7 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	4d92589799	perf(ui): defer hidden task rendering until history is ready (#16878) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People open a task to read saved work and reply. > - The conversation waits for its initial data so messages do not move after reveal. > - The hidden conversation and editor still render while those reads are pending. > - Profiling showed a useful cold-load gain when that hidden rendering was delayed. > - Prepare ordinary task content after its initial data is ready. Keep the existing preparation path for comment links. > - Keep the skeleton, measured reveal, timeout, and mounted conversation during refresh. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #16862 and #16849. Related task-layout work: #14758. Searches found no overlapping open rendering change. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Opening a task mounts hidden message rows and the rich editor while supporting reads are still pending. These trees can render again as data arrives before the user can see or use them. **Subsystem affected** UI task conversation startup and its browser acceptance suite. **Proposed behavior** Keep the existing skeleton and outer layout containers. Prepare the hidden conversation and composer when initial history is ready, then use the existing measured reveal. Keep content mounted after reveal. Hash navigation retains eager preparation so older comment targets can be positioned before reveal. The existing 15-second timeout still reveals available history and the composer. ## What Changed - Gate concealed history and composer children with the existing history readiness, revealed-task latch, timeout, and scroll-navigation hash. - Keep data queries, shell geometry, scroll ownership, and the reveal frame unchanged. - Update unit coverage for deferred content, comment-link preparation, task changes, history timeout, and mounted editor identity during refresh. - Add a real browser journey that holds a background task read, retains the same editor and draft, reloads the saved draft, sends one reply, and checks the persisted comment independently. - Document the loading and draft acceptance paths. ## Verification - Repository-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. Token gates and all 231 task-thread unit cases passed. - Seven regression cases failed against the old rendering behavior before the source change. - All 14 loading and layout browser cases passed again against the final production UI and API build at `15c360aa63e01ad9318aaf7865c07d1ee0d36968`. Coverage includes delayed initial data, reading anchors, media growth, composer sizing, older history, cold comment links, desktop/mobile same-task links and Back, rapid switching, reduced motion, failed reads and retry, stalled history, plan reuse, and cached-task profiling. - The new draft journey retained the same editor during a blocked background task refresh, restored the draft after reload, and persisted exactly one reply. - Final performance comparison used current master `249ab47d41834f174ddd5e9523dc07fa8ebd8e4c` and implementation `15c360aa63e01ad9318aaf7865c07d1ee0d36968` against the same local 160-message Markdown conversation and API process. Conditions: 50 ms network latency, 9 Mbps down/1.5 Mbps up, 4x CPU slowdown, fresh browsers, five alternating pairs per scenario, no CPU profiler, and no concurrent local build/test work. Warm task navigation improved in all five pairs: median paired saving **405 ms**; variant medians **1,787 → 1,456 ms**. Cold results were mixed: paired saving **−89 ms** (slower), despite variant medians **3,188 → 3,021 ms**. There is no consistent cold-load gain established by this comparison. - Earlier prototype comparisons showed paired cold savings of 259–283 ms. Those gains did not consistently reproduce in the final comparison. These are bounded local measurements and do not establish deployed staging latency. - The first prototype delayed comment-link preparation too and failed the older-comment anchor check by 240.5 px. The narrowed implementation keeps hash navigation on the existing eager path. That case and the full suite now pass. The original failure trace is retained locally. - A visual browser walkthrough read the saved conversation and plan, restored a draft after reload, sent it once, reloaded again, and independently checked that exactly one reply was saved. - Greptile reviewed this exact commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings or inline comments. - The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted while the same suites were completing in sharded CI so local performance could be measured on an idle host. It is not counted as a local full-suite pass. - All current-head [CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39296740548), including the server, workspace, Runner, serialized, browser, typecheck, build, canary, and final verification gates. The first run failed one native-process supervision test (`preserves a real listening process and its marker when a health RPC times out`). Its unchanged shard and dependent gate passed on retry. The specific test also passed locally. No source change was made for that transient failure. ## Risks Delaying preparation can change initial scroll geometry. Hash navigation keeps the existing preparation path because it needs the target present before positioning. The revealed-task latch keeps refreshes from removing history or the editor. The existing timeout still makes saved content and the composer accessible when reads stall. No API, database, permission, or provider changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. A more precise runtime model identifier and context-window size are unavailable. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 14:01:37 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d5b92cc41b	perf(ui): reduce task startup initialization and redundant reads (#16862) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip users open tasks to read saved work and reply. > - Faster startup must preserve message positions and composer state. > - Chrome CPU samples showed unused shared schemas and catalog indexes being initialized before task content. > - The shared package exports definitions and module-local data, with no required import-time registrations. > - Let the browser bundler discard unused shared modules. > - Readiness marks also exposed a duplicate plan read even though full task detail contains that plan. > - Keep both improvements measurable through CPU profiles, gate transitions and real browser acceptance. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Follow-up to #16849. Related layout work: #14758. Searches found no overlapping plan-cache PR. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Task startup evaluates unused schemas and catalog indexes reached through the shared package barrel. The task also waits for a second plan-document request after full task detail arrives, even when that response already includes the plan or an explicit absent-plan value. Profiling showed that removing the request alone gave a small and variable total gain; unused initialization was the larger cold-load opportunity. **Subsystem affected** Board task loading, shared-package bundling metadata, plan-query caching, and local issue-detail profiling. **Proposed behavior** Discard unused shared modules during browser bundling. Fill an unused plan query when a full task response arrives. List-only snapshots keep their normal plan fetch. Keep the existing coordinated reveal. ## What Changed - Declare the shared package side-effect free so the bundler can drop unused module initialization. Used schemas and catalog data still initialize normally. - Seed an absent plan query at the successful full-task HTTP response boundary. Use a 30-second plan-query freshness window. List cache merges do not update this plan cache, and a later detail response never overwrites an existing plan query. - Preserve document-scope invalidation for plan creation, edits and deletion. - Add opt-in Chrome CPU profiles and readiness transitions to the existing performance harness. Diagnostic runs use one sample per scenario/profile and are labelled separately from latency benchmarks. - Record only fixed gate names and readiness booleans in local browser marks. Reset the gate effects on task changes so fully cached navigation is profiled too. ## Verification - Production UI build, UI typecheck and token design gates passed. - 258 focused unit tests passed. The final freshness follow-up passed 14 tests, including query eviction followed by a list refresh, preserving a separately fetched newer plan, missing projection, task isolation, and document-event refresh/deletion. - Two focused reuse tests fail with the original HTTP cache function and pass with the fix. The original production browser case makes redundant plan reads and fails. - All 13 final browser cases passed serially: eight layout scenarios, four plan-present/absent and direct/list startup cases, and a cached-task switch that records every gate. The cached-switch case failed before the identity dependencies were added. - One earlier concurrent browser run failed a properties-resize reading-anchor assertion. Two isolated repeats and the final serial suite passed. This outlier is retained in the local logs; it was not treated as a reason to change the unchanged scroll owner speculatively. - Actual CPU samples and readiness artifacts were captured on a disposable local production preview. This is browser timing data, not exported telemetry. - Audited 247 non-test shared modules for required import-time registration. The four top-level loops construct exported local catalog data. No required registration or side-effect-only shared imports were found. - A compiled browser-library contract accepted valid task input, rejected an empty title, retained all seven agent statuses, and retained GitHub metadata plus 1,576 catalog entries. All 13 browser scenarios passed against the initialization candidate too. - Plan reuse alone did not establish a reliable total gain: a final local run was 4,356 ms cold and 1,116 ms warm on Fast 4G/4x CPU. - The next five-sample run with unused shared initialization removed measured **3,298 ms cold (24% faster)** and 1,079 ms warm. Median issue API server time was 35 versus 39 ms. First contentful paint fell from 2,808 to 1,648 ms. JavaScript before content fell from 1,722 to 1,670 KiB; CPU initialization mattered more than byte size. - Final alternating comparison: five samples per variant for both cold and warm navigation, same persisted task and Fast 4G/4x CPU settings, fresh browser per sample, order alternated between variants. **Cold content paint: 4,588 → 3,688 ms (20% faster). Warm: 996 → 1,030 ms (+35 ms).** No CPU profiler was active. The final initialization commit is the only source difference between these two builds. - These local measurements do not establish deployed staging latency or a speedup across every profile. Unthrottled timings varied with API latency. - Actual UI walkthrough on the final bundle: read the saved plan and conversation, submit one unassigned reply, refresh, navigate to Projects and Back, and inspect the new-task dialog. The reply persisted exactly once, confirmed independently through the comments API. No paid agent was woken. - Final head `a7043c474d`: Greptile 5/5, all review threads resolved, and all 56 checks passed, including full typecheck, build, unit and E2E suites. ## Risks Bundlers can discard unreferenced shared modules. Future required registrations or global initialization must be declared in the package side-effects metadata. Current module-local catalog construction remains when its exports are used. Merged list snapshots can retain old plan fields while receiving a new task-cache timestamp. This change seeds only from a new full HTTP response, rather than inferring plan freshness from those merged snapshots. Existing plan-query state is never overwritten. List-only, stale, invalidated, or incomplete data still uses the normal plan read. Existing document invalidations refresh the query. No API, database, permission or reveal-policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser verification. A more precise runtime model identifier and context-window size are unavailable. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 12:03:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	fa50cab568	perf(ui): speed task loading without shifting the conversation (#16849) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip's board should open a task quickly while keeping its conversation and composer stable. > - The browser currently downloads unrelated screens and unopened dialog implementations before task content appears. > - Splitting routes alone creates many shared requests and did not improve measured cold loading. > - This change groups the startup and task dependency trees, preloads the task chunk, and defers optional routes and dialogs. > - Existing coordinated history reveal stays intact so late data does not insert content above the reader. > - Hidden routes must not overwrite saved scroll positions with zero-height geometry. > - Repeated browser measurements and delayed-response tests establish the result independently of bundle-file size. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14758. Related prior work: #10463 and #14727. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Cold task-page opening downloads and evaluates code for other screens and globally mounted, unopened dialogs. A direct task link should reach its saved conversation sooner without moving already-visible messages or the composer. **Subsystem affected** Board UI startup, route boundaries, dialog loading, task scroll restoration, and the issue-detail performance harness. **Proposed behavior** Load optional screens and dialogs when needed, keep startup requests bounded, and preload the task route. Preserve the current history reveal policy. Keep the shell mounted during route loading and preserve the reader's position when a route is temporarily hidden. **Additional context** The older bundle-splitting attempt in #10463 is still open from August. This implementation targets current master and deliberately preserves today's editor, composer, and transcript reveal behavior. It does not implement the alternative transcript-row design discussed in #14758. ROADMAP.md does not describe overlapping startup-bundle work. ## What Changed - Lazy-load board routes, standalone screens, the legacy layout, onboarding, and unopened create dialogs. - Keep activated dialogs mounted across close/reopen to retain their existing draft lifecycle. - Group startup and issue dependencies and preload the emitted issue chunk from the production HTML. - Contain route loading within the shell and retain existing chunk-error recovery. - Contain dialog import failures locally, support cancellation, and keep setup dismissed after a late download. Warm the task module from task lists and keep the small chat redirect eager. - Wait for task-creation dialog fields in the browser fixture before filling an explicit title. - Ignore zero-height scroll geometry while a route is hidden. - Reuse the same persisted performance fixture between builds, record actual network spans, and distinguish concealed loading content from the ready thread in browser assertions. ## Verification - Production UI build and UI TypeScript check passed. - Recovery follow-up: 74 focused UI tests passed; the cancellation change passed 23 focused tests plus all 131 onboarding tests (the latter with a 15-second per-test timeout on the contended local host). - Setup cancellation was reproduced against the prior production build and verified fixed after releasing the held real wizard download. - 91 focused UI tests passed; the final route registrations were checked again after making standalone screens lazy (33 routing tests passed). - All eight real-browser layout scenarios passed: delayed comments, late media, properties changes, growing drafts, older history, Back navigation, deep links, desktop/mobile same-task links, request failure/retry, and stalled native/log reads. - Browser walkthrough: read a populated task, submit one reply, refresh, navigate to Projects, and return. The reply persisted once and the normal composer remained usable. - Token design gates passed. The separate repository-wide publish-token scan fails on pre-existing references to the local maintainer username in unchanged files; this change adds none. - Production-build measurements use the same persisted task, local API/database, fresh browser contexts for cold opens, and five samples per scenario/profile. These measurements do not establish deployed staging latency. - Final head `076466816a`, consecutive before/after production builds: five samples per scenario/profile, same saved task and server. Cold Fast 4G/4x CPU content paint: **5,775 → 4,248 ms (26%)**; issue API server timing was 23 ms in both sets. Warm Fast 4G: 989 → 971 ms. JavaScript transferred before content: **2,596 → 1,722 KiB (34%)**. - Unthrottled cold content paint: 1,306 → 676 ms; warm: 269 → 224 ms. These local timings vary with host load. Earlier measurements showed about 20% cold improvement, and a contended intermediate run had substantially higher API latency; those runs are retained in the local evidence. The final matched pair meets the proposed 25% target, but it does not establish a guaranteed 25% improvement across environments. - All four browser scenarios that failed on the first CI run passed locally after the readiness fixes; the subsequent CI run passed all eight browser shards. - Fault-injection browser checks: delayed route loading preserves shell geometry; a failed route recovers through Back; cancelled or failed dialog loading preserves an unsent reply; Back dismisses pending setup and contains its late failure. - Final head `076466816a`: all CI gates green (55 successful checks, no pending or failed checks); Greptile 5/5 with no actionable findings and all review threads resolved. ## Risks - Dynamic chunks add a loading state on first entry to optional screens and dialogs. Route failures use the existing error boundary. Optional dialog failures are dismissible without unmounting the board; retrying a rejected import requires a reload. - The task preload prioritizes the primary board journey, including when another screen is opened first. - Chunk grouping should be revisited when the dependency graph changes; bundle size alone does not establish a speedup. - No API, authorization, migration, editor semantics, or transcript-reveal policy changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The runtime does not expose a more precise model identifier or 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 - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-19 10:16:23 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3b03c4b9eb	perf(ui): keep long task chat responsive during streaming (#13229) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets operators manage agent work through tasks. > - Task chat keeps responses and run history together. > - A live update rendered every historical bubble and hidden tool row again. > - New image callbacks also forced unchanged markdown to parse again. > - Long conversations saturated the browser main thread. > - This change reuses unchanged history and mounts folded tools on first inspection. > - Operators can read and reply while work continues. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Chat-style tasks with substantial scrollback became almost unusable. A deterministic browser reproduction with 200 long responses and 4,000 tools consumed 97.8% of the main thread during live updates. It delivered only 8 updates during the sample. **Expected behavior** The task should remain responsive during streaming. Historical markdown and unopened run details should not repeat expensive render work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Install dependencies with `pnpm install`. 2. Run `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/perf/task-chat/playwright.config.ts`. 3. Compare the attached performance JSON. The new test fails against the original rendering code. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced at `a05b828bc`. The branch is rebased on current master. **Deployment mode** Local Chromium and Vite with deterministic fixtures. No database or agent credentials are required. Related work: #10463 reduces the issue-page bundle. This change addresses repeated rendering after the page loads. No duplicate scrollback fix was found. ## What Changed - Keep the bubble image callback stable so unchanged markdown can skip parsing. - Memoize the settled history separately from the header and streaming tail. Keep the brief renderer and default attachment array stable. - Mount folded tool history on first expansion. Keep it mounted afterward to preserve child state and closing motion. Runtime request receipts remain visible. - Add deterministic rendering tests to the normal Vitest suite and an opt-in Chromium regression fixture. - Document the reproduction, commands, scope, and local measurements. ## Verification - Browser reproduction: 97.8% main-thread utilization before; 11.6% after for tail-only updates; 31.5% after when projection recreates history objects. Both fixed cases delivered 32 updates. - Browser checks pass for scroll-position retention, typing, return to latest, tool inspection, and retained expansion state. - Focused component suite: 155 tests passed. Post-rebase thread/performance rerun: 101 tests passed. - Recursive typecheck, build, Storybook build, and token gates passed. UI typecheck passed after the final edits. - Local UI/CLI lane: 5,910 tests passed; ten files hit worker-start timeouts, then all ten passed with two workers (20 tests). Shared/adapter lane: 3,128 tests passed. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and is **not green**: its server lane recorded 10,517 passes and 11 failures plus fixture/setup errors. Queue (31 tests), Cursor/Git-load (9 tests), and missing-binary failures cleared on isolated reruns / building the runner test binaries. Two native suites still cannot initialize embedded PostgreSQL on this host. - The remaining native-session recovery assertion was reproduced in a clean worktree at base `a20ecce40` (1 failed, 67 passed across the native/queue suites). It expects a settled-session error but receives a semantic-tool-input digest error. No server or runner files changed in this PR. - All substantive CI jobs have passed, including build, typecheck, all server/workspace test shards, all three e2e shards, and the canary dry run. The unchanged Slack ordering test exhausted its one-second wait on the first run; its shard passed on rerun. Final aggregate verification passed: **31 passing checks**, no failures or pending checks; two optional Storybook deployment/visual checks were skipped. Greptile is **5/5**, with no unresolved review threads. - The supplemental local serialized route run was stopped after CI passed all five serialized shards; it had reported no failures. - The browser fixture uses the real chat rendering components with a plain textarea. It does not test the full composer or server transport. Timing results are local samples; deterministic render-count tests provide normal CI coverage. ## Risks - Closed tool content becomes available to DOM search only after first expansion. Visible run summaries and runtime request receipts remain available immediately. - Opened run history remains mounted to preserve child state. The first full markdown render still scales with conversation size. - Memo dependencies must stay current when adding render inputs. Tests check content edits and replacement gallery callbacks. - No API, database, or permission changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex). Exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser testing. No sub-agents were used. ## 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 — targeted/UI/workspace checks pass; the full local server suite has the baseline/host failures documented 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 - [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>	2026-09-11 10:15:00 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	cd4c4ed205	fix(ui): stabilize task loading and live feeds (#13095) ... Coordinate initial conversation reveal, preserve message identity and reading anchors during live updates, and bound transcript reads with recoverable retries. Cover desktop/mobile navigation and rich task loading with actual-route browser tests. Verified all Linux CI gates, 5,575 local UI tests, eight layout browser scenarios, and recorded native Codex walkthroughs. Greptile: 5/5; all review findings resolved. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-09-09 10:00:37 -05:00
Dotta	e3eed3a3ae	Keep browser startup explicitly opt-in (#12435) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The CLI can save a configuration and start the local server in one command. > - The onboarding path set a browser-open environment variable without an explicit user request. > - Headless test servers use the same onboarding path. > - Each server restart could therefore open a system browser. > - This pull request removes the implicit browser-open request and fixes test servers to disable it explicitly. > - The benefit is predictable foreground and test startup without unsolicited browser windows. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description This is stack 11 of 11. It depends on stack 10. **What happened?** `paperclipai onboard --yes --run` set `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true`. Headless server users, including browser test runners, opened the system browser on each server restart. **Expected behavior** Server startup must not open a browser unless the caller explicitly sets `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `paperclipai onboard --yes --run` from a clean source checkout. 2. Wait for the server to listen. 3. Observe that the default system browser opens. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `dbf052577` plus the dependent stack. **Deployment mode** Local dev from source. ## What Changed - Stop onboarding from setting `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true` for foreground startup. - Set `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` in E2E and issue-detail performance test servers as defense in depth. - Preserve the existing explicit environment opt-in in the server. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts` — 10 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed on the stacked head. - `pnpm build` — passed on the stacked head. - Playwright was not run locally by request. ## Risks - Low risk. The only behavior change removes an unsolicited side effect. - A caller that wants browser startup can still set `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=true` explicitly. - No database or migration change exists in this layer. > 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 exact deployment suffix and context window are not exposed. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, Git, and GitHub API access. ## 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	2026-08-29 12:08:35 -05:00
3 people	2494a2a0fe	perf: add repeatable issue-detail baseline rig (#10409) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The issue detail page is a core operator surface where perceived latency directly affects task navigation > - Performance work needs repeatable evidence so later optimizations can be compared against the same scenarios > - The page did not expose stable user-timing marks for its header or first useful content > - There was also no isolated seeded browser rig that measured warm navigation, cold deep links, waterfalls, or server time > - This pull request adds the instrumentation and a one-command Playwright baseline harness > - The benefit is that issue-page performance changes can be validated with reproducible median measurements instead of anecdotes ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: `ui/`, `server/`, and browser performance tooling. **Problem or motivation** The issue detail page performs a large client bootstrap and request fan-out, but the repository lacks stable user-timing boundaries and a repeatable benchmark. That makes performance changes difficult to compare and allows regressions to be judged from anecdotes instead of consistent evidence. **Proposed solution** Add stable header/content paint measures, development/QA-only lifecycle vital reporting, aggregate server timing for the issue endpoint, and a seeded Playwright command that runs warm/cold scenarios under throttled and unthrottled profiles with N≥5 median reporting. **Alternatives considered** Ad hoc DevTools recordings were rejected because they are not repeatable or reviewable. Production telemetry was rejected because this baseline should not change production data collection. A unit-only harness was rejected because it cannot capture browser bootstrap, rendering, and network waterfall costs. **Roadmap alignment** The roadmap calls for agent performance to be measurable over time. This change applies that evidence-first principle to a core operator page and does not duplicate a listed roadmap deliverable. **Additional context** The generated report includes warm and cold medians, TTFB/FCP/LCP where applicable, request and byte totals before first useful content, JavaScript bytes, and issue endpoint server timing. ## What Changed - Added `issue-detail:navigate→header-paint` and `issue-detail:navigate→content-paint` user-timing measures to the issue detail page. - Added development/QA-only TTFB, LCP, and INP console reporting without production telemetry delivery. - Added `Server-Timing` for `GET /api/issues/:id`. - Added `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts`, which seeds an isolated instance and runs N≥5 warm/cold samples under unthrottled and Fast 4G/4x CPU profiles. - Added Markdown, raw JSON, and Chrome-trace outputs with median baseline tables and waterfall data. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `npx playwright test --config tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts --list` - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts` — passed 20 samples in 9.4 minutes (5 runs × 2 scenarios × 2 profiles) for the baseline; post-review integrity reruns also exercised the corrected paths, while this shared runner intermittently killed Chromium processes, so the rig now performs one bounded browser-crash retry per sample. - Baseline medians: warm unthrottled 278/447 ms header/content; cold unthrottled 646/646 ms; warm throttled 1240/2060 ms; cold throttled 3932/3933 ms. ## Risks - Low product risk: the new browser measurements are development/QA tooling and the UI timing work does not change visible layout. - `Server-Timing` exposes only aggregate handler duration, not query contents or private identifiers. - Native INP reporting uses supported browser event timing entries and silently no-ops where unsupported. > 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-5.4, tool-assisted coding and browser execution with reasoning enabled; context-window size is not exposed in this environment. ## 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> Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>	2026-08-11 15:18:29 -04:00