mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-26 18:31:34 +01:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators use the Mine inbox to track work that needs their attention. > - Old terminal work can make that inbox difficult to review. > - Inbox cleanup must not change issues, branches, or workspaces. > - Operators also need to approve each cleanup set before Paperclip hides any item. > - This pull request adds a garden-inbox skill with scan, confirmation, and apply stages. > - The benefit is a safe and repeatable inbox cleanup workflow with an explicit undo path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description ### Subsystem affected Cross-cutting. This change adds an agent skill that calls existing inbox, workspace, interaction, and archive APIs. ### Problem or motivation Old terminal inbox entries can hide current work. Manual cleanup is slow and can select the wrong entries. A single global result limit can also hide rows from a large inbox. ### Proposed solution Add a zero-dependency skill that classifies inbox rows, requests checkbox confirmation, and archives only accepted rows for the current user. Scan each relevant status separately, remove duplicate rows, and report partial coverage if a status reaches its result limit. ### Alternatives considered Automatic archive was rejected because it removes operator control. A report-only tool was rejected because it does not complete the cleanup workflow. ### Roadmap alignment This is an agent skill. It does not add a new core product capability or duplicate a planned roadmap item. ### Additional context The apply stage changes only per-user inbox visibility. It provides the archive API undo path for every successful item. A GitHub search found no separate duplicate implementation; this pull request is the existing result for the search terms. ## What Changed - Added the `garden-inbox` skill workflow and command reference. - Added a zero-dependency Node script with `scan`, `confirm`, and `apply` commands. - Added four exclusive classification buckets with machine-readable reasons. - Added per-status Mine scans, cross-status deduplication, and partial-coverage reports for capped status results. - Added chunked checkbox confirmations with deterministic idempotency keys. - Added strict accepted-option validation, per-item archive results, and undo instructions. - Added Node tests for classification, fail-safe inspection, accepted selections, tampering, JWT decoding, URL normalization, and capped scans. ## Verification - Passed `node --check .agents/skills/garden-inbox/scripts/garden-inbox.mjs`. - Passed `node --test .agents/skills/garden-inbox/scripts/garden-inbox.test.mjs`. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` with inherited Paperclip runtime identity variables removed. - Passed `pnpm build` with inherited Paperclip runtime identity variables removed. - Ran `pnpm test:run`: 3,241 tests passed and 1 test skipped. One unrelated current-base server integration assertion failed because it received `heartbeat.scheduling_suppressed` instead of `issue_commented` in `plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts`. The exact test failed the same way on one focused rerun. This pull request changes only `.agents/skills/garden-inbox/**`. ## Risks - Low risk. The skill is opt-in and does not change server or UI behavior. - `scan` and `confirm` do not mutate issues. `apply` only updates per-user inbox archive visibility for accepted option IDs. - API or workspace inspection failures keep items out of the archive candidate set. - A status result at the configured limit produces a visible partial-coverage warning instead of claiming a complete scan. > 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. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI `gpt-5.6-sol` through the Codex local adapter. The runtime did not expose the context window size. The model used high-reasoning coding, shell, API, and code-execution tools. ## 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>