry the plugin package itself into `master`. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-11 20:45:41 -05:00