PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-11-14 08:53:19 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	a0ac81e114	fix(ui): show task image results in compact thumbnail grids (#19626 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task feeds show agent messages, documents, and files in time order. > - Each image currently uses a full feed card. > - A turn with seven screenshots makes the conversation hard to scan. > - This pull request groups adjacent images from the same run in a compact grid. > - Users can scan the results and open each image in the existing gallery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Image results in task history and the live task feed. Current behavior Each image uses a separate full-width card. Native image upload receipt messages can also separate related screenshots. Proposed behavior Adjacent images from one run share a wrapping thumbnail grid. New image results join the grid. Documents, video, and authored messages keep their positions. The grid opens the existing gallery. Reason and benefit Users can see a batch of screenshots without scrolling past one large card for each file. Breaking changes The feed layout changes. The stored comments, files, APIs, and permissions do not change. Related public work: Refs #17228. Refs #8785. Refs #7667. These changes supplied the artifact cards and media gallery that this pull request reuses. ## What Changed - Add one image grouping function for settled history, turn history, and live results. Group only images with the same known run. Keep the first row key and each image key when results arrive. - Add a token-based grid that reuses the media artifact cards and image gallery. - Add an optional typed attachment-preparation marker to file registration and chat-file reuse. Preserve the marker through comment normalization. Use it with matching image, author, and run links to hide generated receipts. Keep the exact historical sentence as a fallback for old receipts. - Add nine production component stories with seven sample-account screenshots. Cover mobile, Classic, mixed results, single images, missing images, streaming, gallery navigation, and the complete feed projection. - Add grouping and production-feed regressions. Add 18 browser cases across light and dark themes. - Improve contrast for the shared fallback label and gallery counter after the accessibility checks found low contrast. - Match alternate original-image paths when opening the gallery. Keep a separate Open original link beside Download in the gallery. - Record the feed layout in DESIGN.md. ## Verification - Final qualification at `09b12381ce85bee6593050bd8a2fa18cbe2c45a6`: [required CI passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42317080212/job/128237094513), including typecheck, build, all test lanes, E2E, and verify. The snapshot has 58 successful check runs, three conditional skips, one neutral advisory job, and a successful legacy Snyk status. No pending or failed checks remain. Greptile and Paperclip Review both score this exact head 5/5; all review threads are resolved. - Current-head local checks: 544 focused UI tests passed across 11 files, with one existing skip. UI/shared typechecks and token gates pass. All 18 focused Storybook browser cases passed after the CSS merge, with retries disabled. - Two database integration cases verify file registration and chat-file reuse receipt markers. All 52 issue-validator tests and six upstream default-model tests passed. - Regressions failed before the fixes for unknown-run grouping, receipt wording, and authored progress text with an image. The repair uses a typed receipt marker and requires matching author, attachment, image, and run links before hiding a generated receipt. All five review findings are resolved. - Browser checks cover loaded images, wrapping columns, overflow, missing-image fallback, streaming stability, keyboard gallery navigation, original-file links, and downloads. Fixtures use production renderers. These checks do not prove deployed persistence or provider behavior and do not compare visual baselines. - Local limits: the preflight helper could not finish because Cargo was absent. The earlier low-memory server typecheck and dependency-free selector did not replace final-head CI. The now-passing final CI supplies broad typecheck, build, server, Runner, and E2E coverage. - Prior independent CI failures remain recorded: one Slack timer case passed a single diagnosed rerun; its exact timer cause was not proved. A later chat shard lost its self-hosted runner without a test assertion failure. The current revision passes that shard and all applicable gates. Master conflict resolution retained both image-grid and patch CSS rules. ## Risks - Images without a run ID remain separate. Messages and other resource types end each batch. - Receipt suppression requires a matching preparation marker or the exact legacy sentence, plus matching attachment, image work product, run, and author. Tests preserve human messages and native progress text with attachments. The optional marker uses existing JSON metadata and needs no database migration. - Shared gallery and fallback text now have stronger contrast. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex. The agent used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and browser tests. The runtime did not expose a more specific 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-11-06 18:42:22 -06:00
DottaandPaperclip	cd5f930558	Add shareable image galleries to task documents (#18157 ) <!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/247/changes/paperclip/247 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task documents hold plans, reports, and image evidence. > - Task attachments already have an image gallery. > - Inline document images had no gallery navigation or image links. > - This change gives each document a gallery that uses the existing modal. > - People can review the image sequence and share a link to one image. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Image review in task documents, including the side panel and Classic interface. Current behavior Inline document images do not open a gallery. People cannot move through them with arrow keys or share a link to one image. Proposed behavior Select an image to open the gallery. Use arrow keys or Previous and Next. The URL records its one-based position, for example `#document-report&image=2`. Reloading that URL opens the selected image. Revision links keep their exact saved content. Reason and benefit People can inspect a document's image evidence in reading order and share the exact view. No matching issue was found. The latest 300 open PR titles were checked for related document gallery work. ## What Changed - Add a document renderer that collects rendered images in reading order, including reference-style and repeated images. - Reuse the gallery modal with optional index-change and focus-return controls. - Keep the document owner in the saved tab identity when people switch between local and other-task documents. - Match explicit current-task document owners with local document tabs. Keep review and viewer parameters during gallery navigation. - Treat another Classic review receipt as a new request while image navigation retains the selected revision. - Make inline image controls work with a keyboard. Keep focus in the modal and restore focus on close. - Keep document, revision, review, and maximized-view link parameters during image navigation. - Fix a Classic revision-cache race found by the browser test. Recheck a pinned revision when the saved document head changes. - Update the feature and agent access maps. No new server API or permission is needed. ## Verification - Passed 119 focused tests for document galleries, the shared gallery, document rendering, the revision panel, and hash routing. - Passed all 3 Chromium journeys: desktop, mobile, and Classic. These use real uploads and saved document revisions. - The browser journeys also check explicit current-task owners, review parameters after reopening, other-task links after tab switches, and a second Classic review link after Return to latest. - Browser checks cover keyboard and button navigation, wraparound, shared-link reload, exact historical content, invalid positions, focus return and containment, scroll locking, and Escape, Close, and backdrop dismissal. - UI typecheck, token gates, map checks, and diff whitespace checks passed. - The UI production build passed in the browser harness. - Earlier browser runs found and then verified the Classic revision-cache fix. A later build exited 137 while the full test suite ran. The browser run passed after that suite stopped. - Full repository typecheck and build could not complete because Cargo is absent. The full repository test run did not complete within this sandbox. These checks remain subject to CI. ## Risks - Image positions follow document reading order. Editing an unpinned document can change those positions. A revision link retains the saved sequence. - The shared modal now uses Radix Escape handling. The existing gallery tests and nested mobile dialog journey pass. - No schema change or migration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID or context window size. Used reasoning, code editing, shell commands, and browser automation. ## 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>	2026-10-30 07:52:15 -05:00
Dotta	b4fccaa8c4	[codex] Unify issue media attachment gallery (#8785 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Issue detail pages and run output cards both render user-facing attachment previews > - Media attachments were handled through separate gallery entry points, so attachments from issue comments and issue output did not share one consistent viewing path > - A shared gallery path makes image browsing more predictable across the issue surface > - This pull request unifies the issue media attachment gallery behavior across attachments, output cards, and issue detail rendering > - The benefit is a more consistent image preview experience with focused regression coverage around the affected UI paths ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #8788 This PR fixes inconsistent issue media preview behavior across attachment and output surfaces. ## What Changed - Unified issue media attachment gallery behavior across issue attachments, issue output, output primary cards, and issue detail rendering. - Added image gallery modal coverage and regression tests for attachments, output image handling, keyboard navigation, and issue detail interactions. - Preserved the primary video output Open action while still allowing gallery browsing when a gallery handler is available. - Updated issue attachment and issue output helper logic to preserve shared image gallery metadata. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/ImageGalleryModal.test.tsx src/components/issue-output/IssueOutputSection.test.tsx src/components/IssueAttachmentsSection.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 47 tests passed. ## Risks Low to medium risk. The change is UI-scoped but touches shared issue attachment/output rendering paths, so regressions would most likely appear as image/video preview ordering, missing gallery entries, or incorrect non-image attachment 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 coding agent session with shell and git/GitHub CLI tool use. Exact serving revision and context window were 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 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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-06-30 07:53:40 -07:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

a0ac81e114

fix(ui): show task image results in compact thumbnail grids (#19626 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task feeds show agent messages, documents, and files in time order.
> - Each image currently uses a full feed card.
> - A turn with seven screenshots makes the conversation hard to scan.
> - This pull request groups adjacent images from the same run in a
compact grid.
> - Users can scan the results and open each image in the existing
gallery.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Image results in task history and the live task feed.

**Current behavior**

Each image uses a separate full-width card. Native image upload receipt
messages can also separate related screenshots.

**Proposed behavior**

Adjacent images from one run share a wrapping thumbnail grid. New image
results join the grid. Documents, video, and authored messages keep
their positions. The grid opens the existing gallery.

**Reason and benefit**

Users can see a batch of screenshots without scrolling past one large
card for each file.

**Breaking changes**

The feed layout changes. The stored comments, files, APIs, and
permissions do not change.

Related public work: Refs #17228. Refs #8785. Refs #7667. These changes
supplied the artifact cards and media gallery that this pull request
reuses.

## What Changed

- Add one image grouping function for settled history, turn history, and
live results. Group only images with the same known run. Keep the first
row key and each image key when results arrive.
- Add a token-based grid that reuses the media artifact cards and image
gallery.
- Add an optional typed attachment-preparation marker to file
registration and chat-file reuse. Preserve the marker through comment
normalization. Use it with matching image, author, and run links to hide
generated receipts. Keep the exact historical sentence as a fallback for
old receipts.
- Add nine production component stories with seven sample-account
screenshots. Cover mobile, Classic, mixed results, single images,
missing images, streaming, gallery navigation, and the complete feed
projection.
- Add grouping and production-feed regressions. Add 18 browser cases
across light and dark themes.
- Improve contrast for the shared fallback label and gallery counter
after the accessibility checks found low contrast.
- Match alternate original-image paths when opening the gallery. Keep a
separate Open original link beside Download in the gallery.
- Record the feed layout in DESIGN.md.

## Verification

- Final qualification at `09b12381ce85bee6593050bd8a2fa18cbe2c45a6`:
[required CI
passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42317080212/job/128237094513),
including typecheck, build, all test lanes, E2E, and verify. The
snapshot has 58 successful check runs, three conditional skips, one
neutral advisory job, and a successful legacy Snyk status. No pending or
failed checks remain. Greptile and Paperclip Review both score this
exact head 5/5; all review threads are resolved.

- Current-head local checks: 544 focused UI tests passed across 11
files, with one existing skip. UI/shared typechecks and token gates
pass. All 18 focused Storybook browser cases passed after the CSS merge,
with retries disabled.
- Two database integration cases verify file registration and chat-file
reuse receipt markers. All 52 issue-validator tests and six upstream
default-model tests passed.
- Regressions failed before the fixes for unknown-run grouping, receipt
wording, and authored progress text with an image. The repair uses a
typed receipt marker and requires matching author, attachment, image,
and run links before hiding a generated receipt. All five review
findings are resolved.
- Browser checks cover loaded images, wrapping columns, overflow,
missing-image fallback, streaming stability, keyboard gallery
navigation, original-file links, and downloads. Fixtures use production
renderers. These checks do not prove deployed persistence or provider
behavior and do not compare visual baselines.
- Local limits: the preflight helper could not finish because Cargo was
absent. The earlier low-memory server typecheck and dependency-free
selector did not replace final-head CI. The now-passing final CI
supplies broad typecheck, build, server, Runner, and E2E coverage.
- Prior independent CI failures remain recorded: one Slack timer case
passed a single diagnosed rerun; its exact timer cause was not proved. A
later chat shard lost its self-hosted runner without a test assertion
failure. The current revision passes that shard and all applicable
gates. Master conflict resolution retained both image-grid and patch CSS
rules.

## Risks

- Images without a run ID remain separate. Messages and other resource
types end each batch.
- Receipt suppression requires a matching preparation marker or the
exact legacy sentence, plus matching attachment, image work product,
run, and author. Tests preserve human messages and native progress text
with attachments. The optional marker uses existing JSON metadata and
needs no database migration.
- Shared gallery and fallback text now have stronger contrast.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex. The agent used reasoning, repository tools,
code execution, and browser tests. The runtime did not expose a more
specific 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-11-06 18:42:22 -06:00

DottaandPaperclip

cd5f930558

Add shareable image galleries to task documents (#18157 )

<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/247/changes/paperclip/247
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task documents hold plans, reports, and image evidence.
> - Task attachments already have an image gallery.
> - Inline document images had no gallery navigation or image links.
> - This change gives each document a gallery that uses the existing
modal.
> - People can review the image sequence and share a link to one image.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Image review in task documents, including the side panel and Classic
interface.

**Current behavior**

Inline document images do not open a gallery. People cannot move through
them with arrow keys or share a link to one image.

**Proposed behavior**

Select an image to open the gallery. Use arrow keys or Previous and
Next. The URL records its one-based position, for example
`#document-report&image=2`. Reloading that URL opens the selected image.
Revision links keep their exact saved content.

**Reason and benefit**

People can inspect a document's image evidence in reading order and
share the exact view.

No matching issue was found. The latest 300 open PR titles were checked
for related document gallery work.

## What Changed

- Add a document renderer that collects rendered images in reading
order, including reference-style and repeated images.
- Reuse the gallery modal with optional index-change and focus-return
controls.
- Keep the document owner in the saved tab identity when people switch
between local and other-task documents.
- Match explicit current-task document owners with local document tabs.
Keep review and viewer parameters during gallery navigation.
- Treat another Classic review receipt as a new request while image
navigation retains the selected revision.
- Make inline image controls work with a keyboard. Keep focus in the
modal and restore focus on close.
- Keep document, revision, review, and maximized-view link parameters
during image navigation.
- Fix a Classic revision-cache race found by the browser test. Recheck a
pinned revision when the saved document head changes.
- Update the feature and agent access maps. No new server API or
permission is needed.

## Verification

- Passed 119 focused tests for document galleries, the shared gallery,
document rendering, the revision panel, and hash routing.
- Passed all 3 Chromium journeys: desktop, mobile, and Classic. These
use real uploads and saved document revisions.
- The browser journeys also check explicit current-task owners, review
parameters after reopening, other-task links after tab switches, and a
second Classic review link after Return to latest.
- Browser checks cover keyboard and button navigation, wraparound,
shared-link reload, exact historical content, invalid positions, focus
return and containment, scroll locking, and Escape, Close, and backdrop
dismissal.
- UI typecheck, token gates, map checks, and diff whitespace checks
passed.
- The UI production build passed in the browser harness.
- Earlier browser runs found and then verified the Classic
revision-cache fix. A later build exited 137 while the full test suite
ran. The browser run passed after that suite stopped.
- Full repository typecheck and build could not complete because Cargo
is absent. The full repository test run did not complete within this
sandbox. These checks remain subject to CI.

## Risks

- Image positions follow document reading order. Editing an unpinned
document can change those positions. A revision link retains the saved
sequence.
- The shared modal now uses Radix Escape handling. The existing gallery
tests and nested mobile dialog journey pass.
- No schema change or migration.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The runtime did not expose a more specific
model ID or context window size. Used reasoning, code editing, shell
commands, and browser automation.

## 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>

2026-10-30 07:52:15 -05:00

Dotta

b4fccaa8c4

[codex] Unify issue media attachment gallery (#8785 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issue detail pages and run output cards both render user-facing
attachment previews
> - Media attachments were handled through separate gallery entry
points, so attachments from issue comments and issue output did not
share one consistent viewing path
> - A shared gallery path makes image browsing more predictable across
the issue surface
> - This pull request unifies the issue media attachment gallery
behavior across attachments, output cards, and issue detail rendering
> - The benefit is a more consistent image preview experience with
focused regression coverage around the affected UI paths

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #8788

This PR fixes inconsistent issue media preview behavior across
attachment and output surfaces.

## What Changed

- Unified issue media attachment gallery behavior across issue
attachments, issue output, output primary cards, and issue detail
rendering.
- Added image gallery modal coverage and regression tests for
attachments, output image handling, keyboard navigation, and issue
detail interactions.
- Preserved the primary video output Open action while still allowing
gallery browsing when a gallery handler is available.
- Updated issue attachment and issue output helper logic to preserve
shared image gallery metadata.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/ImageGalleryModal.test.tsx
src/components/issue-output/IssueOutputSection.test.tsx
src/components/IssueAttachmentsSection.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- Result: 4 files passed, 47 tests passed.

## Risks

Low to medium risk. The change is UI-scoped but touches shared issue
attachment/output rendering paths, so regressions would most likely
appear as image/video preview ordering, missing gallery entries, or
incorrect non-image attachment 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 coding agent session with shell and git/GitHub CLI
tool use. Exact serving revision and context window were 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 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

2026-06-30 07:53:40 -07:00