2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	9dbbfa4fb2	fix(qa): wait for task document controls after reload (#18503) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task documents keep saved work and its revision history with each task. > - The browser document journey must reopen the saved task and read the revised document after reload. > - Reload can finish before the task controls mount. > - The helper checked visibility once and could wait for a tab launcher inside a panel it had never opened. > - This pull request waits for the existing usable controls before it selects the normal UI path. > - The saved content, revision, ownership and no-agent-work checks stay unchanged. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18356. **What happened?** The document case in QA run 41253428446 passed document creation and revision-history checks, then failed during reopen or readback. The preserved screen shows the revised document and revision 2 in chat. The original result has the generic `journey_operation_failed` code. Its exception stack was intentionally excluded, so the exact historical failing instruction is not known. A separate Chromium control reproduces a concrete navigation race in the same helper. If task controls mount 200 ms after reload, the helper can select `Open a new tab` before it opens the properties panel. That control never becomes visible. The same race affects a delayed classic document editor or an existing Artifacts tab. **Expected behavior** The helper waits for the current task's normal authoring or panel controls. It then opens Artifacts through the same visible controls. A task without document authoring must still fail. A stale body, stale title or damaged revision history must still fail. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task from the Backlog list and reload it. 2. Delay mounting the task controls by 200 ms. 3. Run the unchanged document reopen helper with its properties panel closed. 4. Observe that it waits for `Open a new tab` while `Show properties` is visible. **Paperclip version or commit** Frozen source base: `b889ac39b7fbed558c5f4cfbbc2b73c4ca916810`. No duplicate document reopen PR was found. The related document feature is #18356. ## What Changed - Wait for an existing authoring, properties, Artifacts or launcher control before choosing the navigation path. - Wait for usable panel content after opening properties. - Add five credential-free Chromium controls for delayed collapsed, Artifacts, launcher and classic layouts, plus missing-authoring rejection. - Keep the existing Backlog navigation test compatible with the new readiness probes. - Register the browser regression in the existing support suite. No product code, model, budget, run cap or campaign deadline changed. The existing document contract needs no documentation change. ## Verification - Original failure is preserved. The [sanitized QA report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41253428446-1/) records both partial checks and the failed journey. This PR does not change that grade. - Before the fix, the real Chromium control failed for delayed collapsed, Artifacts and classic controls. The launcher path and missing-authoring rejection passed. A 750 ms action timeout bounded this diagnostic; final tests use the existing suite timeouts. - Final Chromium: `node node_modules/@playwright/test/cli.js test --config tests/runner-e2e/playwright-support.config.ts task-document-navigation.spec.ts` — 5 passed. - Document units: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/product-journeys/task-document-flow.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/product-journeys/task-document-evidence.test.ts --maxWorkers 1` — 23 passed. This includes 19 negative content, ownership and revision controls. - Scoped strict TypeScript, map checks, token gates and diff checks passed. - Node 24 normal QA import preflight passed with network disabled. - The entire `taskDocumentPersistence` function and the canonical evidence module are byte-identical to the base. The existing exact title/body checks, independent API reads, revision pointers and no-agent-work checks remain in force. - Repository-wide build, typecheck and tests were not run locally for this four-file harness change. [Canonical CI 41255897484](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41255897484) passed on exact head `ffc04500cb0728f6fbc8b3bc2e704c547015641d`: all 59 checks are terminal (55 success, 3 skipped, 1 neutral), with no failed or pending checks. Greptile and Paperclip each gave this head 5/5 with no findings. All review threads were checked; none are open and there is no next page. The branch is CLEAN and MERGEABLE. - Actual QA measurement now passes in [workflow 41266385118](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/actions/runs/41266385118), campaign `journey-1793502283113-8f658807`. The measured harness `5c0830f693da2ccef062612146b76629a0177049` contains the three exact reviewed document source/test blobs and unchanged canonical evidence module from this head. The target was the QA cloud instance on App `756599e4ea069c9338c320fe8846523d3dfb92a0`. All four canonical checks and all five phases passed; the manifest is COMPLETE with evidence cleanup complete and nothing pending. A positive no-agent-work check establishes zero native work despite omitted raw run IDs. A separate read-only verifier reread the exact original final grade and confirmed the retained-result validator. Raw document snapshots were not retained; content, revision and author proof comes from the executed unchanged exact UI/API predicates. The full 14-case launch remains failed because hiring failed separately; no aggregate pass is claimed. ## Risks The historical exception was intentionally sanitized. The local control proves this helper race, but cannot prove which instruction failed in the prior QA attempt. The current staging measurement passes this document case; the exact historical failing instruction remains unproven. The new readiness waits use the existing assertion timeout and campaign deadline. They do not accept missing controls or weaken document evidence. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution and browser automation. The exact serving model revision 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 - [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 Live qualification: the document case is verified on QA with complete cleanup. Historical failed results remain unchanged. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-31 22:30:05 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	322fa6b65c	fix(ui): restore task document authoring and add persistence journey (#18356) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work. > - Task documents keep versioned work beside each conversation. > - The default chat interface could read general documents but hid their editor. > - People also need unfinished edits to survive a tab switch or reload. > - This pull request restores the shared editor in Artifacts. > - A portable browser journey checks exact saved content and revision history. > - The benefit is a usable document flow with independent deployment checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person using the default task interface could read a general task document but could not create or edit one. The existing editor was available in Classic mode. A pending create could also leave newer text as a new form after its editor unmounted, causing a conflict against the person's own successful creation. **Expected behavior** A person can create and edit general documents through Artifacts. Titles, bodies and revision history persist after reopening and reloading the task. Unfinished text survives tab switches. A successful create makes retained newer text an edit of that confirmed revision. Later writes from another actor still cause a conflict. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open an ordinary task in the default chat interface, then open Artifacts. 2. Try to create a general document. The previous interface has no authoring control. 3. With authoring restored, submit a new document, keep typing, and switch to Properties before the request finishes. 4. Reopen Artifacts. The previous draft path restores a new form despite the successful create. Related public work: #17598 adds document copy/download and #18157 adds image galleries. The selected actual merged parent is `f1d780838218f975064f38333946805e0ec103a5` from #18427. It includes the stable profile-entry ordering repair and the exact recovery-fixture prerequisite. The resulting PR diff contains 32 document and reporting files. ## What Changed - Reuse `IssueDocumentsSection` for general documents in default-chat Artifacts. Keep Classic authoring in its existing task body. Ordinary tasks, conversations and Coordinator mode share the same editor options and signed-in permission wrapper. - Preserve Plans, file-review documents, attachments, uploads and work products. Hide duplicate general-document cards. Use the same general-document key rules for visible rows, validation and refused writes. - Forward image uploads, mentions, references, author maps and feedback to both editor mounts. Keep empty mention/project values stable while queries load. - Back up unfinished forms within their signed-in account, task and editor scope. Preserve text entered before its key. Record a successful create on its matching retained newer buffer, including after unmount or an early reopen. Preserve newer title/body edits, real remote conflicts and matching cancellation cleanup. - Add the model-free `task-document-persistence` journey. Setup creates only an owned empty backlog task. The browser creates and edits the document; normal APIs independently check company, task, actor, exact content and both revision records. - Reopen the owned task through the explicit Backlog view, then reload it. Require exact UI readback and zero native runs. Add only the Doc registration, definition-hash inputs, report mapping and four closed checks to the shared harness. - Count explicit zero-run browser receipts after private journey metadata is removed for publication. Preserve missing billing evidence, positive usage and native/protocol accounting. - Update browser assertions for the restored inline editor while retaining exact download bytes, revision collisions, paused-state and no-run checks. Update the feature map, usage docs and shared editor stories. ## Verification - Latest focused checks use official Node 24.22.2: 568 journey, catalog, report, billing and attempt-accounting tests across 25 suites pass. All four admitted journeys remain registered. The seven relevant UI suites pass 529 tests, including the task-page container after the parent merge. Maps, token gates, the PR-scope diff check and the owned credential-pattern scan pass. The normal QA import preflight also passes with an empty environment and network access blocked. - Billing regression: before the repair, the explicit empty public receipt counted one run, and two positive-usage receipts were discarded by browser metadata. Those three cases fail before and pass after the repair. Two additional red regressions cover aggregate usage beside an empty run list. That ambiguous shape now keeps an unavailable receipt and a minimum count of one. Missing receipts retain unavailable billing, and native/protocol one-or-more run totals retain their measurements. - The previous fresh CI run failed its unchanged snapshot-only recovery fixture: one global sweep did not call its callback. The original failure remains recorded. An isolated PGlite probe with all canonical migrations exercises the real reconciler: it processes two earlier sources, then reaches the owned third source on the next sweep. It preserves source evidence, files and run IDs. This proves bounded pagination, not full native snapshot repair. - Local native recovery tests could not start PostgreSQL because the host semaphore limit was reached. That run executed zero cases. Canonical Linux CI later passed all 143 fixture cases, including the original snapshot-only case and the new competing-candidate control. The exact fixture repair is now inherited from #18427 and is absent from this PR diff. - The portable oracle rejects 19 stale, missing, foreign or incorrect outcomes. Result validation also rejects model/provider metadata and native runs for this case. - Five real Artifacts-to-Properties unmount regressions fail before the repair and pass after it. They cover both editor modes, reopening before and after completion, later typing, and a foreign revision that must still conflict. The edit-storage failure case also checks that Cancel clears the promoted fallback copy. - UI coverage includes default chat, Classic, conversations, Coordinator, Plan rendering, document-card deduplication, reserved keys, pending-query stability, permissions and rich editor options. - Earlier real browser checks passed five upload cases and two artifact-arrival cases. They retain exact CSV bytes, original/revised content, collision, paused-state and no-run assertions. Current-head normal CI runs the updated browser suites again. - The branch merges only the selected actual parent `f1d780838218f975064f38333946805e0ec103a5`. The merge has no conflicts or manual resolution. The SQL service and recovery fixture match that parent exactly. The own document editor, persistence flow, saved-state oracle and billing repair retain their previously qualified source blobs. Follow-up, clarification, question/resumption, screenshot helpers and the Steering map are byte-identical to the merged parent. Existing project/search/question/follow-up registrations remain present. - Required document source blobs remain exact: Doc UI `22e80663b053363e5f75e1432dd9043dc0e70243`, its unmount tests `16f3f4ed0dc9b11aaff129e06e6cf2bbf4522713`, readiness helper `800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`, and budget service `3a15d489f0aa55c22e8f7fe6a6bc6a0e14e5914e`. - Local typing is limited by borrowed declarations from another checkout. They omit current `skill_test` and sandbox creation-operation fields. No dependency declarations or repository config were changed. The authoritative clean CI Typecheck + Release Registry gate passes on exact head `2ffce29827ae170420d740940c1c069c7225a74c`. - Full monorepo typecheck, tests and build were not run locally. Borrowed build declarations from another checkout limit local typing. Authoritative [clean CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41171717008) passes on exact head `82d15946c5844d3ae41c6ade62fa224053f20a9a`: 55 successful checks, 3 skipped and 1 neutral, with zero pending or failed checks. Typecheck, build, Runner, server and browser lanes pass. Greptile gives that same head a fresh 5/5. All 15 review threads are resolved, with no further thread page. The PR is mergeable and clean. - Failure history remains recorded. The earlier recovery failure was repaired with a bounded, owned-source fixture. A later CI worker shut down after 2,375 Runner unit tests passed. Its one authorized narrow retry passed those tests and all five native integration suites. The separate AgentConfig browser failure was reproduced and fixed by the merged #18427 parent. These earlier passes do not replace current-head CI. - Final-source live qualification passed on exact harness and served application `82d15946c5844d3ae41c6ade62fa224053f20a9a`. QA run `41177696858` completed all four closed checks and all five phases with zero native runs. Cleanup passed; the durable manifest is complete with no pending evidence. The coordinator verified the original grade and manifest. - The [public qualification report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41177696858-1/) records zero agent runs, empty run IDs and empty run usage. Pricing remains unavailable and billing remains incomplete; the report does not claim measured zero cost. - The earlier harness `36c8d9ddd76d0b7ddb28a9a6c674d9e538f6df88` pass against application `2ffce29827ae170420d740940c1c069c7225a74c` remains historical evidence. It is separate from the final-source measurement above. - The selected parent brings profile-entry ordering, proactive chat, a database migration, Runner updates, and task-page chat/read behavior. Its new task-page container is included in the final application measurement. The coordinator retains the original evidence and owns the primary merge and daily-plan admission. ## Risks Artifacts now mounts the existing shared editor. Its autosave, conflict, revision, annotation and server access contracts remain in place. Tests cover both interface modes, shared scopes, later remote writes and unavailable edit storage. Plans and generated file-review documents keep their existing flows. The PR adds no database schema or API change. The shared billing repair requires explicit captured empty run IDs and an unambiguous usage object containing only an empty run list for public browser-only receipts. Other fields beside an empty list keep conservative unavailable billing. Missing measurements remain unavailable. Contradicting positive usage remains counted. The inherited recovery fixture keeps the production sweep limit and its source, readback and no-agent-work assertions. The live journey must fail when authoring controls or saved outcomes are absent. It must not create the expected document through setup APIs or switch to another interface to pass. Final deployment verification must retain the actual app and harness revisions separately. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. The exact runtime model ID and context window were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [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>	2026-10-31 01:49:24 -05:00