Commit Graph
3 Commits
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
Devin FoleyandClaude Opus 5.5 a39f1b81f1 fix(ui): stop refetching cache-only queries without a queryFn (#18062)
Task snapshots are cached under each alias key (UUID and identifier) with setQueryData. Those entries have no queryFn until a view observes them, so inactive invalidations refetched them and failed with "Missing queryFn". The app QueryClient now skips entries without a queryFn when it refetches; invalidateQueries still marks them stale.

Fixes PAPERCLIP-FRONTEND-X

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-10-28 14:17:29 -07:00
39279aa34f feat(ui): shared error, connectivity and query foundation for disconnects (#15754)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The board reads API data and keeps the current task on screen.
> - A restart or temporary network failure can interrupt those reads.
> - Separate page error handlers can hide cached data or expose raw
server codes.
> - The app needs one connection state, readable error copy and a
consistent read policy.
> - This change provides that foundation and moves affected read
surfaces onto it.
> - The dependent write layer in #17960 preserves edits and submissions
across the same failures.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Temporary API failures could replace loaded content with errors.
Different surfaces handled the same outage differently. Some showed raw
server codes. A successful query to an unrelated service could also
falsely report that Paperclip had recovered.

**Expected behavior**

Keep cached content visible. Show one connection banner during sustained
trouble. Confirm recovery through the Paperclip health probe or its
WebSocket. Retry transient reads and show readable errors for permanent
failures.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open a populated task or workspace page.
2. Interrupt API requests with a 503 or a dropped connection.
3. Keep an unrelated external request in flight.
4. Confirm that cached content remains and that the external result
cannot clear the outage.
5. Restore the API and check that reads refresh.

The write layer first merged into this feature branch in #15769 now has
its own dependent PR, #17960. This PR contains the shared foundation and
read changes. Merge this PR first.

## What Changed

- Classify API errors and provide readable error copy, including
non-JSON proxy responses and Retry-After handling.
- Use one connection store and health probe with bounded backoff.
Confirm recovery from the server health probe or live-updates WebSocket.
- Pause reads while disconnected, retry transient errors, and refresh
active reads after recovery.
- Keep cached data visible through shared query views and affected page,
panel and plugin read surfaces.
- Add one app-level connection banner and support the pending-write
count consumed by the dependent write layer.
- Add a query-error rendering guard. Call it directly from the existing
CI step. Update development documentation.

## Verification

- Historical-chat lookup now follows the same ready/stale roster state
as rendering. Three regressions fail before the fix; the six new cases
pass after it, including working Retry, fresh data, no-cache error,
permanent 403 and company isolation. All six focused query/recovery
suites pass 200 tests. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no
unresolved findings. Canary Dry Run initially refused a preview version
that was already on npm. It passed after one rerun with fresh registry
metadata; no check was disabled.

- Integrated current master and retained both transcript interest
registration and connectivity reporting on socket open. The seven
focused recovery/query suites pass 288 tests, and UI typecheck and
production build pass. All 9,451 UI tests across 799 files pass on the
merge commit. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no unresolved
findings.

- Current head `70d9335d732219352ef0f98414439766bbcb33df`: all hosted CI
checks pass. Apex is **5/5** on that head with no unresolved findings.
The branch has no merge conflict. GitHub still requires code-owner
approval.

- The foundation passes 9,430 UI tests in 804 files. After integrating
current master page paths, 190 focused page tests pass.
- Two unrelated-success regressions fail before the latest fix. With the
fix, 62 focused UI tests, all six guard tests and UI TypeScript pass.
- The composed foundation and write layer pass **9,505 UI tests in 808
files**, UI TypeScript, a production UI build, and query-error, token
and map guards.
- A real Chromium journey on the composed source injects a 503 during
title save. The loaded task stays visible; one reconnect banner appears;
the edit saves after recovery; another task stays unchanged; the saved
title survives reload.
- Full recursive local checks were not repeated because Runner
compilation exhausted local disk during another repair. Hosted checks
must pass before merge. No new staging deployment is claimed.

- Latest review follow-up: a cached CaseDetail now survives a failed
HTTP 429 refresh. Its page regression fails before the fix and passes
after it. Eighty focused foundation tests, UI TypeScript, build and
guards pass after that change.
- Earlier CI evidence is retained: several foundation jobs received a
runner shutdown signal together. The write-layer head also failed an
unchanged Runner descriptor close test with `provider_transport_failed`.
The same Runner source passed that suite in the foundation run. New CI
runs cover the updated heads; no check or assertion was weakened.

## Risks

- Shared retry defaults change the time before transient read errors
appear. Permanent errors still fail promptly.
- ApiError.message now contains readable copy. Callers that compare raw
codes must use ApiError.code.
- Cache success can come from another service or local data. It must not
confirm Paperclip recovery.
- Durable writes are reviewed separately in #17960. This PR does not
change database or mutation contracts.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) produced the original work
with tool use. OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, assisted with restoration,
integration, tests and review fixes. The Codex session does not expose
its exact serving model ID 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <claude@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-27 21:22:07 -07:00