mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-06 23:20:53 +01:00
6175603fd3fe7112bc76fdf3d78a1a3fc5d108d2
6
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 TonioandClaude Fable 5.1
|
341b622604 |
feat(ui): Artifacts V1 behind an experimental setting — Artifacts page, panel tab and task thread (#17228)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents produce artifacts: documents, files, pictures, video and links. The app shows them on the Artifacts page, in the right panel's Artifacts tab and in the task thread > - The artifact directions lab (#17213) settled a presentation for those surfaces, MVP V1, drawn from the PCLP-Core mocks. It is a reference, not product code > - Shipping it means product components on product data, token-only, behind a switch, one surface at a time, so the current presentation stays the default until the new one has been used > - This pull request adds the switch (Settings > Experimental > Artifacts V1), the `--artifact-*` tokens, the V1 primitives as product components, and the V1 presentation on all three surfaces behind the switch: the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread > - The benefit is the redesign in the product, reversible by one setting, with every existing behaviour of those surfaces kept ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. This section follows the feature request template; the plan is `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. **Subsystem affected** The web UI (`ui/`): the Artifacts page, the right panel's Artifacts tab and the task thread. The experimental settings contract in `packages/shared` and `server` gains one boolean. **Problem or motivation** The three artifact surfaces grew separately and their artifact presentation is dated and inconsistent. The lab produced a measured direction; nothing in the product uses it yet. **Proposed solution** An experimental setting, `enableArtifactsV1`, default off, with the same plumbing as the other experimental settings. Product primitives under `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1` (kind helpers and adapters, the sheet and print artwork, the stack, the page tiles with the Paper Mono pill, the row the panel and thread will share), driven by `--artifact-*` tokens in `index.css` with light and dark values. With the setting on: the Artifacts page shows one row of views (Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files) and the V1 tiles, a task with several artifacts as a stack whose newest artifact is the first page, everything else as single tiles; the panel's Artifacts tab is one flat list of V1 rows, newest first, with the expandable rows (Markdown review surface, document annotations, deep links) keeping their behaviour behind the row as their face; the thread shows a message's files as rows under its footer and registered deliverables and documents as one row each. The hover movement respects reduced motion. **Alternatives considered** Replacing the current cards outright: no fallback and three surfaces to land at once. Mounting the lab's components: they are typed on lab fixtures and keep lab-local tokens, which the token gates reject. The primitives were ported instead and the lab stays a reference. **Roadmap alignment** Supports the "Artifacts & Work Products" theme in `ROADMAP.md`. Presentation only; no data model change. **Additional context** No new API fields: the tiles show title, identifier, count and "Updated …"; rows take sizes from the work-product and attachment payloads; a picture's aspect ratio comes from the loaded image, 4:3 until it loads. The plan records what each surface keeps and what it drops (run sections in the panel; the "Images · N / Files · N" labels and the four-up grid in the thread). ## What Changed - Add the `enableArtifactsV1` experimental setting: shared type, validator and feature catalog, server defaults and managed keys, the `useArtifactsV1Enabled` hook, and the Settings > Experimental toggle (in its alphabetical place). - Add the `--artifact-*` tokens and the Artifacts V1 component rules to `ui/src/index.css`: light values on `:root`, dark overrides, and the hover movement under `prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference`. - Add `ui/src/components/artifacts/v1/`: `kinds.ts` (kind treatment, labels, glyphs, the server's media-kind rule, adapters from `CompanyArtifact`), `geometry.ts` (the measured constants), `when.ts`, `ArtifactSheet`, `ArtifactPrint`, `ArtifactStack`, `ArtifactFront`, `ArtifactTile` (stack and single tiles, caption, grid), `ArtifactRow` (the row and its inline group), `ArtifactsV1Filters`, with the mock's SVG assets. - Wire the Artifacts page: with the setting on, the toolbar's filter row becomes the V1 views and the grid renders V1 tiles; the toolbar takes an optional `filters` row for this. The old cards and kind filters stay the default. - Wire the panel's Artifacts tab (`IssuePropertiesArtifactsTab`): with the setting on, one flat list of V1 rows, newest first; `DocumentRow` and `MarkdownWorkProductRow` take a `face` render prop so the V1 row fronts their unchanged expansion, review and deep-link behaviour; `PanelFileRow` opens attachments and attachment-backed work products the way the shipped card does (gallery, text tab, new tab) with open and download beside the name; other work products are a link row with their status. - Wire the task thread: `TaskChatBubble` hangs a message's files under its footer as V1 rows inline (pictures and video to the gallery, text to a text tab, files to a new tab) in place of the media grid and file chips; `TaskChatProtocolCard`'s resource rows render deliverables, documents and attachments as one V1 row each, opening where the card did. - `ArtifactRow` keeps trailing controls beside its own control (no nested interactive elements) and can be a link, an in-app anchor, a new-tab anchor or a button; adapters read work products, documents, attachments and message references. - Add a catalogued Storybook story, `Components/Artifact V1 primitives`, under `documents-artifacts`, on fixtures. - Add tests: the primitives (kinds, dates, print fitting, tiles, rows), the hook, the Artifacts page, the panel's Artifacts tab, the task-chat bubble and the protocol card, each with the setting on and off; the settings page and server tests list the new key. - Add `doc/plans/2026-10-22-artifacts-mvp-v1.md`. ## Verification - Run `cd ui && pnpm typecheck`: the Storybook catalog accepts the new story, and `tsc -b` is clean apart from the five pre-existing `PluginOrganizationSwitcher` errors. - Run `pnpm check:token-gates` and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: clean. - Run `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/artifacts src/components/issue-properties src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.test.tsx src/components/task-chat/TaskChatProtocolCard.artifactsV1.test.tsx src/pages/Artifacts.test.tsx src/hooks/useArtifactsV1Enabled.test.ts src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.test.tsx`: the suites pass (151 tests in the last run). - Run `cd packages/shared && npx vitest run src/feature-catalog.test.ts` and `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts`: pass. - Manual: open Settings > Experimental, turn on Artifacts V1. On the Artifacts page the view row reads Tasks, All files, Images, Videos, Documents, Text, Files; tasks with several artifacts show as stacks, hovering fans the pages and lifts the artwork (not under reduced motion); Images shows single tiles with bordered prints. Open a task's Artifacts tab: one list of rows, newest first; a Markdown work product still expands into its review surface, a document still opens in its tab. In the thread, a message's files sit under its footer as rows. Turn the setting off: everything returns to the current presentation. - Storybook: `Tasks and conversations / Documents, attachments, and work products / Components / Artifact V1 primitives`. - Not run: the full `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm build` (CI runs them), and a browser pass against a dev instance with real artifacts on the three surfaces; that pass is the remaining step before this leaves draft. ## Risks - Off by default; with the setting off, the only changes on a product path are an optional `filters` prop on the toolbar, an optional `face` prop on two panel rows, a read of the setting in the bubble and the protocol card, and the new token declarations. - With the setting on, the Artifacts page's view tabs set two URL parameters (`groupBy`, `kind`) at once; the group-by menu and search are unchanged. - A picture with unknown dimensions renders at 4:3 until it loads, then the print refits once; the frame's height is fixed so nothing below it moves. - About thirty new `--artifact-*` tokens, namespaced and documented in place. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code in the desktop app. Extended reasoning was on. Capabilities used: tool use (shell, file edits, a headless Playwright browser for the lab's measurements, the Figma MCP server for the mocks during the lab work) and image input. The context window is the Claude Code session's; its exact size is not surfaced to the 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 (#17213 is the lab this builds on) - [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 (the suites listed above; CI runs the full set) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (the plan document; no command or product behaviour changes outside the setting) - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
228f0e2807 |
fix(ui): make pull request review waits visible (#15375)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people supervise agent work and review its outputs. > - A task can wait for a human to review a pull request while an agent schedules checks. > - The PR work product and detected external links use separate display paths. > - A private PR can disappear from the useful sidebar view when its provider lookup fails. > - The monitor countdown says when the next check runs but omits the saved review request. > - This change shows the saved PR and requested review in the task's existing surfaces. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task kept checking whether a private GitHub PR had merged. Its work product requested board review, but the Properties sidebar used detected external objects instead. The PR URL was stored only in metadata, which the PR refresh path did not read. The composer showed a generic monitor countdown with no PR link or review action. **Expected behavior** Show saved PR links even if provider access fails. During a GitHub monitor wait, make outstanding review requests visible with the next check time and a status-check action. Stop requesting review when a PR merges or closes. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Register a PR work product with `reviewState: needs_board_review` and its URL in `metadata.url`. 2. Schedule an external-service monitor for GitHub. 3. Open the task with external-object lookup unavailable or unable to access the private repository. 4. Inspect Properties and the composer wait strip. Related work: #14469 added rich artifact cards. #8759 addresses attention on monitored task blockers. This change uses the existing work products and monitor action; it adds no blocker or approval mechanism. ## What Changed - Show saved PRs in Properties, including metadata-only links, independent of external-object availability. - Deduplicate equivalent GitHub PR URLs while preserving the saved navigation link, and put explicit review requests first. - Keep provider status and freshness on the combined PR row; keep private PR links usable when lookup fails. - Show the saved PR review request above the composer and in the existing monitor banner during a GitHub monitor wait. - Label the existing monitor action `Check status` and show check failures inline. - Suppress review prompts for merged, closed, or archived PRs even if their review flag is stale. - Refresh PR metadata using `metadata.url` and the existing `repository` alias. - Share saved work-product reads across the thread, Properties, and Artifacts. Refresh GitHub in a separate query and enrich only matching PR versions. - Start a fresh saved-row request on live invalidation so late provider responses cannot hide new artifacts or changed review requests. - Cover stalled GitHub lookups in both panels so refresh latency cannot hide saved work. - Scope monitor-check mutation state to the task so failures and late responses do not leak across navigation. - Refresh GitHub status when the displayed run finishes, including when saved PR rows have not changed. - Clarify that PR review and external release handoffs need a saved human-input interaction with an agent assigned for continuation; a flag, monitor, or handoff comment alone does not create that card. ## Verification - 386 tests pass across eleven affected UI and server suites on `184c7d8746`. Regressions cover saved links, provider status, cold-cache loading, panel reopening, monitor errors during navigation, and live updates during provider refresh. - Three live-update regressions and two run-completion regressions fail before their fixes and pass afterward. These tests use the real API client's GET coalescing and abort handling. - Full repository typecheck and build passed on the merged parent `1a49112dd2`. The latest UI changes pass UI typecheck and token gates; CI also verifies the latest build. Capability contract/inventory checks pass. - Storybook build and browser checks passed before the query race fix. Browser checks cover desktop and 390px mobile review waits, plus video, mixed-file, and empty artifact galleries after background refresh. - The earlier full local `pnpm test:run` was stopped under disk pressure. It reported failures outside the changed suites; an isolated skill-cache run reproduced three existing macOS permission failures. The full local suite was not rerun for this follow-up. - Latest-head CI passes on `184c7d8746`, including the browser shards and canary dry run. Apex is 5/5 with no actionable findings and no unresolved threads. All eight reported findings are addressed. ## Risks - This uses saved PR review state. When GitHub access fails, the saved state can remain stale until the agent updates it. The link remains visible and the status check remains available. - `Check status` wakes the existing monitor owner. It does not merge a PR, accept an approval, or mark the task done. - No schema, permissions, or scheduler behavior changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, repository analysis, code editing, and test execution. 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 — 277 affected tests - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
87d05e194b |
feat(work-products): add rich cards and run artifact inventory (#12717)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect from a task. > - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card vocabulary. > - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and producing-run context. > - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and state. > - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration, inventory, and Storybook review coverage. > - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect without seeded data. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the task Artifacts tab. **Subsystem affected** The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path, server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh, the React board UI, and Storybook. **Current behavior** The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind. **Proposed behavior** The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product. The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media. **Reason and benefit** Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card permutations without creating task data. **Breaking changes** None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current behavior. ## What Changed - Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a compact inventory variant. - Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state refresh. - Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments. - Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in the same server transaction. - Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings. - Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a company Artifacts link. - Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all eight visual kinds. - Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow coverage. - Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`. ### Screenshots Before: one resting card per kind.  After: the kind and state matrix.  After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.  [Open the Storybook evidence viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/). The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the [artifact inventory viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/). ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - `pnpm build-storybook` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed with 5 tests. - Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths. - All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test was flaky and passed on its single retry. - Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. ## Risks - Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes. - The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible in one review surface. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request. Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The context-window size is 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 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 public branch name describes the change and contains no internal task id - [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests 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 - [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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
Michael Nguyen
|
d2fb05d225 | Fix issue document deep-link routing (#11551) | ||
|
scotttongandPaperclip
|
eabecc6f77 |
feat(annotations): include issue document annotations in agent review context (#11332)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Reviewers annotate plans and issue documents with inline comments, and assigned agents act on that feedback > - The server already builds a bounded review context from open plan annotations and includes it in agent wake payloads > - Non-plan issue documents did not get the same treatment: their open annotation threads never reached the agent, and the properties pane did not surface their annotations > - This pull request extends the review-context path and the properties-pane UI to issue documents, at parity with plans > - The benefit is that agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The review-context pipeline that delivers inline annotation feedback to assigned agents, and the properties pane that surfaces those annotations to reviewers. **Subsystem affected** The server review-context path (`server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`, wake payload assembly in `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`, `server/src/routes/issues.ts`), shared wake-payload types (`packages/shared`, `packages/adapter-utils`), and the issue properties pane (`ui/src/components/issue-properties/`). **Current behavior** A reviewer can annotate any issue document, not only the plan. The agent wake payload includes open annotation threads for the plan document only. Feedback left on other issue documents is invisible to the assigned agent. In the properties pane, the Artifacts tab also gives no way to see or open a document's annotations. **Proposed behavior** Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` beside the existing plan builder. It collects open annotation threads for all non-plan issue documents, applies the same thread, comment, and character budgets across documents, and reports truncation. Include the result as a new `documentReviewContext` field in agent wake payloads and in the issue wake-context route. Keep the plan context on its legacy builder and field so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. Render the new context in the adapter wake-payload text, and surface annotation counts and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane's Plans and Artifacts tabs. **Reason and benefit** The floating annotation popover and persistent highlight UI landed earlier; this change completes the loop so agent feedback on any issue document reaches the assigned agent, not only feedback on the plan. **Breaking changes** None. The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; the existing plan context field and its legacy builder are unchanged, so plan-only wakes stay byte-for-byte compatible. ## What Changed - Add `buildDocumentReviewContext` in `server/src/services/plan-review-context.ts`: bounded review context (shared thread/comment/character budgets, per-document legacy limits) over all non-plan issue documents - Include `documentReviewContext` in agent wake payloads (`server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`) and in the issue wake-context response (`server/src/routes/issues.ts`) - Add shared `DocumentReviewContext` / `DocumentReviewContextDocument` types in `packages/shared` - Normalize and render the new context in adapter wake-payload text (`packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`), with tests - Show a `DocumentAnnotationsCountChip` and the annotation panel for documents in the properties pane Plans and Artifacts tabs, with tests - Extend server document-annotations service tests to cover the new context builder ## Verification - Run `npx vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts` from the repo root — 104 tests pass - Run `TZ=UTC npx vitest run ui/src/components/issue-properties/IssuePropertiesDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/components/DocumentAnnotationPopover.test.tsx` from the repo root — 75 tests pass (one pre-existing monitor-row case asserts UTC timestamps, so use `TZ=UTC` locally; CI runs in UTC) - `pnpm run typecheck` in `server/` passes - Manual: annotate a non-plan issue document, then wake the assigned agent with a comment — the wake payload lists the open document annotation threads; the Artifacts tab shows the annotation count chip and opens the panel ## Risks - The wake payload gains a new optional `documentReviewContext` field; consumers that ignore unknown fields are unaffected, and the plan context field is unchanged - The context is new input to agent wakes; shared budgets (same limits as the plan context) bound token cost across all documents - Low UI risk: the properties-pane changes reuse the existing annotation components > 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 - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), with extended thinking and agentic tool use (Claude Code harness) ## 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> |
