Commit Graph
19 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 582911ba74 fix(access): give Operators default company editing permissions (#15377)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Human company members receive permission grants from their role
preset.
> - Human invitations use the Operator role by default.
> - The old Operator preset only granted task assignment, so ordinary
members could not edit agents or manage connections.
> - This pull request gives Operators company editing and audit access
while keeping join approval and member-permission management separate.
> - Members can configure their agents and accounts without an Owner
role.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The default permission grants for human Operators and the invitation
role description.

**Subsystem affected**

server/ permission presets and invitation authorization, plus ui/
invitation and tool access gates.

**Current behavior**

Operators receive only `tasks:assign` as an explicit default grant.
Agent configuration and managed account setup fail their permission
checks.

**Proposed behavior**

Operators receive agent creation/configuration, skills, environments,
invitations, task assignment, pipelines, connections, tool
management/use, and audit grants. The preset excludes `joins:approve`
and `users:manage_permissions`. Operators can invite Operators and
Viewers. Inviting a role with either excluded power requires that power,
so invitations cannot bypass the restriction.

**Reason and benefit**

Ordinary company members can edit company work and connect accounts
through the existing routes.

**Breaking changes**

The Operator preset grants more permissions. The existing startup and
Cloud sign-in seeding paths can insert these missing grants for existing
Operators. They retain custom grant scopes. Explicit invitation grants
still take precedence. Inviting Admins now requires join approval;
inviting Owners also requires member-permission management. This PR adds
no migration or new backfill path.

Related: #5945 describes missing role grants in another membership entry
point. This PR changes the preset and does not change that endpoint.

## What Changed

- Expanded the Operator preset to 14 company editing, invitation, tool,
and audit grants.
- Kept join approval and member-permission management out of the preset.
- Required those powers when an invitation's selected human role
includes them, preventing Operators from delegating the excluded powers
through Owner/Admin invitations.
- Updated the invitation role copy and the product specifications.
- Allowed active Operators (including legacy Member roles) through the
invite shortcut and advanced tool/profile UI gates. Kept inactive
memberships, Viewers, and other companies excluded; API grants remain
authoritative.
- Added tests for the default Operator grants, both excluded actions,
agent editing, company boundaries, and invitation role authorization.
- Simplified adapter-route test imports so authorization errors and the
error handler use one module graph; retained the upstream
mock-initialization fix.
- Kept Owner/Admin/Viewer presets and explicit invitation grants
unchanged. Added no EE code or database migration.

## Verification

- Permission and invitation tests: 38 passed across access service,
invitation defaults, and invitation creation routes.
- UI access tests: 61 passed across invitation shortcuts, Operator
tool/profile access, and invitation UI.
- Adapter route tests: 15 passed after resolving the upstream test setup
conflict.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates`:
passed on the final branch.
- The initial local `pnpm test:run` general-server batch reported three
tool-access failures and eight upload-helper timeouts. Both complete
affected suites passed in isolation on the final branch: 403 tests. The
initial full local run was not green.
- Both complete tool-access and adapter route suites also passed on an
untouched snapshot of base `88ff98b83`: 387 tests. The earlier tool
failures did not reproduce there.
- [All CI gates
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37527422346)
for `068be153b9c2a064f2aaccc0627fdf458e73747e`, including the previously
failing serialized adapter lane, general tests, E2E, typecheck, build,
Runner checks, and canary dry run.
- Greptile scored that exact commit 5/5. Superagent passed. Both
invitation review threads are resolved.

## Risks

- Operators gain broad company editing and invitation access by design.
- Existing default seeding can add the new missing grants during startup
or Cloud sign-in. It does not replace existing scopes.
- Company boundaries and the two excluded permission checks still apply.
- An Admin without member-permission management can no longer invite an
Owner. Operators retain invitation access for Operator/Viewer roles and
agent-only invites.
- This PR changes company permissions. Cloud workspace invitation rules
remain separate.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact deployment model ID and context window
were not exposed in this session. Used repository inspection, code
editing, shell execution, and test tools.

## 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 a merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-06 15:55:38 -05:00
d6fa1fd1ef feat(ui): streamline account menu profile access and add Invite shortcut (#14480)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Humans work in teams, so Paperclip has a multi-user system with
logins, profiles, and a company sidebar.
> - The account menu in the lower-left corner of the sidebar is the main
entry point for a user's own settings.
> - The account menu spent half of its rows on "View profile" and "Edit
profile". Users open these rows rarely.
> - The account menu had no fast path to invite a new member. The invite
flow is different on a self-hosted instance and on Paperclip Cloud.
> - This pull request removes the two profile rows, makes the header a
link to the profile, adds an "Edit profile" button on the profile page,
and adds an "Invite" row.
> - The benefit is a shorter account menu that keeps profile access and
gives users with the invite permission a one-click path to invite
people.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The description below
follows the enhancement template.

Refs #14060. That earlier pull request holds the first two commits and
the first Greptile review. It closed when the branch got a new name to
remove an internal ticket id. All Greptile findings from both reviews
are fixed in this branch.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The account menu in the sidebar (`SidebarAccountMenu` and its
`.production` variant) and the user profile page at `/u/:userSlug`.

**Subsystem affected**

ui/ — React + Vite board UI

**Current behavior**

The account menu shows the user's picture and name at the top. Below
them, the menu shows "View profile" and "Edit profile" rows, then the
other rows. The header is not a link. The menu has no row to invite
people. On a self-hosted instance, the user must open Company settings,
then Members, then the Invites tab. On Paperclip Cloud, the user must
open the Members page and use the Cloud People link there.

**Proposed behavior**

The account menu does not show "View profile" or "Edit profile". The
picture and name at the top of the menu are a link to the user's own
profile page. The profile page shows an "Edit profile" button when the
viewer looks at their own profile. The account menu shows an "Invite"
row with the same `UserPlus` icon as the company menu. On a self-hosted
instance, the row opens the Members page on the Invites tab, and shows
only to boards that hold the `users:invite` grant (company owners and
admins, instance admins, and local boards). On Paperclip Cloud, the row
opens the People settings for the current stack, and shows only to the
owner or admin of the stack, the same rule the Members page uses.

**Reason and benefit**

Users open their profile rarely, but the two rows took half of the menu.
Inviting people is a common task, but it needed three clicks and a
different path on Cloud. The new menu is shorter, keeps profile access
in one tap on the header, and gives one "Invite" entry point on both
hosting modes to the users who can invite.

**Breaking changes**

None. Routes, API responses, and settings keys do not change. The
profile page and the invite pages keep their current URLs.

## What Changed

- `SidebarAccountMenu.tsx` and `SidebarAccountMenu.production.tsx`:
remove the "View profile" and "Edit profile" rows. Make the picture and
name header a link to the user's profile. Add the "Invite" row after
"Settings" in the streamlined menu and first in the production menu.
- Header structure: `master` added a staging commit SHA link under the
email in the same header. The profile link is now a stretched overlay
behind the header content, so the SHA anchor sits beside the email and
the header has no nested anchors.
- `ui/src/lib/userProfileLinks.ts` (new): build the profile path from
the user id first. The profile endpoint treats the id as the one unique
slug, so two members with the same display name get different links.
Name and email are a fallback only when the session has no id.
- `ui/src/hooks/useCloudInviteUrl.ts` (new): read the Cloud stack
portfolio and return the People settings URL only when the current stack
role is owner or admin. This is the same rule as the Members page.
- `ui/src/hooks/useCompanyInviteAccess.ts` (new): read the current board
access snapshot and report whether the board may invite people to the
selected company on a self-hosted instance. Local boards and instance
admins pass. Other boards need an active owner or admin membership, the
roles that carry `users:invite`. This follows the same client-side gate
pattern as `ToolsAdminGate` and the run ledger. The server stays
authoritative.
- Invite row visibility: the row is hidden when the operator hides
`company.members` or `company.invites`, and until the health check
resolves. On self-hosted instances, the row is hidden until the board
access snapshot loads and when the board cannot invite. On Cloud, the
row is hidden when no People URL can be built. The in-app Invites tab is
never a fallback on Cloud, because it drives a different flow.
- `ui/src/pages/UserProfile.tsx`: add an "Edit profile" button that
links to `/company/settings/instance/profile`. The button shows only on
the viewer's own profile and follows the `instance.profile`
hidden-settings gate.
- Tests: extend `SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx`; add
`userProfileLinks.test.ts`, `UserProfile.test.tsx`, and
`useCompanyInviteAccess.test.ts`.
- No documentation references the removed menu rows, so no docs change
is needed.

## Verification

Run the focused tests from the `ui/` directory:

```bash
pnpm vitest run src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx src/hooks/useCompanyInviteAccess.test.ts src/lib/userProfileLinks.test.ts src/pages/UserProfile.test.tsx
```

- 52 tests pass in these four files. They cover the header link by user
id, the removed rows, the header overlay with no nested anchors, the
self-hosted invite target, the self-hosted permission gate (owner,
admin, instance admin, and local board see the row; an operator does
not, on both menu variants), the Cloud invite target with no
`target="_blank"`, the menu order, the hidden-settings gate on both
variants, the Cloud role gate (a plain member sees no row), the
no-fallback rule when Cloud stack metadata is missing, the staging
commit SHA link from `master`, and the own-profile-only "Edit profile"
button.
- `tsc -b` in `ui/` reports no errors in the changed files. The only
errors are pre-existing `@paperclipai/plugin-sdk/ui` resolution errors
in `PluginOrganizationSwitcher.tsx` from an unbuilt workspace package.

Manual steps:

1. Sign in and open the account menu in the lower-left corner. Confirm
the menu has no "View profile" or "Edit profile" rows.
2. Click your picture or name at the top of the menu. Confirm your
profile page opens and shows an "Edit profile" button.
3. Open another user's profile. Confirm the page shows no "Edit profile"
button.
4. On a self-hosted instance, as a company owner or admin, click
"Invite". Confirm the Members page opens on the Invites tab. As an
operator or viewer, confirm the menu shows no "Invite" row.
5. On Paperclip Cloud, as a stack owner or admin, click "Invite".
Confirm the Cloud People settings page opens in the same tab. As a plain
member, confirm the menu shows no "Invite" row.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change is limited to the UI and touches ten files.
- Users who know the "View profile" and "Edit profile" rows must learn
the new header link. The header has hover and focus styles to show that
it is a link.
- On self-hosted instances, the "Invite" row depends on the board access
snapshot from `/cli-auth/me`, which other gates in the UI already use. A
member with a custom `users:invite` grant but an operator or viewer role
does not see the row. That member can still use the Members page. The
row is a shortcut, not the only path.
- On Paperclip Cloud, the "Invite" row depends on the stack portfolio
query. When that query fails or the role is unknown, the menu hides the
row instead of sending the user to the wrong flow.
- Both menu variants change together, so a behavior difference between
them is not expected.

## Model Used

- Provider: Anthropic. Model: Claude Fable 5.1 (`claude-fable-5-1`).
- Run through Claude Code on the Claude Agent SDK inside a Paperclip
`claude_local` agent, with extended thinking and tool use (file edits,
shell, tests, GitHub API).
- The model wrote the code, the tests, and this description. A human
reviewed the pull request and requested the review fixes.

## 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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <bender@paperclip.local>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-09-30 16:18:59 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 270afd2fb8 feat(ui): show running commit in staging account menu (#14410)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The account menu shows the signed-in user's identity.
> - Staging users need to know which server commit is running after a
deploy.
> - The health endpoint already returns that commit, but the menu does
not show it.
> - This pull request adds the short commit below the email on staging
hosts.
> - Users can open the menu to check a deploy without opening deployment
tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The account menu on staging instances.

**Current behavior**

The menu shows the user's name and email. It does not show the running
server commit.

**Proposed behavior**

On `*.staging.paperclip.app`, show `SHA 8751e2d` below the email. Use
the current `/api/health` commit. Show the full SHA on hover and link to
the commit on GitHub. Refresh the health query when the menu opens. Hide
the label on other hosts and when commit metadata is unavailable.

**Reason and benefit**

A user can confirm which commit a staging instance runs after an
automatic deploy.

**Breaking changes**

None. The server already returns the commit field.

Refs #14060 for related account-menu work. This change adds deployment
information only.

## What Changed

- Add the existing health response commit field to the UI type.
- Share the staging host check and a separate health query across both
account-menu variants. A menu refresh failure leaves the access gate
health state unchanged.
- Show a short SHA below the email. Link to the full commit on GitHub
and include the full SHA in its accessible name and hover title.
- Document the staging label and cover staging hosts, other hosts,
missing metadata, refresh on reopen, and request failure isolation.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx` —
24 tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed. The UI build and typecheck also passed again
after review fixes.
- Full test matrix — passed on the latest commit in
[CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36447810742).
The local `pnpm test:run` was stopped before completion after CI
finished the same suites. The focused local tests, full local typecheck,
and full local build passed.
- Browser shard 6 passed on one rerun. Its first attempt lost part of
the draft text in the existing attachment-receipt reload test. No code
changed for the rerun.
- Rendered the real account menu in a local browser fixture with a
staging hostname condition and mocked health response. Confirmed the SHA
fits below the email in the dark menu.
- Greptile review — 5/5, all review threads resolved.
- Manual check after deployment: open the menu on a staging host and
compare the SHA with `/api/health`. Open the menu again after a deploy
to refresh it. Confirm the label is absent on production and localhost.

## Risks

- Low risk. Each menu opening on staging can make one additional health
request.
- The host check applies to `*.staging.paperclip.app`. Other staging
domains will need an explicit update.
- The label identifies the running server commit. It can briefly show
cached data while the request completes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact model variant and context window are not
exposed in this session. Used code execution, repository inspection, 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
#123` / `Refs #123` 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>
2026-09-28 13:43:30 -05:00
Michael Nguyen fe38085174 fix(ui): hide profile feedback flag on Cloud (#13292)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The sidebar provides account controls and a feedback link.
> - Cloud now has Plain chat through the snippet support in #13168.
> - The feedback flag creates a second feedback route on Cloud.
> - This PR uses the existing Cloud metadata to hide the flag.
> - Self-hosted users keep the existing feedback link.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13168 and #10850. Related: #12778 proposes a separate native
feedback relay; this PR only hides the existing flag on Cloud.

**What happened?**
Cloud users see both Plain chat and the profile feedback flag, which
opens the external feedback form.

**Expected behavior**
Cloud users use Plain chat. Self-hosted users keep the profile feedback
flag.

**Steps to reproduce**
Open a Cloud instance with Plain enabled and expand the sidebar. Both
feedback controls are visible.

## What Changed

- Use `useCloudInstance()` in both account-menu variants.
- Render the feedback flag only when the sidebar is expanded and the
instance is not Cloud.
- Extend existing tests for Cloud and authenticated self-hosted
behavior.

## Verification

- Account-menu tests: 6 passed (`cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run
src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx`).
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`: passed.
- Full typecheck: failed in unchanged `plugin-workspace-diff` code
(`editStateKey` required by `UseFileDiffInstanceProps`).
- UI build: blocked by four missing exports in the installed
`assistant-cloud` dependency, including `createRunReport`.
- Repository build: failed on the same unchanged workspace-diff plugin
types.
- Full test suite: started, then stopped after broader validation hit
dependency failures. Only the six targeted account-menu tests are
claimed as passed.
- Fresh installation used `--no-frozen-lockfile --lockfile=false`
because the base lockfile and server manifest differ. No dependency or
lockfile changes are included.
- After deployment, check that Cloud has no profile feedback flag and
self-hosted still links to `https://paperclip.ing/feedback`.

## Risks

Low risk. The hook reads the existing health query cache and adds no
request. CloudAccessGate loads health before the main UI mounts. The
flag is hidden on all Cloud instances, so operators must keep Plain
configured. No backend, settings, or Plain integration changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 Codex, with code inspection and command execution. The
exact model ID and context-window size are 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
- [ ] 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
2026-09-11 17:03:38 -07:00
5b56d430e9 feat(ui): refine core navigation and task detail (#12854)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The main navigation and task detail view are core operator surfaces.
> - Several controls used different hover states, popover layouts, and
spacing rules.
> - Recent task actions also needed a compact menu and correct inbox
archive behavior.
> - These differences made the interface feel inconsistent and caused
some content to look crowded or clipped.
> - This pull request aligns these surfaces with the Paperclip design
tokens and current interaction patterns.
> - The benefit is a simpler and more consistent operator experience in
light and dark modes.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Profile and organization popovers used inconsistent layouts. Navigation
controls used different hover and selected backgrounds. Task warnings
and the composer could crowd nearby content. Archiving a recent task
could also remove it from more than the inbox.

**Expected behavior**

Popover menus should use the same compact visual language. Navigation
controls should share readable hover and selected tokens. Task detail
content should keep consistent spacing. Archiving should hide a task
from the inbox while keeping it in the task list.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open the main sidebar in light or dark mode.
2. Open the profile and organization menus.
3. Hover navigation items, the organization trigger, the profile
trigger, and the feedback flag.
4. Open a task with a warning banner and a long thread.
5. Use the recent task overflow menu and archive a task.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `master` before this branch.

**Deployment mode**

Local dev (`pnpm dev`).

## What Changed

- Rebuilt the profile and organization popovers with compact token-based
layouts.
- Matched organization popover width and alignment to the profile
popover.
- Unified sidebar hover and selected states in light and dark modes.
- Added a recent task overflow menu with rename, archive, and pause or
restart actions.
- Kept archived tasks in the task list while removing them from the
inbox.
- Improved warning banner and composer spacing in task detail views.
- Added and updated focused UI tests for the changed behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- The seven affected UI test files passed with 216 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed.
- GitHub CI passed the full build, typecheck and release registry,
general test, serialized server, canary dry-run, and end-to-end
matrices.
- Greptile reviewed commit `6e296be85` at 5/5 with no outstanding
actionable findings.

## Risks

- Risk is limited to sidebar presentation, recent task actions, and task
detail layout.
- The recent task archive action now follows inbox-only archive
semantics.
- No database schema or public API contract changed.

> I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This pull request does not
duplicate planned core work.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6. The model used high reasoning, tool use, and
code execution. The context window size was 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 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: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-04 16:15:21 -07:00
Devin Foley c38b59484c fix(ui): remove the Account badge and version line from the account menu (#12818)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The web UI has a sidebar account menu that opens from the user's
name in the lower left
> - The menu header shows an "Account"/"Local" badge and a "Paperclip
<sha>" (or "Paperclip v<version>") build line next to the user's
identity
> - These labels add noise to the header and repeat information that is
available elsewhere: the email line already shows the sign-in state, and
the opt-in "Server" debug section in the same menu shows the running
commit
> - This pull request removes the badge and the build line so the header
shows only the user's name and email
> - The benefit is a cleaner account menu that shows only identity
information

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No existing issue. Related: #9637 (closed) added the source-sha
rendering that this PR removes from the menu header. Description follows
the enhancement template:

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The sidebar account menu popover. Its header shows the user's name, an
"Account" or "Local" badge, the email, and a build identifier line
("Paperclip <short sha>" with branch/commit links for source builds, or
"Paperclip v<version>" for release builds).

**Current behavior**

The popover header mixes identity information with deployment and build
metadata. The badge and the version line take space and do not help
daily use.

**Proposed behavior**

The popover header shows only the user's name and email. Build
information stays available in the "Server" section at the bottom of the
same menu when the server-info debug view is enabled in experimental
instance settings.

**Reason and benefit**

Less visual noise in a menu that users open often. No information is
lost: sign-in state is clear from the email line, and the running commit
remains visible through the server-info debug view.

**Breaking changes**

None. The `SidebarAccountMenu` components no longer accept the
`serverGit` and `version` props; both call sites in the two `Layout`
variants are updated in this PR.

## What Changed

- `ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.tsx` and
`SidebarAccountMenu.production.tsx`: remove the "Account"/"Local" badge
and the full version block (source-build branch/commit links and the
release-version fallback); drop the now-unused `serverGit`/`version`
props, the sha-parsing helper, and the `Badge` import
- `ui/src/components/Layout.tsx` and `Layout.production.tsx`: stop
passing the removed props at all four call sites
- `ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx`: delete the
source-build sha test; the sign-out test now pins that the popover
contains neither "Account" nor "Paperclip v"
- `ui/storybook/stories/navigation-layout.stories.tsx`: stop passing the
removed `version` prop in the account-menu story

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx` — 36 tests pass
- `tsc --noEmit` for the `ui` package passes
- Manual: open the app, click your name in the lower left. The popover
header shows only name and email.

## Risks

- Low risk. UI-only removal with no data or API changes.
- Users who relied on the header sha to identify a source build must
enable the experimental server-info debug view to see the running commit
in the same menu.

> 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), Claude Fable 5, model ID `claude-fable-5`,
extended thinking enabled, via Claude Code CLI with tool use (file edit,
shell, test runner)

## 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
2026-09-03 23:26:08 -07:00
871f7d1124 fix(ui): polish core navigation and task layout (#12793)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators use the main navigation, contextual navigation, and task
chat throughout the product.
> - The recent core UI refactor left uneven spacing and inconsistent
navigation styles.
> - The Apps label also did not match the Connectors product language.
> - The account area did not provide a clear direct path for feedback.
> - This pull request aligns these related core UI surfaces and
preserves their existing behavior.
> - The benefit is a more consistent interface with clearer navigation
and balanced task-chat layout.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

This improves the core sidebar, Settings navigation, Connectors catalog,
task-chat layout, and account controls.

**Subsystem affected**

`ui/` — React and Vite board UI.

**Current behavior**

The task chat had uneven edge treatment. Settings used a separate
contextual-navigation style. Apps used inconsistent product labels. The
account footer did not expose a direct feedback control.

**Proposed behavior**

The task chat keeps balanced content padding while its scrollbar sits at
the properties boundary. Settings replaces the primary sidebar with a
matching navigation surface and a Back to app link. Apps uses Connectors
and Browse labels. The account footer provides a dedicated feedback icon
with a tooltip.

**Reason and benefit**

These changes make related navigation and layout patterns predictable.
They reduce duplicate labels and improve access to feedback.

**Breaking changes**

None. Routes, APIs, and stored data do not change.

## What Changed

- Balanced the task-chat content gutter and moved its scrollbar to the
properties-panel boundary.
- Reworked Settings navigation to replace the main sidebar and use the
shared primary-sidebar style.
- Added a Back to app navigation item to Settings.
- Renamed Apps to Connectors in the main navigation and added the
`Unplug` icon.
- Renamed the Connectors contextual item to Browse.
- Added the Connectors top-level header and aligned the search field
with the connector cards.
- Added account-footer hover states and a direct feedback flag with a
Share feedback tooltip.
- Removed the duplicate Feedback item from the account popover.
- Added regression coverage for each changed UI surface.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/AppsSidebar.test.tsx
src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx
src/components/Layout.test.tsx src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/TaskMessageScroller.test.tsx
src/pages/apps/Browse.test.tsx` — 90 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- `env PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome PAPERCLIP_E2E_PORT=3201 pnpm
exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/apps-dark-mode-shots.spec.ts
tests/e2e/sidebar-takeover.spec.ts` — 10 tests passed.
- The full workspace typecheck and build reached the Rust runner and
stopped because `cargo` is not installed on this machine.
- The full test suite exposed unrelated server and workspace-runtime
failures and was stopped after the affected suites completed. No changed
UI test failed.
- Manually verified the changed Settings, Connectors, task-chat, and
account-menu surfaces in the running app.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change affects layout and navigation presentation only.
- The Settings sidebar now replaces the main sidebar by design. Users
must use Back to app to return to the application navigation.
- The task scrollbar offset depends on the existing responsive page
gutters. Regression tests cover both narrow and desktop spacing.

> 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, `gpt-5.6-sol`, extended reasoning with tool use and code
execution. The host does not expose the context-window size.

## 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
- [ ] 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: Scott Tong <scott@scottsmbpm5max.lan>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-03 15:35:39 -07:00
scotttong 597fd63b61 feat(ui): add streamlined navigation foundation (#12746) 2026-09-02 23:55:43 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f258b34bbd fix(ui): unify cloud-managed sign-out (#10994)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip can run as a self-hosted app or as a Cloud-managed tenant.
> - These modes need different sign-out sequences because Cloud owns
three sessions.
> - Several visible controls implemented sign-out separately and could
choose different paths.
> - This pull request adds one Cloud-aware sign-out action and moves
every visible control to it.
> - The benefit is one safe sign-out path in Cloud and unchanged local
sign-out in self-hosted deployments.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #2073. That older PR adds a separate company-settings sign-out
surface. This change centralizes the existing account, company, and
instance-settings surfaces and preserves the self-hosted behavior
described there.

**What happened?**

Visible sign-out controls used separate implementations. A Cloud-managed
control could call the app-local sign-out endpoint and open the local
auth page. That path did not enter the Cloud-owned logout sequence for
the tenant, Cloud, and identity sessions.

**Expected behavior**

Every visible sign-out control must use one action. Cloud-managed
instances must navigate the top-level window to the same-origin
`/cloud/logout` route without a local sign-out call first. Authenticated
self-hosted instances must keep the local sign-out API and cache
invalidation behavior.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open a Cloud-managed tenant.
2. Use the account menu, company menu, or instance-settings sign-out
control.
3. Observe that independently implemented controls can enter different
sign-out paths.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The problem reproduces at `656ecfa585b31938e2685ffab3db22e794474803`.

**Deployment mode**

Cloud-managed tenant built from source. The regression tests also cover
authenticated self-hosted mode.

## What Changed

- Added `useSignOut` as the shared Cloud-aware sign-out action.
- Navigated Cloud-managed sessions to `/cloud/logout` exactly once
without calling local auth first.
- Preserved local API sign-out and cache invalidation for authenticated
self-hosted sessions.
- Migrated the account menu, company menu, and instance general settings
to the shared action.
- Added focused tests for mode selection, menu closure, pending state,
failure state, and settings behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/hooks/useSignOut.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/InstanceGeneralSettings.test.tsx` — 26 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` — passed.

## Risks

- Low risk. The change centralizes existing behavior and adds no schema,
API, telemetry, or style-token changes.
- Cloud mode depends on the existing health decision. Tests pin both
mode branches.
- The change does not alter Fetch Metadata, CSRF, cookie, prefetch, or
return-URL protections owned by the Cloud logout route.

> 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, GPT-5. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode, shell
tools, and API tools.

## 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
- [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>
2026-08-06 12:13:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ac3b2e1d7a fix(ui): use cloud logout for managed sign-out (#10937)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip supports self-hosted and Cloud-managed authenticated
deployments
> - A Cloud-managed tenant uses the Cloud harness to own the full
browser session
> - The account menu treated every authenticated deployment as Cloud and
called the local sign-out API first
> - This pull request uses the existing Cloud health metadata as the
mode gate
> - Cloud-managed sign-out now starts the harness logout round trip with
a top-level navigation
> - Self-hosted authenticated sign-out keeps the existing local API flow
> - The benefit is a complete Cloud logout without changing self-hosted
behavior

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related prior work: Refs #10802.

**What happened?**

The account menu called the app-local sign-out endpoint before it moved
an authenticated browser to the Cloud logout route. It also used
authenticated deployment mode as the Cloud test. This test included
self-hosted authenticated instances.

**Expected behavior**

A Cloud-managed tenant must navigate the top-level browser directly to
`/cloud/logout`. A self-hosted authenticated instance must keep the
app-local sign-out flow.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open a Cloud-managed tenant.
2. Open the account menu.
3. Select **Sign out**.
4. Observe that the browser returns through the tenant auth route
instead of completing the Cloud logout round trip.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `master` after `76f442040c`.

**Deployment mode**

Paperclip Cloud-managed authenticated deployment.

## What Changed

- Read the existing Cloud instance metadata in the account menu.
- Navigate directly to `/cloud/logout` for Cloud-managed instances
without calling the local sign-out API.
- Keep the local sign-out API and cache refresh for self-hosted
authenticated instances.
- Add regression coverage for both sides of the mode gate.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`

## Risks

- Low risk. The change is limited to the account-menu action.
- The Cloud branch depends on the existing `health.cloud` metadata that
already gates other Cloud UI behavior.
- The self-hosted regression test verifies that authenticated mode alone
does not select the Cloud route.

> 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 based on GPT-5. The runtime provided agentic reasoning,
repository tools, shell execution, and test execution. The exact
internal model ID and context window are not exposed to the agent.

## 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>
2026-08-05 21:14:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 76f442040c fix(ui): follow managed sign-out redirects
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-03 22:34:14 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6f204605ad fix(ui): show source SHA for unreleased builds (#9508)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage
AI-agent companies
> - Operators need to identify the exact build running from the
persistent account menu
> - Formal releases already have a concise public version, but source
builds include a long derived version string
> - The derived version identifies a commit but does not expose the
source branch or a direct path to inspect the code
> - Server Git metadata is auth-sensitive, so the UI must also refresh
it when the current session changes
> - This pull request shows linked branch and commit metadata for source
builds while preserving `v<version>` for formal releases
> - The benefit is faster build diagnosis with correct metadata across
sign-in and sign-out transitions

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

### Pre-submission checklist

- [x] I searched existing open and closed issues and found no duplicate
implementing this exact account-menu behavior.
- [x] The behavior reproduces on `master`.
- [x] The behavior originates in Paperclip's core UI, not an adapter,
provider, or local configuration.

### What happened?

Source builds displayed the full derived version, such as
`2026.626.0+58.git.518fc71ce`, without linking the operator to the
corresponding source branch or commit.

### Expected behavior

Source builds should show the concise branch and short commit SHA with
links to GitHub, while formal releases should continue showing their
public version. Auth transitions should refresh the health metadata that
supplies those Git details.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Run Paperclip from a commit after a release tag.
2. Open the account menu.
3. Inspect the build label beneath the user identity.
4. Sign in or out and reopen the menu.

### Paperclip version or commit

Any source build whose server version uses the
`<version>+<count>.git.<sha>[.dirty]` format.

### Deployment mode

Local dev (`pnpm dev`) or authenticated deployments.

### Installation method

Built from source.

## What Changed

- Detect source-derived version strings and render the source branch
plus seven-character commit SHA in `SidebarAccountMenu`.
- Link source branches and commits to the canonical
`paperclipai/paperclip` GitHub repository.
- Extend server Git metadata with the full SHA and expose it through
health/OpenAPI contracts.
- Refresh auth-sensitive health metadata after sign-in and every
sign-out entry point.
- Preserve the existing `v<version>` label for formal releases and add
focused regression coverage.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Auth.test.tsx
src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
src/components/SidebarServerInfo.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/health.test.ts src/__tests__/server-info.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `git diff --check public/master...HEAD`

## Risks

- Low risk: formal release rendering retains the existing fallback
behavior when the source-version pattern does not match.
- Source links assume the build came from the canonical public
repository; fork-only branches or commits may not resolve there.
- Health metadata is invalidated after auth transitions, adding one
bounded refetch so the displayed Git details match the new session.

> 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 using GPT-5.4 with medium reasoning, repository/tool
access, shell execution, and code editing; context-window size was not
exposed by 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
- [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>
2026-07-13 20:55:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 176645187c Fix request storm polling and issue-list coalescing (#9190)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The board UI keeps issue, agent, activity, and run state fresh
through polling across several pages and sidebar surfaces
> - When multiple components or browser tabs poll the same company data
at the same time, the API can receive bursts of duplicate issue-list
requests
> - Those duplicate requests increase database and server load without
returning meaningfully different data
> - This pull request adds server-side compression/coalescing plus
client-side visibility-aware and cross-tab shared polling
> - The benefit is lower request volume during normal board usage while
preserving fresh UI data for active users

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No exact public GitHub issue was found for this request.

Problem:
- The board can issue redundant polling requests for the same issue-list
data from multiple UI surfaces and tabs.
- In busy operator sessions, those bursts can trigger request-storm
behavior and unnecessary issue-list load.
- Expected behavior is to reuse identical in-flight work server-side and
reduce hidden-tab or duplicate-tab polling client-side while preserving
normal refresh behavior.

Related public context found during duplicate search:
- #8206 covers a different board UI 404-storm scope.
- #5165 covers separate issue-list behavior around page-size truncation.

## What Changed

- Added API compression middleware foundation and a company/created-at
index for heartbeat run access.
- Added server-side issue-list request storm detection and identical
in-flight request coalescing.
- Added UI fetch metadata, visibility-aware polling, and request
deduplication for issue/activity/client calls.
- Added cross-tab shared polling primitives and wired them into the
sidebar, inbox, dashboard, issue, project, routine, and agent surfaces.
- Resolved the latest `master` migration collision by keeping upstream
`0140_built_in_managed_resources.sql` and renumbering this branch's
heartbeat-run index migration to
`0141_heartbeat_runs_company_created_at_index.sql`; the SQL uses `CREATE
INDEX IF NOT EXISTS` for idempotency.
- Stabilized server heartbeat cleanup tests exposed by the PR check
matrix.
- Fixed the Greptile compression follow-up by weakening strong ETags on
encoded JSON responses and bypassing compression for streamed/download
responses.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` — passed after resolving the latest
`master` conflict in `IssuesList.tsx` and updating the 200-result cap
expectations.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed after the UI conflict resolution.
- `jq -e '.entries | length as $n | (map(.idx) | unique | length == $n)
and (map(.tag) | unique | length == $n)'
packages/db/src/migrations/meta/_journal.json` — passed after
renumbering the migration to `0141`.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/api-compression.test.ts` -
passed after the compression follow-up.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts` - passed
after the compression follow-up.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - passed after the
compression follow-up.
- Greptile Review for head `8dbddac41ec273fda404100b4981ddb912fad57b` -
passed after the latest conflict/migration fix; all Greptile review
threads are resolved.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/api-compression.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts
ui/src/api/client.test.ts ui/src/api/issues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/polling.test.ts ui/src/lib/cross-tab-poll.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issueDetailCache.test.ts` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/api/client.test.ts` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issueDetailCache.test.ts` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-worktree-suppression.test.ts` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` — passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts` —
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- GitHub PR checks for head `8dbddac41ec273fda404100b4981ddb912fad57b`:
all GitHub Actions/status checks passed; Greptile, Superagent, Socket,
Snyk, build, typecheck/release registry, general tests, serialized
server suites, e2e, canary dry run, policy, and commitperclip review are
green; Storybook visual regression and security-review were
skipped/neutral by policy.
- Confirmed this branch does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows` changes.

## Risks

- Medium risk: issue-list coalescing changes request timing and cache
semantics for a hot API path.
- Medium risk: cross-tab polling uses browser coordination primitives,
so older or unusual browser environments need fallback behavior to stay
correct.
- Low migration risk: the new index migration is ordered after current
`master` and uses `CREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS`.

> 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 coding agent, GPT-5-based model, tool-enabled with
shell/git execution. Exact hosted deployment identifier and
context-window size were not surfaced in the agent 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
- [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>
2026-07-09 17:38:34 -05:00
c07e650cd7 feat(ui): single-source design tokens, visual regression suite, and theme retune (#9134)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its UI is the operator's daily surface: task lists, boards, budgets,
agent status — all built on shadcn components and Tailwind
> - Visual values (colors, spacing, type sizes, radii) were hardcoded at
~1,600 call sites: the same "small gray label" was 9/10/11px depending
on the file, charts disagreed with chips about status colors, two
toggle-switch implementations coexisted in two greens, and there was no
visual regression coverage
> - This made the UI drift-prone and made any restyle a
hundreds-of-files project, which discourages design iteration
> - This pull request extracts visual values into a single token layer
in `ui/src/index.css`, adds a Storybook visual regression suite backed
by external immutable baseline archives, and then applies a deliberate
retune reviewed change-by-change on screenshot diffs
> - The benefit is that Paperclip's look becomes a config surface:
retheming is a token edit reviewed as a snapshot diff, drift is blocked
by a token gate, and future UI PRs can prove exactly what changed
visually without committing hundreds of PNGs

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No existing public issue covers this work (searched "design tokens",
"visual regression", "design system" across issues and PRs). Related in
spirit: Refs #8982 (theming a hardcoded panel — a one-off instance of
the same problem class this PR addresses systematically).

**Problem (feature-request form):** UI visual values are hardcoded per
call site with no source of truth and no regression coverage;
consistency depends on reviewer memory, and restyling requires mass file
edits.
**Proposed solution (this PR):** a single token layer + enforcement gate
+ externally stored visual snapshot suite, then an intentional restyle
on top of that foundation.

## What Changed

- **Token extraction (zero visual change, machine-verified during
development):** committed codemods (`scripts/codemod-*.mjs`) moved
~1,600 hardcoded color/type/spacing/radius/shadow/misc values into named
tokens in a non-inline `:root` block of `ui/src/index.css`.
- **Visual regression suite:** `pnpm test:storybook-visual` covers 255
stories × light/dark = 510 Playwright screenshots at `maxDiffPixels: 0`,
plus new primitive-coverage stories and deterministic-render fixes.
- **External visual baselines:** committed PNG snapshots were removed.
`tests/storybook-visual/baseline-manifest.json` pins an immutable
archive URL/hash/size/count, and `scripts/storybook-visual-baseline.mjs`
handles `download`, `verify`, `pack`, and trusted maintainer `upload`
flows.
- **Opt-in visual CI artifacts:** added a `Storybook Visual` workflow
that runs on manual dispatch or PRs labeled `storybook-visual`,
downloads/verifies the baseline, runs Playwright, and uploads Playwright
report/test-result artifacts for review. Normal PR runs do not mutate
baseline objects.
- **Token gate:** `pnpm check:token-gates` — zero hex literals, zero
arbitrary bracket values, zero raw font-sizes in `ui/src/components/**`
and `ui/src/pages/**`, with a documented inline allowlist for legitimate
opt-outs.
- **Theme retune (intentional, snapshot-reviewed):** new base theme
values; radius ladder derived from a single `--radius` knob; micro-type
cluster collapsed to a named ladder (`--text-nano/micro/compact` +
Tailwind `text-xs`/`text-sm`); letter-spacing collapsed to named steps.
- **One status-color vocabulary:** charts, quota/budget bar fills,
RUNNING/live chips, and liveness indicators all use the canonical
`--status-*` hues. Light-mode legibility fixes for red alert surfaces
that used dark-tuned text classes.
- **One switch:** `ToggleSwitch` restyled to the registry capsule form,
second hand-rolled implementation removed, and all call sites unified.
- **Docs:** `DESIGN.md` is the design contract; `doc/design/` holds
audit reports, decision logs, and updated guidance for external baseline
review/update workflows.
- Dead code removed (`agentStatusBadge` duplicate map), byte-identical
contrast constants consolidated, semantic renames
(`--project-seed`/`--project-none`, `--liveness-blue`).

## Verification

- `pnpm check:token-gates` — 3/3 gates CLEAN during the design-system
run
- `pnpm typecheck` && `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — green
during the design-system run
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/storybook-visual-baseline.test.mjs` —
pass after external-baseline rework
- `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit --pretty false --module NodeNext
--moduleResolution NodeNext --target ES2022 --types
node,@playwright/test tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts
tests/storybook-visual/storybook-visual.spec.ts` — pass after
external-baseline rework
- `git diff --check origin/pr/9134..HEAD` — pass after external-baseline
rework
- `find tests/storybook-visual -type f -name '*.png' -print | wc -l` —
`0`
- `node scripts/storybook-visual-baseline.mjs verify` — intentionally
fails closed until the first trusted maintainer publishes the baseline
archive and updates `baseline-manifest.json`

## Risks

- **Large but shallow:** the PR still touches many UI files due to
mechanical token extraction and retune work, but committed PNG snapshot
churn has been removed from the branch.
- **Baseline publication required before the visual suite can pass in
clean clones:** the manifest currently has placeholder archive metadata.
A trusted maintainer must publish the first immutable archive, then
update `baseline-manifest.json`.
- **Rendering platform variance:** the external baseline should be
captured in the documented Linux/Chromium environment. Future CI runs
verify against the pinned archive and fail closed on checksum/count
mismatch.
- **Visual CI is opt-in while stabilizing:** add the `storybook-visual`
label or dispatch the workflow manually to produce downloadable
Playwright report/test-result artifacts.
- **Scheduled follow-ups, deliberately out of scope:** Tailwind palette
classes map to semantic tokens in a dedicated pass; card/pill component
consolidation; ESLint ratchet. Tracked in
`doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md`.

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, `claude-fable-5`, Mythos-class tier) with
extended thinking, running in Claude Code with tool use; mechanical
phases delegated to Claude Sonnet subagents. Follow-up external-baseline
rework assisted by OpenAI Codex (`gpt-5` coding agent with repository,
terminal, and GitHub tool use). All bulk rewrites executed via
deterministic, idempotent scripts committed in `scripts/`; intentional
visual changes were human-reviewed on screenshot contact sheets.

## 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 targeted local verification and documented the
intentional baseline-publication failure above
- [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 *(pending new CI run after this
rework)*
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
*(pending review)*
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) and
OpenAI Codex

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <bippadotta@protonmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-07-07 16:22:16 -05:00
e3aada1df2 feat(ui): add Feedback item to the account flyout menu (PAP-107) (#7854)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The web UI has a bottom-left account flyout menu where users reach
profile, docs, and the light/dark toggle
> - There was no in-product way for users to send feedback or report
issues — they had to find an external channel
> - We want a low-friction, always-visible entry point for feedback, and
a clean URL we can re-point later without shipping app changes
> - This pull request adds a **Feedback** item (Megaphone icon) to the
account flyout, between Documentation and the theme toggle, that opens
`https://paperclip.ing/feedback` in a new tab
> - `paperclip.ing/feedback` is a stable indirection (added to the
marketing site) that currently 302-redirects to a Google Form, so the
destination can be swapped for a richer solution later with no app
release
> - The benefit is a one-click feedback path for users and a
future-proof link the team controls

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists (tracked internally as Paperclip PAP-107).
Describing the underlying request inline as a feature, per
CONTRIBUTING.md path (B):

### Problem or motivation

Users have no in-app affordance to give feedback or report issues; that
friction loses signal we'd otherwise act on.

### Proposed solution

Add a Feedback item to the account flyout (Megaphone icon, between
Documentation and the theme toggle) that opens a stable
`paperclip.ing/feedback` URL in a new tab. That URL redirects to a
Google Form for now, keeping the client decoupled from the destination.

### Alternatives considered

Linking the Google Form directly from the app — rejected because it
bakes a throwaway URL into the client; the `/feedback` indirection keeps
the link clean and swappable.

### Roadmap alignment

Small, self-contained UX addition; no overlap with planned core work
(checked ROADMAP.md). The `/feedback` redirect lives in the separate
`paperclip-website` repo (Astro site on Cloudflare Pages), commit
`f65b566`. No duplicate/related PRs found in this repo (searched
feedback/flyout/menu).

## What Changed

- `ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.tsx`: import `Megaphone` from
`lucide-react`; add `FEEDBACK_URL = "https://paperclip.ing/feedback"`
const next to `DOCS_URL`; insert a `Feedback` `MenuAction` between
Documentation and the theme toggle using the `external` prop so it opens
in a new tab (`target="_blank"`, `rel="noreferrer"`) and closes the
popover on click.
- `ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx`: assert the Feedback
item renders with the correct `href`, opens in a new tab, and is ordered
after Documentation and before the theme toggle.
- (Separate repo, for context) `paperclip-website` `public/_redirects`:
`/feedback` → 302 → the feedback Google Form.

## Verification

- **Unit tests:** `SidebarAccountMenu` tests pass (item renders, correct
`href`, `target="_blank"`, ordering). Run: `cd ui && npm test --
SidebarAccountMenu`.
- **Manual / canary:** The board previewed the canary build of the menu
item and accepted it. Clicking **Feedback** opens a new tab to
`paperclip.ing/feedback`.
- **Redirect:** After the Cloudflare Pages deploy propagates, `curl -sI
https://paperclip.ing/feedback` returns the Google Form in the
`Location` header.

_Screenshots:_ UI change was validated via the accepted canary preview;
the item reuses the existing `MenuAction` styling, so it visually
matches the Documentation/theme rows.

## Risks

- **Low risk.** Additive, self-contained UI change with no new state or
API calls. The only external dependency is the `paperclip.ing/feedback`
redirect (separate repo, already deployed); if it were missing the link
would 404, but it is in place. No migrations, no breaking changes.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR.

## Model Used

- **Claude (Anthropic).** PR authoring/orchestration:
**claude-opus-4-8** (extended thinking + tool use). The implementation
commit `b454a12d` was produced with assistance from
**claude-sonnet-4-6**. All changes reviewed before pushing.

## 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 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
- [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: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-06-09 16:42:15 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 76c88e5855 [codex] Move instance settings under company settings (#7680)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Operators manage both company-scoped configuration and
instance-level runtime/admin settings from the board UI
> - Instance settings previously lived as their own top-level sidebar
area, separate from the company settings context operators already use
> - That split made settings navigation feel heavier and made instance
configuration less discoverable from the settings tab
> - This pull request moves instance settings under company settings
while preserving the existing instance settings routes and plugin/admin
surfaces
> - The benefit is a smaller primary sidebar and a more coherent
settings hierarchy for operators

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #338
- Internal: PAP-10491, PAP-10538

## What Changed

- Moved instance settings navigation under the company settings area.
- Added route helpers and sidebar entries for nested instance settings
paths.
- Updated plugin/admin settings routes to use the company settings
instance scope.
- Preserved legacy instance-settings bookmarks through compatibility
redirects that keep the active company prefix.
- Updated focused UI and plugin tests for the new navigation shape.
- Stabilized the process-loss retry test that was failing the serialized
server shard in CI.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip` `master` and
pushed the current head.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/access/CompanySettingsNav.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/instance-settings.test.ts
ui/src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/PluginPage.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts
packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/instance-settings.test.ts
ui/src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/access/CompanySettingsNav.test.tsx
ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t "queues
exactly one retry when the recorded local pid is dead"`
- `pnpm test:run:serialized -- --shard-index 0 --shard-count 4`
- GitHub PR checks are green on head
`fe7b0955169dcae55cbe10889c1876a70ab0b80c`, including `verify`, `General
tests (server)`, all serialized server shards, build, e2e, policy,
security checks, and Greptile.
- Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows` changes.

## Risks

- Medium UI/navigation risk: instance settings links are intentionally
moving under company settings, so stale external bookmarks to legacy
paths rely on the compatibility routing in this branch.
- Low test-only risk from the CI stabilization commit: it makes the
recovery assertion select the actual retry run by `retryOfRunId` instead
of whichever non-original run appears first.
- No database migrations.
- No dependency lockfile or workflow changes.

> 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell/tool execution in
a local repository worktree. Exact context window was not exposed by 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 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
- [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>
2026-06-07 17:23:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d734bd43d1 [codex] Roll up May 17 branch changes (#6210)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so agent
work needs visible ownership, recovery, and operator controls.
> - This local branch had accumulated several related control-plane
reliability and operator-experience fixes across recovery actions,
watchdog folding, model-profile defaults, mentions, markdown editing,
plugin launchers, and small UI polish.
> - The branch needed to be converted into a PR against the current
`origin/master` without losing dirty work or including lockfile/workflow
churn.
> - The safest standalone shape is a single rollup PR because the
recovery/server/UI files overlap heavily across the local commits and
splitting would create avoidable conflicts.
> - This pull request replays the local branch onto latest
`origin/master`, preserves the uncommitted work as logical commits, and
adds a Zod 4 validator compatibility fix found during verification.
> - The benefit is that the May 17 local branch can be reviewed and
merged as one coherent, conflict-free branch under the 100-file Greptile
limit.

## What Changed

- Rebased the local May 17 branch work onto current `origin/master` in a
dedicated worktree.
- Preserved and committed previously dirty changes for recovery retry
handling, plugin/sidebar launcher polish, and `.herenow` ignores.
- Added recovery-action behavior for returning source issues to `todo`
when retrying source-scoped recovery.
- Included the existing local recovery/liveness/watchdog fold, Codex
cheap-profile, markdown/mention, duplicate-agent, and UI polish commits
from the branch.
- Normalized shared validator `z.record(...)` schemas to explicit
string-key records for Zod 4 compatibility.
- Confirmed the PR has no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`
changes and stays below the 100-file Greptile limit.

## Verification

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts`
- `npm run install` in
`node_modules/.pnpm/sqlite3@5.1.7/node_modules/sqlite3` to build the
local native sqlite3 binding after installing with scripts disabled
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
packages/shared/src/project-mentions.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-local-folders.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx`
- First pass: 13 files passed with 201 passing tests; 3 server files
failed before sqlite3 native binding was built.
- After rebuilding sqlite3:
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts`,
`server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts`, and
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts`
passed/loaded; embedded Postgres tests were skipped by the local host
guard.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`

## Risks

- Medium risk: this is a broad rollup PR across recovery semantics,
server tests, shared validators, and UI surfaces.
- Some embedded Postgres tests skipped locally due the host guard, so CI
should provide the stronger database-backed signal.
- UI changes were covered by component tests, but no browser screenshot
was captured in this PR creation pass.
- This branch may overlap with existing recovery/liveness PR work; merge
this PR independently or restack/close overlapping branches rather than
merging duplicate implementations together.

> 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, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled local repository
and GitHub workflow, medium reasoning effort.

## 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-05-17 17:15:06 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4103978578 Polish operator sidebar and issue property controls (#5355)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Operators use the board sidebar and issue properties panel to move
between companies and understand task metadata
> - Small UI regressions in these controls make repeated board operation
slower and less predictable
> - The local branch already contained targeted fixes for company
ordering, issue date display, and sidebar rail sizing
> - This pull request isolates those operator UI quality-of-life fixes
into a standalone branch against `origin/master`
> - The benefit is a focused, reviewable PR that can merge independently
of the issue-thread activity work

## What Changed

- Shows issue property timestamps with time, not just dates.
- Adds edit-mode support for ordering companies in the sidebar company
menu.
- Fixes a workspace switcher rail regression and keeps the account menu
aligned with the rail width.
- Includes focused component coverage for the touched controls.

## Verification

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx` — 4 files passed, 29
tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter /ui typecheck`
- PR checks on `a4030f7a` are green: policy, verify, serialized server
suites 1/4-4/4, e2e, Canary Dry Run, Greptile Review, and Snyk.
- Captured a local Storybook screenshot of `Product/Navigation & Layout`
after the sidebar polish:
`/tmp/pap-3659-screenshots/navigation-layout-after.png`.
- Confirmed the PR changes 8 files and does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`
or `.github/workflows/*`.

## Risks

- Low to moderate UI risk: this touches shared sidebar components and
issue metadata rendering.
- The company ordering behavior depends on existing query/cache
behavior, so stale cache bugs would show up as ordering inconsistencies.
- No database, API, workflow, or lockfile changes are included.

> 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, GPT-5 coding agent, shell/tool-use enabled, used to
split the existing branch, verify the isolated PR branch, and create
this PR.

## 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 08:59:39 -05:00
b9a80dcf22 feat: implement multi-user access and invite flows (#3784)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies.
> - V1 needs to stay local-first while also supporting shared,
authenticated deployments.
> - Human operators need real identities, company membership, invite
flows, profile surfaces, and company-scoped access controls.
> - Agents and operators also need the existing issue, inbox, workspace,
approval, and plugin flows to keep working under those authenticated
boundaries.
> - This branch accumulated the multi-user implementation, follow-up QA
fixes, workspace/runtime refinements, invite UX improvements,
release-branch conflict resolution, and review hardening.
> - This pull request consolidates that branch onto the current `master`
branch as a single reviewable PR.
> - The benefit is a complete multi-user implementation path with tests
and docs carried forward without dropping existing branch work.

## What Changed

- Added authenticated human-user access surfaces: auth/session routes,
company user directory, profile settings, company access/member
management, join requests, and invite management.
- Added invite creation, invite landing, onboarding, logo/branding,
invite grants, deduped join requests, and authenticated multi-user E2E
coverage.
- Tightened company-scoped and instance-admin authorization across
board, plugin, adapter, access, issue, and workspace routes.
- Added profile-image URL validation hardening, avatar preservation on
name-only profile updates, and join-request uniqueness migration cleanup
for pending human requests.
- Added an atomic member role/status/grants update path so Company
Access saves no longer leave partially updated permissions.
- Improved issue chat, inbox, assignee identity rendering,
sidebar/account/company navigation, workspace routing, and execution
workspace reuse behavior for multi-user operation.
- Added and updated server/UI tests covering auth, invites, membership,
issue workspace inheritance, plugin authz, inbox/chat behavior, and
multi-user flows.
- Merged current `public-gh/master` into this branch, resolved all
conflicts, and verified no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is included in this
PR diff.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx`
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-service-authz.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/access-validators.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/authz-company-access.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/sidebar-preferences-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/auth-routes.test.ts
ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm db:generate`
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts --list`
- Confirmed branch has no uncommitted changes and is `0` commits behind
`public-gh/master` before PR creation.
- Confirmed no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is staged or present in the PR
diff.

## Risks

- High review surface area: this PR contains the accumulated multi-user
branch plus follow-up fixes, so reviewers should focus especially on
company-boundary enforcement and authenticated-vs-local deployment
behavior.
- UI behavior changed across invites, inbox, issue chat, access
settings, and sidebar navigation; no browser screenshots are included in
this branch-consolidation PR.
- Plugin install, upgrade, and lifecycle/config mutations now require
instance-admin access, which is intentional but may change expectations
for non-admin board users.
- A join-request dedupe migration rejects duplicate pending human
requests before creating unique indexes; deployments with unusual
historical duplicates should review the migration behavior.
- Company member role/status/grant saves now use a new combined
endpoint; older separate endpoints remain for compatibility.
- Full production build was not run locally in this heartbeat; CI should
cover the full matrix.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5-based model, CLI/tool-use
environment. Exact deployed model identifier and context window were not
exposed by 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 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

Note on screenshots: this is a branch-consolidation PR for an
already-developed multi-user branch, and no browser screenshots were
captured during this heartbeat.

---------

Co-authored-by: dotta <dotta@example.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-17 09:44:19 -05:00