2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	35ab90ad0f	Map runtime activity to authorized task plugin panels (#18131) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and tasks. > - Plugins contribute views to the task sidebar. > - A ready view can belong to an earlier task. > - Runner records activity under its authenticated run. > - This PR maps that activity to installed task-panel declarations. > - The sidebar checks readiness after current-run use and restores use after reconnect. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Builds on merged contract #18129 and Runner publisher #18050. This PR targets master and is ready for review. Earlier combined verification is retained in [the verification archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18050#issuecomment-6489369676). **Subsystem affected** Run-event reads, plugin task contributions and the task sidebar. **Problem or motivation** Readiness polling can show a view left ready by another task. Reload and reconnect must recover current-run use without losing concurrent live activity. **Proposed solution** Map recorded activity to installed task-panel declarations. Merge authorized history and live activity, then perform bounded readiness checks for the running agent. Preserve the existing read-only view. ## What Changed - Add optional `{ namespace, activityKey }` activation mappings to task-panel declarations. Legacy declarations remain valid but contribute no task panel. - Add `view=plugin-panels` to the existing run-events route. Preserve run-read and telemetry-read authorization, secret redaction and private-run denial. Map activity to installed contributions and return at most 128 panel identities. - Scope activation caches to current panel versions and activity declarations. Preserve unchanged panels during unrelated plugin updates and history reads. - Merge history and live hints without losing concurrent activations. Filter by company, task, run and agent. Restore history on mount and reconnect. - Replace periodic availability checks with up to three readiness attempts after activity. Fresh activity restarts settled transient failures. Pending checks, successful readiness and HTTP 4xx failures are left alone. - Reuse live run updates with the panel cache key. Recover only panel history after a pending subscription read. Mark expected not-ready query results so the global error reporter skips them; real failures remain reportable. - Preserve current-run dismissal and the read-only plugin view. Update manifest comments and producer/consumer documentation. ## Verification - Current head: `5e04d757c`, based on master `09c05c550`. Range comparison confirmed all six feature commits were unchanged by the rebase. The final follow-up keys readiness by the plugin installation ID and availability path. - `cd ui && node ../node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run src/hooks/useTaskPluginPanels.test.tsx` — all 45 cases passed. `cd ui && node ../node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -b` passed. - The shared query-client and live-update recovery selection passed 96 cases on `49c544cd2`. Token gates passed before the final hook-only changes. - Earlier focused verification passed 57 manifest cases, 69 database/history cases, event-registry cases and route authorization cases, including private-run denial. - Regression coverage includes subscription/history races, task changes during recovery, unfocused run completion, bounded readiness retries, denied reads, expected not-ready responses, changed activity mappings, unchanged panel preservation, old cache scopes, and same-version route or installation changes. - [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40942001707) passed: 54 successful checks, two skips, no failures or pending checks. - [Standard and final review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18131#issuecomment-6489842168) both scored 5/5 on `5e04d757c`. The final review used the Apex tier, added no comments, and left no unresolved findings. The PR is conflict-free and ready for review. - Local checks stay targeted. GitHub CI provides the broad build, test, typecheck, browser and Runner coverage. No deployment or live-provider acceptance is claimed. <details> <summary>Retained failures and recovery evidence</summary> - `ac9329548` twice failed a browser reload assertion while conversation history was concealed. Master fixed its readiness wait in #17923. The approve journey then passed locally on `fea63a418` with installed Chrome (1 passed, 39 seconds). All eight browser shards passed in later CI. The browser test is outside this diff. - A canary checkout failed with Git HTTP 408; its unchanged-head retry passed. - `de07d09fa` failed the mobile Cases card click after a ten-second stability wait. The same read-only journey passed locally on that exact head (1 passed, 26 seconds). Its unchanged-head CI retry passed 22 cases, with one skip. The original artifact is retained; the cause of that click timeout is not established. - [CI on `49c544cd2`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40903679075) passed 54 checks with two skips. CI also passed on `de07d09fa` after the recorded retry. - The `1e59ab441` merge checkout passed all browser and server suites. Runner shard 2 passed 2,252 cases and timed out waiting for a controller-recovery command. The test had landed on master in #18161 after the former branch base. Rebasing aligned the local checkout with that code; Runner shard 2 then passed on `fcf7380d3`. The original timeout cause remains unproven; no unrelated timeout was changed. - [CI on `fcf7380d3`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40940235193) recorded runner shutdown signals in typecheck and a workspace shard. A chat recovery test observed a null wake deadline, and one Runner transport fixture failed during close. Those separate assertion failures remain unexplained. All of those jobs passed on the final readiness-key head. Those later passes establish recovery; they do not prove the cause of the earlier assertion failures. - Local browser setup first stopped at pnpm version-download verification, then a sandbox IPC restriction, then a missing bundled browser. Installed pnpm 9.15.4 and Chrome completed the journeys. No dependency files were changed. - Earlier optional-property TypeScript errors were corrected. Embedded PostgreSQL needed its install hook run from its package directory. Older CI also recorded fixture-cleanup lock timeouts, attention-fixture timeouts, and canceled server shards after runner shutdown. The parent fixed its FIFO snapshot-copy failure before merge. The linked verification archive retains earlier combined evidence. </details> ## Risks Activity is a hint and grants no access. Missing plugins, denied reads and unavailable views contribute no panel. Older runs without activity records show no task plugin tab. A used view stays available for the running task; reconnect reconciles readiness. Matching producer and consumer builds are required. No migration, dependency, image publication or deployment is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact serving snapshot is not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My 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>	2026-10-29 13:56:48 -07:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip	c7c12dbc79	Support plugin panels in task sidebars (#17796) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task side panels keep live work beside the conversation. > - Plugins can already provide agent detail tabs. > - Those tabs have no generic way to appear beside the task that is using the agent. > - This pull request adds an optional task-side-panel declaration to agent detail tabs. > - The plugin owns the label, component and availability. Core supplies the task's running agent. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Access to plugin-contributed live views from task chat. **Subsystem affected** Plugin manifest validation, slot discovery, and task side-panel UI/state. **Current behavior** Agent detail-tab contributions appear on agent pages. A task cannot offer the same view through a plugin-owned availability decision. **Proposed behavior** An agent detail tab can declare `taskSidePanel: { availabilityPath }`. Core substitutes the running agent into the plugin-local path. A declared board GET route scoped to that agent returns `{ available: boolean }`. Available contributions appear in desktop and mobile task side panels. **Reason and benefit** Keep the task and its live plugin views together. Preserve plugin ownership of provider protocols and product behavior. Core contains no concrete plugin identifiers, routes, labels or readiness rules. **Breaking changes** None. The field is optional. Existing contributions remain unchanged. Missing, disabled or unavailable plugins add no panel. **Additional context** Related: #17111 established the agent detail-tab and scoped API extension surfaces. Roadmap and related PR searches found no duplicate of this extension. ## What Changed - Extend the manifest with optional task-panel metadata. Validate safe plugin-local paths and require a declared board GET route with agent-scoped authorization. - Discover and load only opted-in agent contributions. Poll their generic availability responses and mount the existing components with agent context. - Add generic panel tabs, launcher entries, dismissal and inactive-view removal in desktop/mobile task chat. - Reuse the existing live-run polling guard so idle tasks with a healthy live connection stop polling. - Add provider-neutral fixtures, schema/authorization tests, task tests and SDK/feature documentation. ## Verification - PASS: 301 focused tests including the full task-detail file, generic panel discovery, persistence, slot loading and manifest validation. Regressions cover POST-before-GET route order, mobile drawer dismissal, recovery without focus and the absence of the hidden desktop task panel on mobile. - PASS: UI and shared-package typechecks; production UI build; token gates, feature-map and module-boundary checks; diff and secrets/PII review. - PASS on final head: all 795 UI files / 9,186 tests, and all 95 shared-package files / 1,038 tests. Commands: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run --project @paperclipai/ui --maxWorkers 3` and the corresponding `--project @paperclipai/shared` command with local socket access. - On the final head, server shards 7/12 and 10/12 and workspace shard a-1/2 were interrupted by runner shutdown/communication loss. GitHub reported infrastructure failures; no assertion failure was surfaced in the available diagnostics. The queued summary was cancelled, then `gh run rerun --failed` successfully requested retries for only those three jobs. They are currently queued for CI runners; the 50 successful checks remain passing. Interrupted attempts are not counted as passing. [Final-head CI and retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40396870920). - Earlier verification exposed an empty-panel rerender loop, which was fixed. The sandboxed combined run also failed five shared port-registry tests because it could not bind loopback listeners; the full shared rerun with socket access passed. These earlier failures are retained here rather than reported as passing runs. - Full workspace typecheck/build were attempted with pinned pnpm 9 after resolving the initial local package-manager setup. Both stop at the unchanged Runner Rust step because `cargo` is not installed. Full local workspace checks are not reported as passing; final CI must provide those broader checks. - No live provider or plugin-specific transport acceptance is claimed by Core's synthetic fixtures. ## Risks - Availability is polled every three seconds only while an authorized running agent exists. Plugins own the side effects and meaning of that read. - A view uses the running agent's context. It is not a separate per-task resource. - Optional metadata adds no backend endpoint or permission bypass. The host requires existing board and agent authorization. - Reverting the optional contract and UI integration removes task panels without a data migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact backend snapshot ID and context window size are not exposed by 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 described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket id - [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-26 14:47:15 -07:00