Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip 33d24e48ad fix(skills): simplify source rows, errors, and actions (#16310)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent skills from GitHub repositories.
> - Skills → Sources shows saved repositories and their sync status.
> - A saved source gained a second repository row when other projects
used the same repository and branch.
> - That row repeated the GitHub icon and branch, and it exposed project
names that did not help with source management.
> - The page also repeated the Installed navigation link and showed
refresh errors as separate lines of text.
> - Connection management also appeared under each source, where it
competed with source-specific actions.
> - This pull request shows each saved source once, groups error
details, and moves connection management into the menu beside Import
from GitHub.
> - The result is a clearer source list that keeps import and recovery
actions available.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

When a saved source shared its repository and branch with other
projects, Skills → Sources displayed a second GitHub header and the
names of those projects. The page also displayed an extra Installed
skills link and repeated Manage GitHub connection under source rows. A
failed refresh placed its timestamp and error on separate lines.

**Expected behavior**

Show one row for each saved source. Keep project names out of that row.
Keep the additional import action available in More. Put connection
management in the page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Present
refresh errors as one readable notice with the time and review action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open Skills → Sources in a company with one saved GitHub source and
another project that uses the same repository and branch.
2. Observe the repeated repository row and project names.
3. Open the Storybook journey `Existing source, more projects` to
inspect the same state. Open `Retained skills and retry` to inspect a
failed refresh.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The issue is present on base commit `739f9e40a4`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. The issue was also observed in a staging workspace.

## What Changed

- Remove project names, the duplicate repository row, and the redundant
Installed skills link from saved source rows.
- Put imports for additional projects in the source More menu. Show
brief import progress in the source metadata.
- Group source errors, attempt time, and the review link in a compact
notice. Add a Storybook journey and browser coverage for the
shared-repository state.
- Add a page actions menu beside Import from GitHub. Put Manage GitHub
connection there and remove the repeated inline links. Cover the menu
and keyboard focus in the Storybook browser suite.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs
--check` passed locally. The Skills sources unit suite passed 22 tests.
- All 18 repository-skills Storybook browser tests passed, including the
shared-source import, connection menu, mobile, and failed-refresh
journeys.
- A local full `pnpm test:run` was stopped after a server runner-API
test timed out. An isolated diagnostic identified macOS embedded
PostgreSQL shared-memory exhaustion. The PR passed all 55 CI checks,
including server test shards and end-to-end tests.
- Open the Storybook journeys `Existing source, more projects`,
`Automatically imported skills`, and `Retained skills and retry` to
inspect the compact source row, page actions menu, and grouped error
notice.

## Risks

Low risk. The visible import action for projects that share a saved
source moves to More. Connection management moves to a page menu and
opens the Apps catalog. People must open those menus to find the
actions. The import API and access checks do not change.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This source-list correction does not duplicate
planned core work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The task runtime did not expose an exact
serving model ID or context-window size. The model used tool calls, code
edits, and browser verification.

## 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>
2026-10-14 12:52:18 -05:00
..

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.

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.

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, followed by one H2 backticked ID per product sub-feature. Each capability contains these fields:

  • Review: baseline or operation-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 none only 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.

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. Do not register entries or 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.