DottaandPaperclip
33d24e48ad
## 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>
Paperclip feature map
Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.
The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.
Browse features
Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.
Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in
maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the
Storybook guide. A new recipe is discovered automatically; do not register it in
this README or maintain counts here.
Before driving a journey
- Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
- Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
- Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
- Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
- Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.
For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.
Evidence contract
Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature filename and entry-point ID, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result, command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant, without secrets.
A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.
Inventory and remaining depth
The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page
modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module
is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested.
Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations
describe documentation scope, not runtime health.
Maintaining the reference
The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health.
When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with
the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior
and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion
and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only
access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run
node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks;
follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.
Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:
---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---
The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. A new feature or capability needs only its recipe and companion.
Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas
section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and
has Scope (ui, cli, or browser),
Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions
and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API.
The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.
After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:
- Sub-features — stable backticked IDs and observable behavior/states.
- How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
- Driving it with — starts with
Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, withAutomated:andManual:paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly. - Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.
New or updated entries follow
Poteto's feature-map examples.
Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when
their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by
Omnigent's feature map.
Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.