Commit Graph
9 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 5061ab7b35 perf(ui): speed up task and inbox cold opens (#17756)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task lists and inboxes are the main entry points to that work.
> - Cold opens fetch overlapping task lists, task descriptions, and run
details before useful rows settle.
> - Independent responses can insert rows above content that a person
has started to read.
> - This pull request loads a small task index first and adds details
only for visible rows.
> - It keeps row order and geometry stable while those details arrive.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opens of Tasks and Inbox, including the shared navigation badge.

**Subsystem affected**

Server list reads, shared response contracts, and the React UI.

**Current behavior**

The badge fetches full task bodies. Mine fetches several overlapping
lists. Historical diagnostics and row metadata add work before the first
useful list. A fast failed-run response can appear before task rows,
then move down when tasks arrive.

**Proposed behavior**

Load the selected inbox source and its required context together. Use an
index without task descriptions or recovery diagnostics. Fetch
diagnostic details for up to 50 visible rows. Keep skeletons, recovery
indicators, external status, and live metadata in fixed space.

**Reason and benefit**

Reduce work on a cold open and prevent loading-induced row movement. On
the same 100 local fixture tasks, the compact response was 262,441
decoded bytes and the index was 110,909 bytes. This comparison excludes
compression and is not a page latency benchmark.

**Breaking changes**

Existing full and compact responses remain available. New index/row
projections are opt-in and marked as partial data. Mine keeps its
existing most-recent-100 display limit, now selected on the server.
Existing filters and group preferences remain in the client. No database
migration.

**Additional context**

Refs: #17593. Related: #13095, #17428, #13803. This change addresses
collection overfetch and layout stability. It does not replace the
blocked-inbox query work or the database activity-index work.

## What Changed

- Add authorized index and row projections, with bounded task and parent
ID batches.
- Replace badge list downloads with unread IDs and aggregate counts.
Preserve actor privacy, dismissals, and local archive behavior.
- Load only the selected inbox source, plus bounded parent and
failed-run context. Return only relevant failures from the bounded run
window.
- Batch hierarchy reads, including at most one authorized child per
collapsed parent in one request. Collapsed markers do not consume the
expanded row budget, and partial descendant counts are not shown as
totals. Enrich visible rows without replacing membership, ordering,
titles, or read state.
- Reserve row geometry on desktop and mobile. Reveal the initial inbox
only after its sources settle. Preserve legacy task-list reads.
- Start collection module downloads during access checks. Keep partial
rows out of the task-detail cache.
- Keep ETags and concurrent request sharing for the new projections, but
skip the short server response TTL so archive undo sees fresh state.

## Verification

- On final head `ef6afb2a56`, the full CI workflow passed, including
build, typecheck, server/workspace/runner suites, and all eight browser
shards. A server shard reported **1,489 passing tests** before runner
shutdown canceled the job; its single infrastructure retry passed. Both
Greptile and Paperclip Review are **5/5**, with zero unresolved review
threads.
- The optional external **Entire Gates** check remains `unassessed`
because it has no active assessed Change for this comparison. Entire is
not set up in this checkout. The repository ruleset requires `ci /
verify` and `ci / e2e`; both passed. No gate configuration was changed.

- Passed workspace typecheck after the final API batching change. The
full production build also passed on the final commit; the exact-retry
E2E run built the shipped UI.
- Passed token gates and map validation. The final batch-preview pass
has 91 passing route/hierarchy/component tests, including privacy,
request bounds, 30 collapsed parents in one read, and a 120-child parent
alongside a sibling.
- Passed the 166-test focused UI/inbox/badge run, 47 additional UI
regression tests, and 34 issue-list route tests. The latest regressions
cover low-trust agent badge IDs, cold company selection, 30
description-only Mine matches with archive actions, retrying optional
row details, and collapsed/expanded siblings.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` spanned the rebase and reported
failures in five suites before it was stopped; it is not claimed as a
complete pass. A fresh serial rerun of all five suites passed
**452/452** tests (tool gateway, native resume, project repositories,
workspace recovery, and runner selection). Full current-commit coverage
is checked by CI.
- Real browser: delayed index and row-detail responses on Tasks and
Mine. The first placeholder and first row had the same origin and
44-pixel height. Twelve rows on each page had zero position, height, or
title-width change after recovery details arrived.
- Real browser: reviewed long titles and recovery status at a 390 by 844
viewport. Task text stays on one line and recovery uses a compact
indicator.
- Three fresh document loads per page on final commit `260893bf92`, with
HTTP cache retained on a warm local development server: Tasks
1.031–1.190 seconds; Mine 0.999–1.193 seconds. Browser-control overhead
is included. These values must not be compared directly with staging
latency or the earlier local samples taken during a full test run.
- The browser archive test exposed stale results after Undo. The new
projections now bypass the server TTL; immediate-mutation regression
tests pass. The final browser retry passed: Archive followed by Undo
restored exactly one row and the badge count.

- CI exposed a hook-order crash when company selection resolved after
the first inbox render. The hook now runs before the empty-company
return. All seven affected exact-retry and legacy-continuation browser
scenarios pass locally after the fix.
- Real browser review regressions: 97 description-only source matches
retained Archive actions; deliberately failed optional row reads
displayed a retry notice while all 12 observed row positions and heights
stayed unchanged. Retry restored the recovery indicator. Network fault
injection was removed.

- The final production build and workspace typecheck passed. Final
focused verification passed 153 UI/helper tests and 26 heartbeat privacy
route tests. Final review regressions cover newer diagnostics arriving
during the index read, reloading diagnostics when the same task ID
changes version, optional source failure/retry without hiding available
rows, and required external-status filter failure. The latest-failures
route test verifies bounded selection, agent filtering, success
suppressing an older failure, and private-run redaction.
- Real browser: deliberately failed the run source, then retried it.
Twelve available task rows kept the same position and 44-pixel height
before, during, and after retry. No loading skeleton replaced them.
Fault injection was removed.
- Hierarchy review decision: the cold-open barrier stays because
inserting ancestors or expanded children after revealing index rows
would cause layout shifts. Existing hierarchy context now survives
subsequent requests, with a regression proving a new ancestor read does
not blank the list. The bounded recursive tree read can still add
latency for unusually deep expanded trees.

- Tasks now handles a failed external-status filter with an explicit
error and Retry, suppressing a false empty state. All 52 Tasks component
tests pass, including failure-to-success retry. One existing large-tree
test timed out while workspace typechecking ran concurrently; the whole
component suite passed when rerun without that competing work. Workspace
typecheck, the full production build, and token gates passed for this
fix.

## Risks

- Saved filters and grouping still operate on the existing bounded
collection. This is not a new global server pagination model.
- Fixed row slots reduce available title width. Long titles remain
accessible through task navigation.
- Recovery and related diagnostics arrive after core rows. Their
responses cannot replace ordering fields, and stale versions are
rejected.
- Index/row requests now revalidate against current data instead of a
short server TTL. They still share concurrent reads and use ETags.
- This has not been deployed by this pull request. Staging latency must
be measured after deployment under comparable conditions.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used code editing,
terminal execution, and real-browser diagnostics.

## 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>
2026-10-26 14:29:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a1f77821b9 perf(tasks): show recent conversation before historical activity (#17593)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task page must show the instruction and current conversation
quickly.
> - The current page waits for related task data and historical run
transcripts.
> - These reads grow with task history, even when the reader only needs
the latest answer.
> - This pull request gives cold opens a small initial view and loads
older history on demand.
> - Messages and runs observed while the page stays open remain visible.
> - The benefit is a readable task before historical diagnostics finish
loading.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #14667 and #16229. The first changes the reveal gate and scroll
anchors. The second adds general history pagination. This PR adds a core
task read and a folded recent-conversation view. It preserves the
default full-read API contracts. The shared files will need coordination
if either related PR lands first.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Cold opening an ordinary task with a long conversation or large run
logs.

**Current behavior**

Task enrichment and historical transcripts delay the readable
conversation. A cold open can fetch several megabytes of tool activity
before revealing saved messages.

**Proposed behavior**

Show the task instruction, recent saved replies, latest human input, and
the latest run's conversation data first. Fetch older messages and full
run activity when the reader chooses **More messages**. Retain new
messages while the page stays open.

## What Changed

- Add an authorized core issue view that skips related enrichment. Keep
enrichment on the existing detail read. Share task mutation, rollback
and invalidation updates with the core cache.
- Add a bounded recent-comment read. Preserve the first human
instruction when no description exists, including legacy rows with a
NULL author type. Keep company and task access checks and comment
redaction.
- Add optional recent activity and run-summary views. Fetch original
input receipts for visible comments separately so delivered messages
stay out of the queue. Reconcile watched unfinished runs after a
reconnect beyond the preview window, removing deleted runs after
reconciliation.
- Filter the latest native run's initial events to assistant messages,
request lifecycles and terminal results. Full event reads remain
available on expansion. Legacy fallback reads use a small tail extended
to the first complete record. HTTP cancellation aborts the storage read.
- Retain observed messages across cursor catch-up and new runs. Apply
local cancellation and deletion to both caches and their task aliases.
Refetch locally seeded history pages on expansion. Preserve expansion
across identifier and UUID links. Keep deep links, classic tasks and
Agent Chat on their existing full-history path.
- Update API documentation, design guidance, capability maps and
regression coverage.

## Verification

- Final acceptance on `9ea0b15ae44d9f6d2c9a9f824b4835f299f92979`: all CI
gates passed, including server/UI tests, all eight browser shards,
runner checks, full typecheck and build. [Final CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40326990328).
GitHub reports 55 successful checks, two intentionally skipped checks,
and one neutral Paperclip Review check described below. No checks are
pending or failed; Greptile is 5/5 and no review threads remain open.
- October 26 merge update: merged current `master`. The only conflict
was in task-page imports; both the compact-history hook and the new
live-update hooks remain. All CI tests and build jobs passed on
`044fd6733d`. Fresh review found canceled-comment cache drift, legacy
human-comment filtering, send-then-expand truncation, and partial legacy
log records. These defects were fixed in `af3d66a5bd`.
- Review-fix verification: 470 tests pass across ten affected suites,
including all six PostgreSQL cold-open tests without a helper override.
Cancellation/delete and send-then-expand regression tests failed before
the fixes and pass afterward. Coverage includes task identifier/UUID
reopen, stale in-flight reads, legacy NULL author types, local-file and
object-storage tails cut inside UTF-8 text, route forwarding, and
request cancellation. Full workspace typecheck and production build,
token gates, map validation and diff checks pass.
- Follow-up review found that a failed expanded legacy read lost its
record-alignment state on retry. `9ea0b15ae4` commits the expanded
window only after a successful read. The new regression fails before the
fix and passes afterward; all 19 transcript tests, UI typecheck, UI
build and token gates pass. Greptile reviewed this commit at 5/5 with no
actionable findings, and all review threads are resolved.
- The final Paperclip Review check ended neutral because its execution
did not complete; no passing Paperclip assessment is claimed. Its
earlier four concrete findings were fixed and regression-tested.
Greptile and the security scans completed successfully on the final
commit.
- The preceding `af3d66a5bd` CI run was canceled when superseded by the
retry fix. Its server shard 11 check briefly reported failure, but the
job API records cancellation and its test step passed all 1,750 tests.
This superseded run is not used as final CI acceptance.
- 549 focused tests pass on the final implementation across nine task
UI, activity-route, OpenAPI and PostgreSQL suites. These cover pending
history, desktop/mobile visibility, expansion, retained runs, message
bursts, cancellation recovery and queued-comment removal in both views.
- Legacy expansion keeps the latest answer visible while fetching and
deduplicating older output.
- Five PostgreSQL tests pass for core access denial, recent comments,
missing-description instructions, event paging and bounded activity/run
reads. macOS could not start another PostgreSQL cluster because it
exhausted its semaphore limit. These tests used a separate disposable
database on an existing local server through a temporary test setup
override. The helper was restored afterward.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass with the final state fixes, as
do token gates and capability-map validation.
- Token gates, capability-map validation and `git diff --check` pass.
- Browser proof used a disposable task with 80 comments and six large
run histories. The cold view showed the instruction and recent exchange.
**More messages** revealed older comments. Navigation away and back
preserved expansion.
- Local HTTP sample: core 50 ms, recent comments 24 ms, recent run
summaries 17 ms. The latest native conversation response was 839 JSON
characters / 8 ms; its full event response was 1,099,005 / 86 ms.
Browser content paint was 1.34 seconds with development assets cached.
These are local observations, not staging latency claims.
- The first CI run passed every job except four board-send browser cases
and the review threshold. Those browser fixtures only mocked the old
comments endpoint; they now serve both recent and full reads, retaining
all message and attachment assertions. Both initial review findings were
fixed with regression tests. The next CI run passed every job. The
deeper review identified core-cache mutation, older delivery receipt and
retained run-status gaps; those are now fixed with regression coverage.
Final review is 5/5 with zero unresolved findings. Final-head CI
initially failed one unchanged runner shutdown test
(`runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`, timeout-attachment case) with
`NativeSessionCloseUnrecoverableError`; all other CI jobs passed. The
same runner code passed on 971a762f80. A targeted local reproduction
also failed during provider drain. The failure is outside the changed
task loading paths; its underlying cause remains unresolved. The single
failed-job retry passed on the same head; this demonstrates recovery,
not a root-cause fix. All CI gates passed on the previous implementation
head `9004f94f28`: [CI run and
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40192334629).
- `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded
PostgreSQL startup failures. The native session suite recorded 15
database-related failures; other database suites could not start. No
complete local suite pass is claimed.

## Risks

- The compact view intentionally omits older diagnostics until
expansion. Existing open questions and approvals still use the current
interaction and run paths.
- Previously observed comment and activity rows remain cached while
open. The newest preview and incoming cursor pages refresh; this does
not add a general historical-edit synchronization protocol.
- Recent views are optional. Existing full API callers retain their
response shape and behavior. No migration is required.
- A legacy tail can exceed the requested byte limit by the prefix of its
first log record. Backward reads stop at the preceding record boundary
and honor cancellation.
- Staging has not been deployed or qualified with this change. Instance
startup latency is separate from task history loading.
- The related open PRs touch the same task-history files.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository editing, shell
tools and browser testing. The exact serving model identifier 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 — 549 affected task tests;
the full local suite and unrelated runner failure are 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>
2026-10-26 08:11:39 -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 1452d5f413 perf(ui): warm issue detail navigation (#10416)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate
AI-agent companies
> - The board UI opens issue details from lists, quicklooks, and the
inbox
> - Those navigation paths already have enough issue data to paint the
header immediately, but the comment feed still waits for its first
request
> - That delay makes repeat navigation feel cold and can briefly show an
empty thread before comments arrive
> - This pull request centralizes the comment page shape, prefetches
issue detail plus the first comment page, and renders a reserved
skeleton while an uncached page is loading
> - The benefit is faster, stable warm navigation without coupling this
change to the separate aggregate issue-detail API work

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- **Subsystem affected:** `ui/` — React + Vite board UI
- **Problem or motivation:** Opening an issue from an already-loaded
list still waits for the first comments request and may flash the
empty-thread state, making warm navigation feel slower than necessary.
- **Proposed solution:** Prefetch the issue-detail snapshot and first
comments page from every issue navigation entry point, reuse one
page-size constant for prefetch and render queries, and show the
existing chat skeleton until the uncached initial page resolves.
- **Alternatives considered:** Relying only on detail-query prefetch
leaves comments cold; bundling this with the aggregate issue-detail
endpoint would make the UI improvement harder to review and land
independently.
- **Roadmap alignment:** `ROADMAP.md` has no overlapping
issue-navigation initiative. This is a focused board responsiveness
improvement.
- **Related pull requests:** #10409 establishes the issue-detail
performance baseline; #10414 reduces server-side issue-detail request
overhead.

## What Changed

- Added one shared issue-comment page-size constant used by rendering
and prefetching.
- Added first-page comment prefetching and a combined navigation
prefetch helper.
- Wired quicklook, issue-list keyboard navigation, and inbox navigation
to warm both caches.
- Kept the existing chat skeleton visible while the first uncached
comment page loads.
- Added focused cache behavior tests for comment and combined navigation
prefetching.

## Verification

- `vitest run ui/src/lib/prefetchIssueComments.test.ts` — 3 tests
passed.
- `tsc -b ui` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.

## Risks

- Low risk: this adds background prefetch requests on intentional issue
navigation/hover paths. React Query stale-time deduplication prevents
repeat requests while the cache is fresh.
- The change intentionally remains independent of the separate aggregate
`getView` work and composes with it through the same query keys.

> 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, exact model `gpt-5.6-sol`; context-window
size was not exposed; reasoning mode with repository tool use and code
execution.

## 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>
2026-07-29 13:37:22 -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
DottaandPaperclip 43b005b704 Add pipeline workflow primitives and operator UI (#7903)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The pipeline subsystem models repeatable work as items moving
through stages, with agent automation, review gates, blockers, drift
notices, and linked work.
> - Operators need this to be usable as one coherent workflow surface,
not just as backend primitives or disconnected route experiments.
> - The branch now carries the pipeline data model, service/routes,
CLI/tutorial path, aggregation feeds, operator UI, stage automation
controls, liveness/retry handling, and follow-up polish that make the
primitive reviewable end to end.
> - This pull request is the single review target for that pipeline
workflow primitive stack.
> - The benefit is that reviewers can evaluate the full operator
experience and server contract together against `master`.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this work. The underlying feature
request is described inline.

### Problem or motivation

Paperclip needs a first-class way to model multi-stage agent/company
workflows where upstream items can spawn downstream work, request
review, carry fields across pipelines, surface drift, retry automation,
and show operators where work is blocked or active. Without a unified
pipeline primitive, these workflows spread across ad hoc issues,
routines, and comments, making the state hard to inspect or operate.

### Proposed solution

Add the pipeline workflow primitive stack: database schema and
migrations, shared validators/types, server services and REST routes,
aggregation and liveness helpers, CLI/tutorial smoke support, and the
React operator UI for pipeline lists, boards, item detail,
review/learnings views, settings, stage automation, secrets, carry-over
fields, and retry/recovery flows.

### Alternatives considered

- Keep workflows as loosely linked issues and routines: rejected because
operators need a single board/detail/settings surface for repeated
workflow patterns.
- Ship backend primitives first and defer UI: rejected for this branch
because the operator experience is the main way to validate the
primitive.
- Add a narrower one-off content workflow: rejected because the same
primitives are useful across future company processes.

## What Changed

- Added and evolved pipeline schema, migrations, shared contracts,
server services, REST routes, route tests, and CLI/tutorial smoke
support.
- Added pipeline aggregation, health/liveness, drift acknowledgment,
blocker/carry-over, automation retry, stage automation environment, and
permission recovery behavior.
- Added the operator UI for pipeline index/board/item
detail/settings/review/learnings flows, including stage secrets,
automation controls, markdown/item descriptions, linked issue assets,
liveness banners, and source automation metadata.
- Refactored issue document frame rendering through the shared
`DocumentFrameHeader` component to keep document controls consistent
with the pipeline document surfaces.
- Kept this PR as the single base-branch review target for the current
pipeline branch.

## Verification

Current branch refresh:

- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts` — 31
passed
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts` — 19
passed
- `pnpm --filter ./server typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` — passed
- Verified Pipelines remains gated by `enablePipelines === true`:
sidebar item is hidden unless the flag is enabled, direct pipeline
routes redirect to `/dashboard` when disabled, and the Experimental
settings UI still has no Pipelines toggle.
- GitHub status checks on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
all complete with no failing conclusions, including Actions, Socket,
Superagent/Security, and Greptile Review
- Greptile summary on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
Confidence Score 5/5
- GitHub review-thread sweep — 0 unresolved Greptile threads

Previously recorded during branch development:

- Server pipeline service/route and aggregation tests
- Shared validator tests
- UI pipeline page/settings/item-detail/learnings/liveness tests
- Pipeline tutorial smoke path

## Risks

- High review surface: this is a large feature branch spanning database,
shared contracts, server behavior, CLI/docs, and UI.
- Migration ordering and schema compatibility need reviewer attention
because this branch has been kept current across multiple `master`
syncs.
- GitHub still reports merge state `BLOCKED` because the PR is awaiting
normal human review/branch-protection completion; all current status
checks are green.
- Branch-name checklist exception: this PR uses the pre-existing
requested branch name, which predates the current public-branch naming
rule. The PR title/body avoid internal issue references.

> 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 repository tool use,
shell execution, git/GitHub CLI operations, and local verification
commands. Earlier commits in this branch were assisted by Paperclip
agents and other AI coding agents as recorded in commit authorship.

## 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)
- [ ] 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>
2026-06-26 12:02:44 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 32a9165ddf [codex] harden authenticated routes and issue editor reliability (#3741)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane depends on authenticated routes enforcing company
boundaries and role permissions correctly
> - This branch also touches the issue detail and markdown editing flows
operators use while handling advisory and triage work
> - Partial issue cache seeds and fragile rich-editor parsing could
leave important issue content missing or blank at the moment an operator
needed it
> - Blocked issues becoming actionable again should wake their assignee
automatically instead of silently staying idle
> - This pull request rebases the advisory follow-up branch onto current
`master`, hardens authenticated route authorization, and carries the
issue-detail/editor reliability fixes forward with regression tests
> - The benefit is tighter authz on sensitive routes plus more reliable
issue/advisory editing and wakeup behavior on top of the latest base

## What Changed

- Hardened authenticated route authorization across agent, activity,
approval, access, project, plugin, health, execution-workspace,
portability, and related server paths, with new cross-tenant and
runtime-authz regression coverage.
- Switched issue detail queries from `initialData` to placeholder-based
hydration so list/quicklook seeds still refetch full issue bodies.
- Normalized advisory-style HTML images before mounting the markdown
editor and strengthened fallback behavior when the rich editor silently
fails or rejects the content.
- Woke assigned agents when blocked issues move back to `todo`, with
route coverage for reopen and unblock transitions.
- Rebasing note: this branch now sits cleanly on top of the latest
`master` tip used for the PR base.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issueDetailQuery.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts`
- Confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of the PR diff.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` before publishing.

## Risks

- Broad authz tightening may expose existing flows that were relying on
permissive board or agent access and now need explicit grants.
- Markdown editor fallback changes could affect focus or rendering in
edge-case content that mixes HTML-like advisory markup with normal
markdown.
- This verification was intentionally scoped to touched regressions and
did not run the full repository suite.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in the Codex CLI environment
with tool use for terminal, git, and GitHub operations. The exact
runtime model identifier is not exposed inside 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, it is behavior-only and does not
need before/after screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or no
documentation changes were needed for these internal fixes
- [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>
2026-04-15 08:41:15 -05:00
Dotta 6844226572 Address Greptile navigation review 2026-04-12 21:30:50 -05:00
Dotta 1729e41179 Speed up issue-to-issue navigation 2026-04-12 21:14:12 -05:00