mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-22 00:30:19 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
cc88b61c09
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use the feature map to select verification recipes. > - The repository needs separate skills to create a verifier, maintain recipes, and run checks. > - Shared recipes must match current routes, controls, and prerequisites. > - This pull request adds portable verification skills and updates the existing map. > - The benefit is a repeatable verification workflow with clear ownership and evidence limits. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15288, which added the existing feature map. The related test cleanup in #15978 changes test ownership; this PR changes skill instructions and recipes. **Issue type** Missing documentation and outdated verification instructions. **Where is the issue?** The project-local skills in `.agents/skills/` and the recipes in `feature-map/`. **What's wrong?** The repository lacks the portable creation and maintenance skills. The verifier mixes live verification with map editing. Some recipes describe old controls or omit required flags, identities, and provider setup. **Suggested fix** Import the skills and their complete references from Paperclip's pstack fork. Keep the existing map in its current directory. Let the verifier read recipes and report drift. Let the maintenance skill update the map. ## What Changed - Add `create-verification-skill` and `maintain-verification-skill` from the portable fork of Poteto's pstack. Include invocation policies, all feature-map examples, self-contained attribution notices and the full MIT license in each skill folder. - Use the existing `feature-map/` directory and Poteto's recipe format. Omit the fork's separate runtime skill and runtime-skill dependencies because Paperclip supplies execution. - Add `verify-paperclip` with executable launch, readiness, onboarding, and cleanup helpers. Use isolated temporary data and separate evidence directories. - Make `verify-paperclip` consume the map and report recipe drift. Give map editing to `maintain-verification-skill`. - Review all 35 feature files and correct 30 recipes. Clarify routes, flags, current controls, persistence scope, and the limits of linked tests. - Remove the unrelated Conference Room flag change from the onboarding smoke helper. - Add a standard-library ownership test. It proves that doctor and stop reject a foreign checkout without stopping its live server. A delayed-exit fixture also proves cleanup waits for runtime exit. - Keep audit screenshots and scratch reports outside the repository. No product code, migrations, lockfile, or workflow changes. ## Verification - Passed after rebase: metadata validation for all three skills, Python syntax and executable checks, JavaScript syntax, 35-entry map/index consistency, relative links, license preservation, and `git diff --check`. - Ran one isolated live audit before rebase. Checked task persistence, document upload/download bytes, goal hierarchy, project edits, search, local process Agent Chat, question replies, queued-message discard/stop, and a harmless loopback MCP call. - Checked local settings and draft flows. Synthetic cost events reached a small budget limit and paused the test agent. These checks do not prove external model quality or provider billing. - Checked cleanup of the audit server, database, local MCP fixture, and workspace service inventory. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Greptile: 5/5 on commit `4344ac4df7`. The cleanup finding is fixed and its review thread is resolved. A fresh review is pending for the notice relocation. - Passed: `python3 -m unittest discover -s .agents/skills/verify-paperclip/tests -v`. Both tests pass: the foreign fixture stayed alive after rejection, and owned cleanup waited for delayed runtime exit. - Passed: `pnpm build`. - All GitHub CI checks were green on commit `4344ac4df7`. The cloud-auth browser shard passed after one retry for a disposed mocked API response. The notice relocation passed skill metadata, relative-link, and license-preservation checks; fresh CI/review is pending. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not complete. It was interrupted after nearly 30 minutes once the complete CI suite passed on the same commit. Exit code: 130. The new helper safety tests passed locally. The local full-suite checklist item stays unchecked. - Full live coverage is incomplete. Authenticated multi-user checks and external provider journeys need their own identities, credentials, and targets. - The corrected onboarding helper could not be re-tested after removing the flag mutation. Two fresh launches failed before server startup. Direct PostgreSQL initialization reported exhausted shared-memory IDs or limits. The host had free disk space. No host-wide limits or unrelated instances were changed. ## Risks - Recipe drift can return as the UI changes. The map records verification scope, not proof of a passed journey. - The new helpers assume a source checkout with installed dependencies, Python, Node, and `lsof`. The onboarding helper also needs Playwright. - The local audit found observations that need separate investigation: an action test returned fixture data while the connection control showed Off and native profiles existed; a failed status-card setup task left the card showing Setting up. Workspace service start also did not reach a running state. This PR does not change product behavior or redefine those outcomes as success. - The main audit trace did not finalize during browser shutdown. Screenshots, text captures, and iteration results were retained. - Live evidence was captured before rebase. The onboarding helper re-test and full provider/auth qualification remain incomplete. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size, or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, read-only source subagents, file edits, 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
50 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
50 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
# Cases and structured work records
|
||
|
||
The cases experiment exposes structured records with types, fields, parent/child relationships, activity, revisions, and related task work.
|
||
|
||
Implementation: [case list](../ui/src/pages/Cases.tsx), [case detail](../ui/src/pages/CaseDetail.tsx).
|
||
|
||
## Sub-features
|
||
|
||
- `browse`: search, filter, sort, group, and navigate case records.
|
||
- `structure`: inspect fields and parent/child relationships without losing matching descendants.
|
||
- `history`: inspect revisions and activity for a record.
|
||
- `task-links`: follow work associated with a case in both directions.
|
||
|
||
## How to get to it (user POV)
|
||
|
||
### `case-list`
|
||
|
||
Open `/cases` and switch between available grouped/tree views.
|
||
|
||
### `case-record`
|
||
|
||
Open `/cases/:caseIdentifier` or a task’s linked case.
|
||
|
||
## Driving it with Playwright and the Paperclip CLI
|
||
|
||
Preconditions: follow the [baseline](./README.md#before-driving-a-journey). Enable cases and prepare related records with different types/statuses plus an associated task.
|
||
|
||
### `case-list`
|
||
|
||
Automated: [case list](../ui/src/pages/Cases.test.tsx) covers filters, persisted view state, and keyboard/tree behavior with mocked data.
|
||
|
||
Manual: Search for a child, verify its parent context remains understandable, change filters/grouping/columns, and reload. Open the record by keyboard and direct link. Include empty results and terminal records.
|
||
|
||
### `case-record`
|
||
|
||
Automated: [case routes](../server/src/__tests__/cases-routes.test.ts) covers API behavior; [case fields](../ui/src/components/CaseFieldsPanel.test.tsx) covers field UI separately.
|
||
|
||
Manual: Change status or labels, reload, inspect activity, and follow child/task
|
||
links. Edit a case document and inspect its document revisions separately.
|
||
Arbitrary JSON fields are currently displayed without a general field editor.
|
||
Verify cross-company and invalid changes fail clearly. Distinguish a
|
||
pipeline-owned item from a stand-alone case.
|
||
|
||
## Gotchas
|
||
|
||
- A case is not a task execution; inspect linked tasks to prove work occurred.
|
||
- Feature gating and offered controls determine available actions. The API
|
||
accepts a string case type and arbitrary JSON fields; do not infer typed
|
||
case-field validation or a field-editing UI from those values.
|