mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-31 14:16:39 +01:00
beefbe1b52884a3debee0bcb2ad98f13e6aa4a1c
1119
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
beefbe1b52 |
Avoid lockfile dependency in UI split
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fce4e9eadc |
Fix issue list scroll pagination
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cc8e31c05a |
Address UI split review findings
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8c7ae91045 |
Fix latest comment jump target
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0ebbdbfb38 |
Fix productivity review badge routing
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a4fbf51db8 |
Cover issue chat latest comment jump
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
617c642c03 |
Enable routine description mentions
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
35a5057a57 |
Stabilize infinite issue paging
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
57f197dfc1 |
Page issues list with scroll offsets
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5547328d9a |
PAP-2660: Bind issue chat virtualizer to <main> scroll container
The Phase 3 virtualizer (PAP-2645) used useWindowVirtualizer, but on the real issue page the chat lives inside `<main id="main-content" overflow-auto>`. Window scroll never moves on desktop, so the virtualizer only ever mounted the first 7 rows and the chat area went blank past the first viewport. Detect the actual scroll container at mount via DOM walk and rekey the inner virtualizer to use element-mode observers/scroll-fn when an overflow ancestor exists; fall back to window mode for mobile and the auth-free perf fixture, where the document scrolls. Adds a regression test that mounts IssueChatThread inside an overflow-auto ancestor and asserts jump-to-latest drives that element's scrollTo, not window.scrollTo. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
c19dc328a9 |
PAP-2659: Warn before sending issue reply with no assignee
If the issue reply composer would post without any assignee, the first Send press now surfaces a warning toast instead of submitting. A second press confirms the user wants to proceed unassigned, and changing the assignee resets the confirmation. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
68ae4cdb36 |
Make issues page load more on scroll
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
86d3b2c84d |
Preserve virtualized issue chat anchors
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
001c19d4bd |
PAP-2645: Virtualize long issue chat threads
Add @tanstack/react-virtual and gate IssueChatThread on a 150-row threshold. Thread shorter than the threshold still uses the direct render path; longer threads window the merged feed via useWindowVirtualizer with dynamic measurement and overscan, so the document scroll continues to represent the full conversation height without introducing a nested scrollbar. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
26f2993257 |
Isolate issue thread row rendering
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
374948da2a |
Add long-thread issue chat perf fixture
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
50f06d73f8 |
Split dialog action subscriptions
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
954183438c |
PAP-2615: rename source-header productivity-review pill to "Under review"
UX feedback split the badge by role: on the source issue the linked pill
describes a state ("Under review"), while on the productivity-review issue
itself the static pill identifies the kind of issue ("Productivity review").
Tooltip and aria-label still surface the formal name on hover.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dd3aa3569f |
PAP-2614: Surface productivity review state in issue UI
Adds a productivityReview lookup to single-issue and list responses, plus a ProductivityReviewBadge component that surfaces the open productivity review on the source issue's header (with trigger/no-comment-streak detail in the tooltip), and a compact eye glyph next to the StatusIcon on IssueRow so operators can spot yellow tasks in any list. The review issue itself shows a static "Productivity review" pill in the header when its originKind matches. Also extends the shared IssueOriginKind union with the recovery-side kinds (harness_liveness_escalation, issue_productivity_review, stranded_issue_recovery) so UI checks against issue.originKind type-check. Wires the new helper through GET /issues/:id, GET /companies/:id/issues (via issueService.list), and GET /issues/:id/heartbeat-context. Adds a status-language Storybook story matrix for UX review. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
8a34401d80 |
PAP-2607: nudge inline mention chips up 1px
Reviewer follow-up — pills sat slightly low after the baseline-to-middle switch. position: relative + top: -1px raises them to optically center with the surrounding cap height. |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cad9111496 |
PAP-2607: align inline mention chips on text baseline
Inline-flex baseline behavior is browser-dependent, which made skill/agent/issue chips in MarkdownBody and the MDXEditor hang below the surrounding text. Switch to vertical-align: middle and drop the vertical padding so the pill sits centered on the line with the prose around it. Adds a skill-chip line to the MarkdownBody storybook fixture so this regresses loudly next time. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
62c2b81d52 |
Improve new issue dialog typing performance
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
5ee4c9e244 |
PAP-2605: unify routine variables container and add help modal
Wrap the variables editor in a single rounded container so the
"Variables" header and the per-variable cards share one border with
internal dividers, instead of stacking as two visually separate
containers when expanded.
Add a help button to the variable instructions hint that opens a modal
explaining custom {{variable_name}} placeholders and the built-in
{{date}} and {{timestamp}} variables.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1991ec9d6f |
[codex] Split backend control-plane QoL slice (#4700)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so backend task ownership, recovery, review visibility, and company-scoped limits need to stay enforceable without UI-only coupling. > - Closed PR #4692 bundled those backend changes with UI workflow, docs, skills, workflow, and lockfile churn. > - PAP-2694 asks for a clean backend/control-plane slice from that closed branch. > - This branch starts from current `master` and mines only the `cli`, `packages/db`, `packages/shared`, and `server` contracts/tests needed for the backend behavior. > - It explicitly excludes UI workflow/performance work, `.github/workflows/pr.yml`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, docs, skills, package-script, adapter UI build-config, and perf fixture script changes; the only UI files are fixture/test updates required by the tightened shared `Company` contract. > - The benefit is a smaller reviewable PR that preserves the control-plane fixes while staying under Greptile s 100-file review limit. ## What Changed - Added company-scoped attachment-size limits through DB schema/migrations, shared company portability contracts, CLI import/export coverage, and server attachment upload enforcement. - Added productivity review service/API behavior for no-comment streak, long-active, and high-churn review issues, including request-depth clamping and issue summary exposure. - Hardened issue ownership and recovery/control-plane paths: peer-agent mutation denial, issue tree pause/resume behavior, stranded recovery origins, and related activity/test coverage. - Preserved related backend contract updates for routine timestamp variables and managed agent instruction bundles because they live in shared/server contracts from the source branch. - Addressed Greptile feedback by making `Company.attachmentMaxBytes` non-optional, simplifying review request-depth clamping, fixing the migration final newline, and enforcing the process-level attachment cap as the final ceiling for uploads. - Added minimal company fixtures needed for repo-wide typecheck/build and kept the PR to 66 changed files with forbidden/non-slice paths excluded. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` - `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD | wc -l` -> 66 files - `git diff --name-only origin/master..HEAD -- .github/workflows/pr.yml pnpm-lock.yaml package.json doc skills .agents scripts packages/adapters` -> no output - `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts packages/shared/src/routine-variables.test.ts packages/shared/src/adapter-types.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` -> 12 files, 147 tests passed - `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` -> 3 files, 18 tests passed - `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` -> 1 file, 6 tests passed - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` ## Risks - Includes migrations `0073_shiny_salo.sql` and `0074_striped_genesis.sql`; merge ordering matters if another PR adds migrations first. - This is intentionally backend-only apart from fixture/test updates forced by shared type correctness; UI affordances from PR #4692 are not present here and should land in separate UI slices. - The worktree install emitted plugin SDK bin-link warnings for unbuilt plugin packages, but the targeted tests and package typechecks completed successfully. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected; check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the harness. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d0bdbe11a9 |
Stabilize inline selector keyboard handling (#4617)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip's board UI relies on compact selectors for frequent issue and agent edits. > - Inline selectors often live inside larger keyboard-aware surfaces such as composers and popovers. > - Arrow, enter, tab, and escape keys handled by the selector should not leak to parent document shortcuts. > - Stale company selection should also stay hidden until the company list confirms it is valid. > - This pull request tightens inline selector keyboard handling and adds regression coverage for stale company bootstrap behavior. > - The benefit is fewer accidental parent interactions and safer company-scoped UI initialization. ## What Changed - Added a stable empty `recentOptionIds` default so selector filtering does not get a new array every render. - Mirrored highlighted option state into a ref so Enter/Tab commits the current highlighted option reliably after keyboard navigation. - Stopped propagation for selector-owned navigation/commit/escape keys. - Added jsdom regressions for inline selector keyboard handling and CompanyProvider stale selection behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/InlineEntitySelector.test.tsx ui/src/context/CompanyContext.test.tsx` - Targeted selector and CompanyProvider tests pass cleanly without React `act(...)` warnings. - Screenshots not attached: this is keyboard/state behavior covered by component tests. ## Risks - Low risk: changes are scoped to inline selector key handling and tests. The main behavior shift is intentionally preventing handled selector keys from reaching parent listeners. > 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, tool-enabled local repository and shell access, Paperclip heartbeat context. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
43b0f2ae58 |
Add pause and resume actions to sidebar agents (#4616)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip operators need fast control over the agents running their company. > - The sidebar is the persistent place operators scan agent state while navigating the board UI. > - Agent pause and resume already exist as control-plane actions, but sidebar users had to navigate away to use them. > - This pull request adds a compact per-agent action menu in the sidebar. > - It keeps edit, pause, and resume close to the visible agent list while preserving existing navigation behavior. > - The benefit is faster operator intervention when an agent needs to be paused or restarted. ## What Changed - Refactored sidebar agent rows into a small item component with a hover/focus action menu. - Added edit, pause, and resume actions using existing agent API calls and cache invalidation keys. - Added success/error toasts for pause and resume mutations. - Tracked pause/resume pending state per agent so one active mutation does not disable every sidebar row. - Disabled direct sidebar resume for budget-paused agents and labeled that state clearly. - Added jsdom coverage for active-agent pause, paused-agent resume, per-agent pending state, and budget-paused resume protection. - Added visual review artifacts for the default row and opened action menu: - [Sidebar row](docs/pr-screenshots/pr-4616/sidebar-agent-row.png) - [Sidebar action menu](docs/pr-screenshots/pr-4616/sidebar-agent-actions.png) ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server prepare:ui-dist` - Browser screenshot pass against a temporary local trusted instance at `http://127.0.0.1:3102` using Playwright. ## Risks - Low risk: UI-only addition using existing agent pause/resume endpoints. The main risk is layout crowding for very narrow sidebars, mitigated by the icon-only trigger and existing truncation. - Budget-paused agents now require a non-sidebar path to resume, which is intentional to avoid accidentally restarting agents stopped by budget enforcement. > 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, tool-enabled local repository and shell/browser access, Paperclip heartbeat context. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d95968a9f8 |
[codex] Ignore stale stored company selections (#4602)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The board UI is the operator’s control surface for selecting the active company > - A company id stored in localStorage can become stale across resets, imports, or deleted companies > - Exposing that stale id before companies load can briefly put downstream UI in an invalid company scope > - This pull request defers selected-company exposure until the loaded company list validates the stored id > - The benefit is a cleaner company-selection bootstrap path and fewer transient invalid API requests ## What Changed - Initialized `CompanyProvider` selection as `null` until companies finish loading. - Reused a stored company id only when it exists in the loaded selectable company list. - Cleared storage and selected state when no companies are available. - Added jsdom regression coverage for stale stored ids before and after company loading. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/context/CompanyContext.test.tsx` ## Risks - Low risk. The change only affects selection bootstrap and keeps valid stored selections intact. - There may be a slightly longer initial `null` selected-company state while the company list is loading. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled terminal/GitHub workflow, reasoning mode active. Context window not exposed in this environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
53396f272a |
[codex] Fix sub-issue progress summary styling (#4588)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The issue list and issue detail surfaces summarize child/sub-issue progress for operators. > - Those summaries need to be compact and visually consistent because they appear in dense lists. > - The progress strip is most useful when there are multiple sub-issues to compare, so the summary intentionally stays hidden for a single sub-issue. > - This pull request tightens the sub-issue progress summary styling and updates the related tests. > - The benefit is a cleaner, more scannable task list without changing task ownership, status, or workflow behavior. ## What Changed - Adjusted sub-issue progress summary copy/styling in the issue list and detail summary helpers. - Intentionally render the progress summary only for two or more child issues; a single child issue still appears in the normal sub-issue list without a redundant progress strip. - Updated the UI tests that assert the rendered summary behavior. - Clarified the two-plus-child threshold in code with a named constant. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts` ## Screenshots  ## Risks - Low risk; this is a small UI presentation change with focused test coverage. - The intentional threshold change means parents with exactly one child no longer show the aggregate progress strip, avoiding redundant summary chrome while keeping the child visible in the list. - No schema or API behavior changes. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5`, coding model with tool use and local command execution; context window not exposed by the 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fda296ee4f |
[codex] Add configurable liveness auto-recovery controls (#4587)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Heartbeat liveness recovery decides when stalled issue trees need manager-visible follow-up. > - Automatic recovery issue creation is useful, but operators need instance-level controls for how aggressive it is. > - Without controls, recovery behavior is harder to tune for local development, production operations, and noisy edge cases. > - This pull request adds configurable liveness auto-recovery settings across shared contracts, API routes, services, and the instance experimental settings UI. > - The benefit is that operators can keep liveness findings advisory or enable bounded recovery automation with explicit intervals and lookback windows. ## What Changed - Added shared types and validators for liveness auto-recovery settings. - Extended instance settings routes and services to persist and validate the new controls. - Wired heartbeat/recovery services to honor enablement, minimum interval, and lookback settings. - Added UI controls for liveness recovery under instance experimental settings. - Covered the new server behavior with instance settings and liveness escalation tests. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ## Risks - Moderate behavioral risk because recovery automation timing changes when enabled; defaults keep existing advisory behavior unless the setting is turned on. - No database migration in this PR; settings are stored through the existing instance settings path. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, `gpt-5`, coding model with tool use and local command execution; context window not exposed by the 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
82e257c7ba |
Cancel stale queued heartbeats when issue graph changes (PAP-2314) (#4534)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
8145141c55 |
Fix external issue URL rewriting in markdown (#4558)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Issue and comment rendering is part of the board UI where humans supervise and inspect agent work. > - External Paperclip issue URLs can appear in comments as references to other runs, review threads, or remote test environments. > - Those links must preserve their full destination, including origin, port, and `#comment-...` fragments, or the operator is taken to the wrong place. > - The bug here was that absolute `http(s)` issue URLs were being normalized into internal `/issues/...` routes in the markdown path. > - This pull request stops rewriting absolute URLs while keeping internal issue-reference behavior for relative paths and identifiers. > - The benefit is that authored external links now navigate exactly where the operator expects, especially for remote test and comment-deep-link workflows. ## What Changed - Stopped `ui/src/lib/issue-reference.ts` from treating absolute `http(s)` URLs as internal issue paths. - Added defense-in-depth in `ui/src/lib/mention-chips.ts` so absolute `http(s)` URLs are never reclassified as issue mention chips. - Updated `ui/src/lib/issue-reference.test.ts` to cover absolute Paperclip URLs with preserved origin, port, and comment hash. - Updated `ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx` to assert the reported URL renders as an external link, not an internal `/issues/...` href. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issue-reference.test.ts ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx` - Expected result: `2` files passed, `37` tests passed. - Manual spot-check from the issue report path: a URL like `http://remote.example.test:3103/PAPA/issues/PAPA-115#comment-...` should remain an external link with its full destination preserved. ## Risks - Low risk. The change narrows when Paperclip rewrites URLs, so the main risk is if some existing workflow depended on absolute `http(s)` Paperclip URLs being converted into internal issue links. The added regression coverage is aimed at preventing that from regressing silently. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex local agent via Paperclip `codex_local` - Backing model family: GPT-5-based Codex runtime - Exact backend model ID/version: not exposed by this adapter/runtime surface - Context window: not exposed by this adapter/runtime surface - Capabilities used: tool use, shell command execution, code editing, git operations, and local test 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
54ab0d24cd |
Fix disappearing issue comments (#4557)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies, so issue detail pages are a primary surface for understanding agent work and human feedback. > - The relevant subsystem here is the issue comments/chat experience across the React issue detail page and the server comment pagination API. > - Long issue threads were only surfacing the newest page of comments at first render, which hid earlier human and agent messages behind extra pagination. > - The first UI fix exposed that the descending cursor path on the server could also fail for older-page fetches, leaving the chat tab stuck on an infinite "Loading earlier comments..." state. > - This needed to be addressed in both layers so the chat tab can surface earlier conversation history without manual recovery and without server errors. > - This pull request auto-loads earlier comment pages in the issue detail chat view and fixes the descending cursor predicate used by issue comment pagination. > - The benefit is that long-running issues like `PAPA-103` now show the missing conversation history near the top of the chat surface instead of hiding it or failing to load it. ## What Changed - Auto-load earlier issue comment pages in the issue detail chat tab until the thread reaches a 150-comment cap or there are no older comments left. - Add UI-side guard logic and regression coverage for optimistic issue comment pagination so the autoload behavior stops cleanly. - Replace the raw SQL descending cursor predicate in `issueService.listComments` with typed Drizzle comparisons for the `(createdAt, id)` anchor tuple. - Add a server regression test that paginates earlier comments in descending order from an anchor comment. - Smoke-test the exact previously failing seeded `PAPA-103` cursor path on the isolated dev instance used for review. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Manual smoke against seeded `PAPA-103` data on the isolated dev server: - `GET /api/issues/PAPA-103/comments?order=desc&limit=50` returns `200` - `GET /api/issues/PAPA-103/comments?after=765d3609-edc6-4d11-a8fe-d466affbe85d&order=desc&limit=50` now returns `200` with 50 comments instead of `500` ## Risks - Moderate UI/perf risk on very large threads because the chat tab now prefetches multiple earlier pages on mount; the cap is intentionally limited to 150 comments to bound that work. - Low API risk because the server fix only changes the cursor predicate construction for anchor-based comment pagination, but any mistake there would affect older-comment paging order. > I checked `ROADMAP.md` before opening this PR and this bug fix does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent in the Paperclip local adapter environment. The exact backend model ID and context window were not exposed in-session. Tool-assisted workflow included shell execution, git/GitHub CLI, local test execution, and targeted code edits. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
df425fde96 |
Present ordered sub-issues as a workflow checklist (#4523)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators use issue detail pages and child issue lists to understand multi-step execution plans. > - Ordered sub-issues currently read like a flat table, so dependency chains and current next steps are harder to scan. > - The branch work adds a workflow-oriented presentation for child issues without changing the single-assignee task model. > - This pull request makes ordered sub-issues read more like a progress checklist while preserving normal issue list controls. > - The benefit is that operators can see completed steps, active work, blocked follow-ups, and dependency order at a glance. ## What Changed - Added workflow sorting utilities and tests for dependency-aware child issue ordering. - Added sub-issue progress summary, checklist numbering, current-step affordances, blocker context, and done-state de-emphasis in the issue list UI. - Wired issue detail sub-issue panels to use the workflow sort/progress checklist presentation. - Updated issue service behavior/tests for child issue ordering inputs used by the UI. - Added a Storybook visual review fixture and screenshot helper for the sub-issue workflow checklist surface. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts ui/src/lib/workflow-sort.test.ts` - Result: 6 test files passed, 55 tests passed, 34 embedded Postgres issue-service tests skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is unavailable on this host. - Visual review: generated Storybook screenshots from the existing local Storybook server on port 6006 with `node scripts/screenshot-subissues.mjs /tmp/pap-2189-subissues-screens http://localhost:6006`. - Screenshot artifacts: - Desktop dark:  - Desktop light:  - Mobile dark:  - Mobile light:  - Local Storybook note: starting a second Storybook process selected port 6008 because 6006 was occupied, then Vite failed with an esbuild host/binary version mismatch (`0.25.12` host vs `0.27.3` binary). The already-running Storybook server on 6006 served the fixture successfully for screenshots. ## Risks - Medium UI risk: the issue list now has additional sub-issue-specific visual states, so dense lists should be checked for spacing and scanability. - Low ordering risk: workflow sorting is covered by focused unit tests, but unusual dependency topologies may still need reviewer attention. - No migration risk: this PR does not add database migrations or touch `pnpm-lock.yaml`. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled shell/git/GitHub workflow. Context window is runtime-provided and not exposed in this environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
5bd0f578fd |
Generalize sandbox provider core for plugin-only providers (#4449)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane, so optional execution providers should sit at the plugin edge instead of hardcoding provider-specific behavior into core shared/server/ui layers. > - Sandbox environments are already first-class, and the fake provider proves the built-in path; the remaining gap was that real providers still leaked provider-specific config and runtime assumptions into core. > - That coupling showed up in config normalization, secret persistence, capabilities reporting, lease reconstruction, and the board UI form fields. > - As long as core knew about those provider-shaped details, shipping a provider as a pure third-party plugin meant every new provider would still require host changes. > - This pull request generalizes the sandbox provider seam around schema-driven plugin metadata and generic secret-ref handling. > - The runtime and UI now consume provider metadata generically, so core only special-cases the built-in fake provider while third-party providers can live entirely in plugins. ## What Changed - Added generic sandbox-provider capability metadata so plugin-backed providers can expose `configSchema` through shared environment support and the environments capabilities API. - Reworked sandbox config normalization/persistence/runtime resolution to handle schema-declared secret-ref fields generically, storing them as Paperclip secrets and resolving them for probe/execute/release flows. - Generalized plugin sandbox runtime handling so provider validation, reusable-lease matching, lease reconstruction, and plugin worker calls all operate on provider-agnostic config instead of provider-shaped branches. - Replaced hardcoded sandbox provider form fields in Company Settings with schema-driven rendering and blocked agent environment selection from the built-in fake provider. - Added regression coverage for the generic seam across shared support helpers plus environment config, probe, routes, runtime, and sandbox-provider runtime tests. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest --run packages/shared/src/environment-support.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-config.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-probe.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/sandbox-provider-runtime.test.ts` - `pnpm -r typecheck` ## Risks - Plugin sandbox providers now depend more heavily on accurate `configSchema` declarations; incorrect schemas can misclassify secret-bearing fields or omit required config. - Reusable lease matching is now metadata-driven for plugin-backed providers, so providers that fail to persist stable metadata may reprovision instead of resuming an existing lease. - The UI form is now fully schema-driven for plugin-backed sandbox providers; provider manifests without good defaults or descriptions may produce a rougher operator experience. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via `codex_local` - Model ID: `gpt-5.4` - Reasoning effort: `high` - Context window observed in runtime session metadata: `258400` tokens - Capabilities used: terminal tool execution, git, and local code/test inspection ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f68e9caa9a |
Polish markdown external link wrapping (#4447)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The board UI renders agent comments, PR links, issue links, and operational markdown throughout issue threads > - Long GitHub and external links can wrap awkwardly, leaving icons orphaned from the text they describe > - Small inbox visual polish also helps repeated board scanning without changing behavior > - This pull request glues markdown link icons to adjacent link characters and removes a redundant inbox list border > - The benefit is cleaner, more stable markdown and inbox rendering for day-to-day operator review ## What Changed - Added an external-link indicator for external markdown links. - Kept the GitHub icon attached to the first link character so it does not wrap onto a separate line. - Kept the external-link icon attached to the final link character so it does not wrap away from the URL/text. - Added markdown rendering regressions for GitHub and external link icon wrapping. - Removed the extra border around the inbox list card. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ## Risks - Low risk. The markdown change is limited to link child rendering and preserves existing href/target/rel behavior. - Visual-only inbox polish. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled with shell/GitHub/Paperclip API access. Context window was not reported by the 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
73fbdf36db |
Gate stale-run watchdog decisions by board access (#4446)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The run ledger surfaces stale-run watchdog evaluation issues and recovery actions > - Viewer-level board users should be able to inspect status without getting controls that the server will reject > - The UI also needs enough board-access context to know when to hide those decision actions > - This pull request exposes board memberships in the current board access snapshot and gates watchdog action controls for known viewer contexts > - The benefit is clearer least-privilege UI behavior around recovery controls ## What Changed - Included memberships in `/api/cli-auth/me` so the board UI can distinguish active viewer memberships from operator/admin access. - Added the stale-run evaluation issue assignee to output silence summaries. - Hid stale-run watchdog decision buttons for known non-owner viewer contexts. - Surfaced watchdog decision failures through toast and inline error text. - Threaded `companyId` through the issue activity run ledger so access checks are company-scoped. - Added IssueRunLedger coverage for non-owner viewers. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssueRunLedger.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ## Risks - Medium-low risk. This is a UI gating change backed by existing server authorization. - Local implicit and instance-admin board contexts continue to show watchdog decision controls. - No migrations. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled with shell/GitHub/Paperclip API access. Context window was not reported by the 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
5a0c1979cf | [codex] Add runtime lifecycle recovery and live issue visibility (#4419) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9a8d219949 |
[codex] Stabilize tests and local maintenance assets (#4423)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - A fast-moving control plane needs stable local tests and repeatable local maintenance tools so contributors can safely split and review work > - Several route suites needed stronger isolation, Codex manual model selection needed a faster-mode option, and local browser cleanup missed Playwright's headless shell binary > - Storybook static output also needed to be preserved as a generated review artifact from the working branch > - This pull request groups the test/local-dev maintenance pieces so they can be reviewed separately from product runtime changes > - The benefit is more predictable contributor verification and cleaner local maintenance without mixing these changes into feature PRs ## What Changed - Added stable Vitest runner support and serialized route/authz test isolation. - Fixed workspace runtime authz route mocks and stabilized Claude/company-import related assertions. - Allowed Codex fast mode for manually selected models. - Broadened the agent browser cleanup script to detect `chrome-headless-shell` as well as Chrome for Testing. - Preserved generated Storybook static output from the source branch. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-routes-authz.test.ts src/__tests__/claude-local-execute.test.ts --config vitest.config.ts` from `server/` passed: 2 files, 19 tests. - `pnpm exec vitest run src/server/codex-args.test.ts --config vitest.config.ts` from `packages/adapters/codex-local/` passed: 1 file, 3 tests. - `bash -n scripts/kill-agent-browsers.sh && scripts/kill-agent-browsers.sh --dry` passed; dry-run detected `chrome-headless-shell` processes without killing them. - `test -f ui/storybook-static/index.html && test -f ui/storybook-static/assets/forms-editors.stories-Dry7qwx2.js` passed. - `git diff --check public-gh/master..pap-2228-test-local-maintenance -- . ':(exclude)ui/storybook-static'` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/company-import-export-e2e.test.ts --config cli/vitest.config.ts` did not complete in the isolated split worktree because `paperclipai run` exited during build prep with `TS2688: Cannot find type definition file for 'react'`; this appears to be caused by the worktree dependency symlink setup, not the code under test. - Confirmed this PR does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Risks - Medium risk: the stable Vitest runner changes how route/authz tests are scheduled. - Generated `ui/storybook-static` files are large and contain minified third-party output; `git diff --check` reports whitespace inside those generated assets, so reviewers may choose to drop or regenerate that artifact before merge. - No database migrations. > 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 shell, git, Paperclip API, and GitHub CLI tool use in the local Paperclip workspace. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Note: screenshot checklist item is not applicable to source UI behavior; the included Storybook static output is generated artifact preservation from the source branch. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
70679a3321 |
Add sandbox environment support (#4415)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The environment/runtime layer decides where agent work executes and how the control plane reaches those runtimes. > - Today Paperclip can run locally and over SSH, but sandboxed execution needs a first-class environment model instead of one-off adapter behavior. > - We also want sandbox providers to be pluggable so the core does not hardcode every provider implementation. > - This branch adds the Sandbox environment path, the provider contract, and a deterministic fake provider plugin. > - That required synchronized changes across shared contracts, plugin SDK surfaces, server runtime orchestration, and the UI environment/workspace flows. > - The result is that sandbox execution becomes a core control-plane capability while keeping provider implementations extensible and testable. ## What Changed - Added sandbox runtime support to the environment execution path, including runtime URL discovery, sandbox execution targeting, orchestration, and heartbeat integration. - Added plugin-provider support for sandbox environments so providers can be supplied via plugins instead of hardcoded server logic. - Added the fake sandbox provider plugin with deterministic behavior suitable for local and automated testing. - Updated shared types, validators, plugin protocol definitions, and SDK helpers to carry sandbox provider and workspace-runtime contracts across package boundaries. - Updated server routes and services so companies can create sandbox environments, select them for work, and execute work through the sandbox runtime path. - Updated the UI environment and workspace surfaces to expose sandbox environment configuration and selection. - Added test coverage for sandbox runtime behavior, provider seams, environment route guards, orchestration, and the fake provider plugin. ## Verification - Ran locally before the final fixture-only scrub: - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run` - `pnpm build` - Ran locally after the final scrub amend: - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/runtime-api.test.ts` - Reviewer spot checks: - create a sandbox environment backed by the fake provider plugin - run work through that environment - confirm sandbox provider execution does not inherit host secrets implicitly ## Risks - This touches shared contracts, plugin SDK plumbing, server runtime orchestration, and UI environment/workspace flows, so regressions would likely show up as cross-layer mismatches rather than isolated type errors. - Runtime URL discovery and sandbox callback selection are sensitive to host/bind configuration; if that logic is wrong, sandbox-backed callbacks may fail even when execution succeeds. - The fake provider plugin is intentionally deterministic and test-oriented; future providers may expose capability gaps that this branch does not yet cover. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent on a GPT-5-class backend in the Paperclip/Codex harness. Exact backend model ID is not exposed in-session. Tool-assisted workflow with shell execution, file editing, git history inspection, and local test 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
|
77a72e28c2 |
[codex] Polish issue composer and long document display (#4420)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Issue comments and documents are the main working surface where operators and agents collaborate > - File drops, markdown editing, and long issue descriptions need to feel predictable because they sit directly in the task execution loop > - The composer had edge cases around drag targets, attachment feedback, image drops, and long markdown content crowding the page > - This pull request polishes the issue composer, hardens markdown editor regressions, and adds a fold curtain for long issue descriptions/documents > - The benefit is a calmer issue detail surface that handles uploads and long work products without hiding state or breaking layout ## What Changed - Scoped issue-composer drag/drop behavior so the composer owns file drops without turning the whole thread into a competing drop target. - Added clearer attachment upload feedback for non-image files and image-drop stability coverage. - Hardened markdown editor and markdown body handling around HTML-like tag regressions. - Added `FoldCurtain` and wired it into issue descriptions and issue documents so long markdown previews can expand/collapse. - Added Storybook coverage for the fold curtain state. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx --config ui/vitest.config.ts` passed: 3 files, 75 tests. - `git diff --check public-gh/master..pap-2228-editor-composer-polish -- . ':(exclude)ui/storybook-static'` passed. - Confirmed this PR does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Risks - Low-to-medium risk: this changes user-facing composer/drop behavior and long markdown display. - The fold curtain uses DOM measurement and `ResizeObserver`; reviewers should check browser behavior for very long descriptions and documents. - No database migrations. > 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 shell, git, Paperclip API, and GitHub CLI tool use in the local Paperclip workspace. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Note: screenshots were not newly captured during branch splitting; the UI states are covered by component tests and a Storybook story. --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8f1cd0474f |
[codex] Improve transient recovery and Codex model refresh (#4383)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Adapter execution and retry classification decide whether agent work pauses, retries, or recovers automatically > - Transient provider failures need to be classified precisely so Paperclip does not convert retryable upstream conditions into false hard failures > - At the same time, operators need an up-to-date model list for Codex-backed agents and prompts should nudge agents toward targeted verification instead of repo-wide sweeps > - This pull request tightens transient recovery classification for Claude and Codex, updates the agent prompt guidance, and adds Codex model refresh support end-to-end > - The benefit is better automatic retry behavior plus fresher operator-facing model configuration ## What Changed - added Codex usage-limit retry-window parsing and Claude extra-usage transient classification - normalized the heartbeat transient-recovery contract across adapter executions and heartbeat scheduling - documented that deferred comment wakes only reopen completed issues for human/comment-reopen interactions, while system follow-ups leave closed work closed - updated adapter-utils prompt guidance to prefer targeted verification - added Codex model refresh support in the server route, registry, shared types, and agent config form - added adapter/server tests covering the new parsing, retry scheduling, and model-refresh behavior ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-claude-local packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/parse.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/parse.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/adapter-model-refresh-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-models.test.ts server/src/__tests__/claude-local-execute.test.ts server/src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts` ## Risks - Moderate behavior risk: retry classification affects whether runs auto-recover or block, so mistakes here could either suppress needed retries or over-retry real failures - Low workflow risk: deferred comment wake reopening is intentionally scoped to human/comment-reopen interactions so system follow-ups do not revive completed issues unexpectedly > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex GPT-5-based coding agent with tool use and code execution in the Codex CLI environment ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4fdbbeced3 |
[codex] Refine markdown issue reference rendering (#4382)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Task references are a core part of how operators understand issue relationships across the UI > - Those references appear both in markdown bodies and in sidebar relationship panels > - The rendering had drifted between surfaces, and inline markdown pills were reading awkwardly inside prose and lists > - This pull request unifies the underlying issue-reference treatment, routes issue descriptions through `MarkdownBody`, and switches inline markdown references to a cleaner text-link presentation > - The benefit is more consistent issue-reference UX with better readability in markdown-heavy views ## What Changed - unified sidebar and markdown issue-reference rendering around the shared issue-reference components - routed resting issue descriptions through `MarkdownBody` so description previews inherit the richer issue-reference treatment - replaced inline markdown pill chrome with a cleaner inline reference presentation for prose contexts - added and updated UI tests for `MarkdownBody` and `InlineEditor` ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/components/InlineEditor.test.tsx` ## Risks - Moderate UI risk: issue-reference rendering now differs intentionally between inline markdown and relationship sidebars, so regressions would show up as styling or hover-preview mismatches > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex GPT-5-based coding agent with tool use and code execution in the Codex CLI environment ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7ad225a198 |
[codex] Improve issue thread review flow (#4381)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Issue detail is where operators coordinate review, approvals, and follow-up work with active runs > - That thread UI needs to surface blockers, descendants, review handoffs, and reply ergonomics clearly enough for humans to guide agent work > - Several small gaps in the issue-thread flow were making review and navigation clunkier than necessary > - This pull request improves the reply composer, descendant/blocker presentation, interaction folding, and review-request handoff plumbing together as one cohesive issue-thread workflow slice > - The benefit is a cleaner operator review loop without changing the broader task model ## What Changed - restored and refined the floating reply composer behavior in the issue thread - folded expired confirmation interactions and improved post-submit thread scrolling behavior - surfaced descendant issue context and inline blocker/paused-assignee notices on the issue detail view - tightened large-board first paint behavior in `IssuesList` - added loose review-request handoffs through the issue execution-policy/update path and covered them with tests ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-tree.test.ts ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts -t "coerces executor handoff patches into workflow-controlled review wakes|wakes the return assignee with execution_changes_requested"` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` ## Visual Evidence - UI layout changes are covered by the focused issue-thread component and issue-detail tests listed above. Browser screenshots were not attachable from this automated greploop environment, so reviewers should use the running preview for final visual confirmation. ## Risks - Moderate UI-flow risk: these changes touch the issue detail experience in multiple spots, so regressions would most likely show up as thread-layout quirks or incorrect review-handoff behavior > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex GPT-5-based coding agent with tool use and code execution in the Codex CLI environment ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots or documented the visual verification path - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
e4995bbb1c |
Add SSH environment support (#4358)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The environments subsystem already models execution environments, but before this branch there was no end-to-end SSH-backed runtime path for agents to actually run work against a remote box > - That meant agents could be configured around environment concepts without a reliable way to execute adapter sessions remotely, sync workspace state, and preserve run context across supported adapters > - We also need environment selection to participate in normal Paperclip control-plane behavior: agent defaults, project/issue selection, route validation, and environment probing > - Because this capability is still experimental, the UI surface should be easy to hide and easy to remove later without undoing the underlying implementation > - This pull request adds SSH environment execution support across the runtime, adapters, routes, schema, and tests, then puts the visible environment-management UI behind an experimental flag > - The benefit is that we can validate real SSH-backed agent execution now while keeping the user-facing controls safely gated until the feature is ready to come out of experimentation ## What Changed - Added SSH-backed execution target support in the shared adapter runtime, including remote workspace preparation, skill/runtime asset sync, remote session handling, and workspace restore behavior after runs. - Added SSH execution coverage for supported local adapters, plus remote execution tests across Claude, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, OpenCode, and Pi. - Added environment selection and environment-management backend support needed for SSH execution, including route/service work, validation, probing, and agent default environment persistence. - Added CLI support for SSH environment lab verification and updated related docs/tests. - Added the `enableEnvironments` experimental flag and gated the environment UI behind it on company settings, agent configuration, and project configuration surfaces. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/cursor-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/gemini-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/opencode-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts packages/adapters/pi-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/new-agent-hire-payload.test.ts ui/src/lib/new-agent-runtime-config.test.ts` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - Manual verification on a branch-local dev server: - enabled the experimental flag - created an SSH environment - created a Linux Claude agent using that environment - confirmed a run executed on the Linux box and synced workspace changes back ## Risks - Medium: this touches runtime execution flow across multiple adapters, so regressions would likely show up in remote session setup, workspace sync, or environment selection precedence. - The UI flag reduces exposure, but the underlying runtime and route changes are still substantial and rely on migration correctness. - The change set is broad across adapters, control-plane services, migrations, and UI gating, so review should pay close attention to environment-selection precedence and remote workspace lifecycle behavior. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via Paperclip's local Codex adapter, GPT-5-class coding model with tool use and code execution in the local repo workspace. The local adapter does not surface a more specific public model version string in this branch workflow. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f98c348e2b |
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping descendant execution and wake behavior coherent. > - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts, server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc. > - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments` migration. > - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto `paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind. > - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to `0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single PR. > - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration conflicts. ## What Changed - Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree pause, cancel, and restore operations. - Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue detail subtree controls. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to `0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream `0065_environments`. - Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200 OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201 Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts` - `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` ## Risks - This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases. - The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream `0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final `0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that lands. - The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could have assumed. > 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 in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window 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 checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a957394420 |
[codex] Add structured issue-thread interactions (#4244)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators supervise that work through issues, comments, approvals, and the board UI. > - Some agent proposals need structured board/user decisions, not hidden markdown conventions or heavyweight governed approvals. > - Issue-thread interactions already provide a natural thread-native surface for proposed tasks and questions. > - This pull request extends that surface with request confirmations, richer interaction cards, and agent/plugin/MCP helpers. > - The benefit is that plan approvals and yes/no decisions become explicit, auditable, and resumable without losing the single-issue workflow. ## What Changed - Added persisted issue-thread interactions for suggested tasks, structured questions, and request confirmations. - Added board UI cards for interaction review, selection, question answers, and accept/reject confirmation flows. - Added MCP and plugin SDK helpers for creating interaction cards from agents/plugins. - Updated agent wake instructions, onboarding assets, Paperclip skill docs, and public docs to prefer structured confirmations for issue-scoped decisions. - Rebased the branch onto `public-gh/master` and renumbered branch migrations to `0063` and `0064`; the idempotency migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` for old branch users. ## Verification - `git diff --check public-gh/master..HEAD` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts packages/mcp-server/src/tools.test.ts packages/shared/src/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts server/src/services/issue-thread-interactions.test.ts` -> 9 files / 79 tests passed - `pnpm -r typecheck` -> passed, including `packages/db` migration numbering check ## Risks - Medium: this adds a new issue-thread interaction model across db/shared/server/ui/plugin surfaces. - Migration risk is reduced by placing this branch after current master migrations (`0063`, `0064`) and making the idempotency column add idempotent for users who applied the old branch numbering. - UI interaction behavior is covered by component tests, but this PR does not include browser screenshots. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-class coding agent runtime. Exact model ID and context window are not exposed in this Paperclip run; tool use and local shell/code execution were enabled. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
014aa0eb2d |
[codex] Clear stale queued comment targets (#4234)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators interact with agent work through issue threads and queued comments. > - When the selected comment target becomes stale, the composer can keep pointing at an invalid target after thread state changes. > - That makes follow-up comments easier to misroute and harder to reason about. > - This pull request clears stale queued comment targets and covers the behavior with tests. > - The benefit is more predictable issue-thread commenting during live agent work. ## What Changed - Clears queued comment targets when they no longer match the current issue thread state. - Adjusts issue detail comment-target handling to avoid stale target reuse. - Adds regression tests for optimistic issue comment target behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments.test.ts` ## Risks - Low risk; scoped to comment-target state handling in the issue UI. - No migrations. > Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is a focused UI reliability fix, not a new roadmap-level feature. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled repository editing and local test 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bcbbb41a4b |
[codex] Harden heartbeat runtime cleanup (#4233)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The heartbeat runtime is the control-plane path that turns issue assignments into agent runs and recovers after process exits. > - Several edge cases could leave high-volume reads unbounded, stale runtime services visible, blocked dependency wakes too eager, or terminal adapter processes still around after output finished. > - These problems make operator views noisy and make long-running agent work less predictable. > - This pull request tightens the runtime/read paths and adds focused regression coverage. > - The benefit is safer heartbeat execution and cleaner runtime state without changing the public task model. ## What Changed - Bounded high-volume issue/log reads in runtime code paths. - Hardened heartbeat handling for blocked dependency wakes and terminal run cleanup. - Added adapter process cleanup coverage for terminal output cases. - Added workspace runtime control tests for stale command matching and stopped services. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx` ## Risks - Medium risk because heartbeat cleanup and runtime filtering affect active agent execution paths. - No migrations. > Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is runtime hardening and bug-fix work, not a new roadmap-level feature. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled repository editing and local test 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
73ef40e7be |
[codex] Sandbox dynamic adapter UI parsers (#4225)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for AI-agent companies. > - External adapters can provide UI parser code that the board loads dynamically for run transcript rendering. > - Running adapter-provided parser code directly in the board page gives that parser access to same-origin browser state. > - This PR narrows that surface by evaluating dynamically loaded external adapter UI parser code in a dedicated browser Web Worker with a constrained postMessage protocol. > - The worker here is a frontend isolation boundary for adapter UI parser JavaScript; it is not Paperclip's server plugin-worker system and it is not a server-side job runner. ## What Changed - Runs dynamically loaded external adapter UI parsers inside a dedicated Web Worker instead of importing/evaluating them directly in the board page. - Adds a narrow postMessage protocol for parser initialization and line parsing. - Caches completed async parse results and notifies the adapter registry so transcript recomputation can synchronously drain the final parsed line. - Disables common worker network, persistence, child worker, Blob/object URL, and WebRTC escape APIs inside the parser worker bootstrap. - Handles worker error messages after initialization and drains pending callbacks on worker termination or mid-session worker error. - Adds focused regression coverage for the parser worker lockdown and unused protocol removal. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run --config ui/vitest.config.ts ui/src/adapters/sandboxed-parser-worker.test.ts` - `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit --target es2021 --moduleResolution bundler --module esnext --jsx react-jsx --lib dom,es2021 --skipLibCheck ui/src/adapters/dynamic-loader.ts ui/src/adapters/sandboxed-parser-worker.ts ui/src/adapters/sandboxed-parser-worker.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` was attempted; it reached existing unrelated failures in HeartbeatRun test/storybook fixtures and missing Storybook type resolution, with no adapter-module errors surfaced. - PR #4225 checks on current head `34c9da00`: `policy`, `e2e`, `verify`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` are all `SUCCESS`. - Greptile Review on current head `34c9da00` reached 5/5. ## Risks - Medium risk: parser execution is now asynchronous through a worker while the existing parser interface is synchronous, so transcript updates should be watched with external adapters. - Some adapter parser bundles may rely on direct ESM `export` syntax or browser APIs that are no longer available inside the worker lockdown. - The worker lockdown is a hardening layer around external parser code, not a complete browser security sandbox for arbitrary untrusted applications. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in this Paperclip heartbeat environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Dotta
|
a26e1288b6 |
[codex] Polish issue board workflows (#4224)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Human operators supervise that work through issue lists, issue detail, comments, inbox groups, markdown references, and profile/activity surfaces > - The branch had many small UI fixes that improve the operator loop but do not need to ship with backend runtime migrations > - These changes belong together as board workflow polish because they affect scanning, navigation, issue context, comment state, and markdown clarity > - This pull request groups the UI-only slice so it can merge independently from runtime/backend changes > - The benefit is a clearer board experience with better issue context, steadier optimistic updates, and more predictable keyboard navigation ## What Changed - Improves issue properties, sub-issue actions, blocker chips, and issue list/detail refresh behavior. - Adds blocker context above the issue composer and stabilizes queued/interrupted comment UI state. - Improves markdown issue/GitHub link rendering and opens external markdown links in a new tab. - Adds inbox group keyboard navigation and fold/unfold support. - Polishes activity/avatar/profile/settings/workspace presentation details. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts ui/src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments.test.ts` ## Risks - Low to medium risk: changes are UI-focused but cover high-traffic issue and inbox surfaces. - This branch intentionally does not include the backend runtime changes from the companion PR; where UI calls newer API filters, unsupported servers should continue to fail visibly through existing API error handling. - Visual screenshots were not captured in this heartbeat; targeted component/helper tests cover the changed behavior. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent runtime, shell/git tool use enabled. Exact hosted model build and context window are not exposed in this Paperclip heartbeat environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
