## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task pages must make the current instruction and recent conversation readable quickly. > - Compact startup avoids reading all earlier messages and run activity. > - Every URL fragment previously selected the full-history path, even for documents. > - Saved document cards also arrived after the conversation was visible. PR statistics could add another row later. > - This pull request keeps anchors compact and reveals the saved conversation structure together. > - The benefit is stable reading position without loading unrelated history. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #17593 introduced compact startup. #14667 covers earlier reveal and scroll work. This fix retains the bounded history contract. **What happened?** Opening a task document link loaded all task history. Ordinary cold opens could reveal messages before saved document cards and plans arrived. Later PR metadata added a statistics row and changed card height. **Expected behavior** Every URL fragment keeps compact startup. Document links open their pane. Older-comment links fetch only the target comment. Saved cards keep their geometry after first reveal. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a task with many comments, a saved plan, documents and saved PR work products. 2. Delay the enriched task response and open the task. Observe cards inserted after messages appear. 3. Open a document fragment. Observe full comment, activity and run reads. 4. Delay PR metadata refresh. Observe each card grow when diff counts arrive. ## What Changed - Remove fragment and tab checks from automatic history expansion. Resolve validated comment UUIDs through the authorized single-comment endpoint, encode their path components, retain fetched targets across document navigation, and preserve cancellation/deletion cache updates. - Include the saved plan, document metadata and local work-product projection in the core task read. Skip recovery, workspace and related-task enrichment. Do not refresh providers. Summary queries no longer select other document bodies. - Seed saved work-product and plan queries from core, including already pending or errored reads, without replacing known lists or an authoritative empty result. Coordinate the bounded recent reads, saved cards, latest transcript and settled initial pane width before first reveal. Keep the thread and composer mounted during refresh and explicit expansion. - Open continuation summaries in the document pane. Reserve PR statistics geometry while provider metadata loads. - Add a reusable synthetic local task, nine browser checks, frame measurements and video. Extend the PostgreSQL core-route fixture with a saved PR row and assert its identity, URL, state and stored metadata survive the response. Update design guidance and capability maps. ## Verification - Red: visible document/plan cards changed from 0 to 1 to 4; thread height grew from 690 to 1,432 pixels. Green: all seven saved cards appear before reveal, with constant thread height and zero per-card movement in the final reviewed browser run. The final 1,492-pixel layout includes the reserved PR statistics lines. - Red: delayed PR diff counts changed all three cards from 62 to 82 pixels. Green: their heights stay at 82 pixels before and after metadata refresh. - Nine browser journeys pass: delayed enrichment, document/comment/unknown/continuation anchors, document clicks and explicit history expansion with a retained draft, missing-comment retry, delayed PR statistics, and retained older-comment position after document navigation. - 583 focused UI tests passed on `c91fa107ba`. After the plan-cache follow-up, all 212 affected page/cache/plan-hook tests and UI typecheck pass, including 14 plan-hook cases. The original 16 focused PostgreSQL tests passed for the server changes. - Merge-review red: holding the duplicate stored work-products read blocked the first reveal past 10 seconds despite core already containing the saved cards. Both empty and populated core projections now reveal while that request remains pending. Malformed-comment tests prove no target request is made; API tests prove path encoding and abort-signal forwarding. - The populated core-route test now inserts a real saved PR work product alongside the plan and documents, then checks the complete saved projection through HTTP. All ten task cold-open PostgreSQL tests pass. - Plan-cache review red: an existing pending or errored plan query prevented the saved core plan from reaching the consumer. Four real-hook cases failed before the data-presence fix and pass afterward, for both present and absent plans. A separately fetched newer plan or known absent plan remains authoritative. - Further layout red: the initial properties pane reduced visible thread width from 775 to 742 pixels after reveal. The reveal now waits for two stable width frames; the browser check includes width, height, card counts and per-card geometry. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed for the original change; UI typecheck and build pass after review fixes. Token, module-boundary and map checks pass. `pnpm test:run` was stopped after about 15 minutes in the serialized server lane. No full local test-suite pass is claimed. On the earlier head, hosted build/typecheck and all Vitest lanes passed; one E2E shard failed because the agent-configuration clipboard helper copied page text into its YAML parser. On `c91fa107ba`, Greptile was 5/5 and every E2E shard passed, including the earlier clipboard case. One unchanged Discord chat-binding test in server shard 8 returned false after 185 ms; its 16-test integration file passes locally without changes. The CI cause remains unestablished. On `be436ce492`, both server shard 8 and E2E shard 7 passed without changing those tests or their product code. On final head `e357b3bced`, all CI jobs pass, including full general and serialized tests, all eight E2E shards, typecheck, build and the aggregate verification gate. Exact-head Greptile is 5/5 with no findings. The overall status rollup contains 55 successes, two intentionally skipped Storybook checks and a neutral Paperclip Review. That advisory review ended without a complete assessment; all previously posted findings are resolved and it added no current findings. - Test startup exceeded an initial 5-second deadline once while development assets and other checks were active. The final browser checks allow 10 seconds. These runs establish geometry and bounded requests; they do not establish a reliable latency improvement. An initial 503 error fixture exercised global reconnect/backoff. The target-comment failure test uses a terminal 404. - Browser data is synthetic. Provider metadata is simulated for the delayed-response check. No staging deployment or live provider execution is claimed. ## Risks - Core task reads now include local saved-card queries and the saved plan body. Other document bodies and all historical run activity remain outside that path. - First reveal waits for the bounded current structure. The existing 15-second incomplete-history fallback and inline retry remain available. - Continuation-summary links open in the document pane in the current task interface. Classic tasks keep their existing surface. - No migration or mutation permission change. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code editing, shell tools and browser testing. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in 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 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>
Paperclip maps
The maps describe the same capabilities from two perspectives:
- Feature map: what a person can do, where to reach it, and how to verify the user journey. Preserve its Poteto format.
- Agent access map: the APIs and agent entry points for those capabilities, their permission boundaries, and access verification.
The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.
These are sibling directories under maps/. Each feature file has a same-named
agent access companion. Reuse the product map's sub-feature IDs, so tasks/create
identifies the same capability in both maps. Product behavior remains governed by
the implementation spec; a map cannot grant
authority or redefine a permission denial as success.
Capability identifiers
The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding.
The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /:
the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company.
Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key.
The feature-map index lists the existing
feature and full capability IDs.
Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or
product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local
key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access
companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading
and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make
the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.
Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.
Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their
recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as
onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the
capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs.
See IDs and references for examples.
Access contract
Every business operation needs both an API and a usable agent entry point for an
actor authorized to perform it. A dedicated tool is optional when REST, the CLI,
an assigned MCP client, or native search_api / call_api already provides the
operation. Record which agent surfaces actually have that path; an installed CLI
or optional MCP package cannot be assumed available to every native/remote run.
Track these independently:
| Dimension | Values and meaning |
|---|---|
| API | present, missing, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Use exact methods/paths; distinguish protocols from REST. |
| Agent access | available, partial, missing, restricted, operator-only, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Name the supported surface and actual entry point. |
| Policy | Actor, action/grant, company/resource/ownership scope, responsible-user intersection, run requirements, work modes, and gates relevant to the operation. |
| Evidence | source-only, verified, failed, blocked, or not-run. Source presence and successful board calls are not agent verification. |
| Review depth | baseline records representative operations and known gaps; operation-reviewed enumerates the capability's meaningful operations and their individual access contracts. |
Broad capabilities such as task properties must be split into operations before they count as operation-reviewed: renaming, metadata edits, assignment, dependencies, and lifecycle changes can use different tools and permission rules. An available read path cannot certify a write path. List/get/create/update/delete, execution/control, credential handling, and resolution are separate where their authority or transport differs. Do not duplicate request schemas from OpenAPI.
Exceptions and restrictions
Presentation-only state, static developer fixtures, and pre-start/local operator
work may use not-applicable for a domain API, with a concrete reason and the
existing local path. When a capability combines shared data with presentation,
split the operations: browser recents do not exempt resource lookup from API
coverage. Promoting local state to a shared feature requires revisiting the entry.
A board-only endpoint is restricted for agent identity, not an automatic
exception or a missing API. Cite the enforced policy and record whether the
agent can request the authorized human's action and observe its result. An
unresolved delegation question remains in Gaps. Company access, a job title,
a personal assistant's OAuth grant, or an accepted interaction does not grant
board identity. Keep budget, approval, secret and execution authority intact.
Check actual route/service authorization and production tool admission. OpenAPI actor labels and scenario/evaluation tool declarations are supporting metadata; record disagreements rather than using them as proof of access. Native API fallback restrictions, tool field/scope limits, and rollout settings are part of the agent path, even when a legacy agent can call the REST endpoint directly.
Companion file format
Each agent-access-map/<area>.md has an H1, a relative link to its product file,
and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product
sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and contains
these fields:
- Review:
baselineoroperation-reviewed. - API: presence state and exact operation IDs, or a reasoned exception.
- Agent access: availability state and concrete entry points by surface.
- Policy: relevant permission and runtime boundaries, with source references.
- Evidence: evidence state, reviewed commit and sources or executed proof.
- Verification: allowed/denied assertions and observable result; record what has actually run separately from the proposed recipe.
- Gaps: missing APIs/paths, discovery drift, unreviewed operations or policy
decisions; use
noneonly for the enumerated scope that was reviewed.
For an operation-reviewed capability, use H3 backticked operation IDs and repeat
API, Agent access, Policy, Evidence, Verification and Gaps for each operation.
Use small operation names such as create, update, read, or run-now.
The enclosing capability has Review: operation-reviewed only after its
meaningful operations have been enumerated. The following excerpt shows one
operation; include the others before using that review label:
## `definition`
Review: `operation-reviewed`.
### `create`
API: `present` — POST /api/companies/{companyId}/routines.
Agent access: `available` — agent REST, CLI routine create and native call_api
under the enabled rollout and active-run/mode gates.
Policy: same company; assigneeAgentId must be the calling agent; cite the
routine authorization and native API policy sources.
Evidence: `source-only` — reviewed commit and source links; no live proof.
Verification: `not-run` — create an owned routine; reject assignment to another
agent; inspect saved configuration, attribution and retry behavior.
Gaps: verify ownership and responsible-user resolution with a permitted agent
context; source presence alone does not qualify this operation.
Keeping the maps synchronized
When a change adds/removes a capability or changes its behavior, API, permission, tool binding, CLI support, or work mode, update the affected companion and product recipe as appropriate in the same change. Preserve IDs across renames where the capability is unchanged; update the affected cross-links together. Indexes discover recipes automatically. An API-only change may update the companion without rewriting unchanged user instructions. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.
maintain-verification-skill owns reconciliation of both maps. It follows changed source and authorization, checks real agent reachability, and records product gaps without implementing them during a maintenance pass. The creation skill uses this structure. verify-paperclip consumes the relevant recipes and reports evidence/drift; map editing belongs to maintenance.
Run the structural check after map changes:
node scripts/check-maps.mjs
It checks paired areas/IDs, navigation metadata, required fields, and local references. It does not certify endpoint authorization, production bindings, operation completeness, or live behavior. Source audits must check those against the existing API and tool contracts; avoid a second schema catalog or runtime.
For live access proof, use Paperclip's existing API/runner/MCP fixtures or an owned
isolated instance. Use the actual agent identity, target and work mode. Assert the
allowed result and relevant denial (another company/private resource, wrong
owner, missing grant, invalid run, restricted mode or resolver). Mutations also
need persisted state/attribution and retry behavior. Capture evidence using the
existing artifact workflow; keep executed run results
separate from generated maps/generated/coverage.json, which lists page references.
Local authorship and generated indexes
Change only the recipes, access contracts and stories whose behavior or intent
changed. Feature recipes own navigation metadata; stories own small
parameters.paperclip annotations. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID
index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation.
Do not refresh counts in shared READMEs, inventories, fingerprints or review
journals.
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs validates and generates aggregate navigation,
Storybook data, verification routes and the page inventory. All outputs live in
ignored maps/generated/, ui/storybook/generated/, and the ignored Storybook
preview.tsx wrapper. Start/build and UI typechecking generate their own inputs.
A clean merged checkout therefore assembles both branches' changes automatically.
Git provides history and diffs. PRs, issues and CI artifacts retain review/run evidence for the named revision. Capability associations do not create whole-file review dependencies. Keep durable scenario limits in the affected recipe or story.