Files
PaperClipAI/maps/storybook-map
DottaandPaperclip 5e8e992df2 fix(storybook): reconcile capability associations and map omissions (#16154)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - The feature map describes user capabilities and verification
recipes.
> - Storybook holds isolated examples of those capabilities.
> - Missing catalog links can hide existing examples.
> - Some stories also expose shipped capabilities absent from the map.
> - This pull request adds verified source associations and three paired
map entries.
> - Readers can find existing examples without changing their homes or
URLs.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #16052, #16049 and #16046.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Storybook capability lookup and the feature/agent access maps.

**Current behavior**

Seventy capabilities have no example link. Some matching stories already
exist. Primary-agent preferences and company decision/fast-response
services appear only under broad neighboring capabilities.

**Proposed behavior**

Add source-supported links across 34 suites. Keep shared foundations in
place while cross-listing them. Add primary-agent, decision-model and
fast-response capabilities to both upstream maps. Retain explicit
simulation and partial-example limits.

**Reason and benefit**

The catalog distinguishes missing associations from missing examples.
The upstream map describes three existing product capabilities more
precisely.

**Breaking changes**

None to product behavior, story exports, folders, sidebar titles or
URLs. A shared foundation can declare a reasoned `home: "foundations"`
override while referencing related capabilities.

## What Changed

- Add 55 references across 34 suites. Replace primary-agent suites'
reporting-line association with their own capability.
- Add three source-reviewed capabilities and their API/actor boundaries
to paired maps.
- Preserve the shared Foundations home when cross-listing developer
design examples. Add a validation regression test.
- Record which exports demonstrate each association and what remains
simulated or unverified.
- Regenerate the catalog and capability data. Preserve all original 223
authored suites and 2,210 story IDs. Retain the two skill-removal
stories added by current master, for 2,212 authored stories in total.
- Reduce empty example lookups from 70 of 171 capabilities to 59 of 174.
Links do not establish complete capability coverage.

## Verification

- Passed: 27 catalog/generator/map tests, catalog validation, map
structural checks, token gates and skill validation.
- Passed: source inventory comparison preserves all authored files,
titles, meta IDs and story IDs.
- Passed: repository typecheck/build and Storybook build. Final built
index has 2,248 entries and preserves all previous entries, including
the two skills stories added by current master.
- The broad local repository test run was interrupted before completion
to resolve a new master conflict. A complete local suite pass is not
claimed; fresh CI passed on the reconciled branch.
- Browser: Design links to preserved Foundations stories;
company-service sections link settings/history/journey suites; decision
SetupToHistory passed 12 interaction steps; primary-agent ReplacePrimary
passed four steps. No console errors in selected checks.
- Greptile: 5/5 on final commit
`805a8af62abe589907e7cc6ca1b415ce1e0cc3c0`, with no findings or
unresolved threads.
- Final-revision CI passed all 57 checks/statuses, including all eight
browser shards, server and Runner tests, typecheck and build. The
unchanged Cloud-auth mocked-response race seen on a superseded revision
did not recur on the final commit. No test expectations were changed.
- New agent-access evidence is source-only. Live provider and
agent-credential verification is not established.

## Risks

- Suite-level associations can represent only selected states. Notes
retain those limits and existing review classifications.
- In-memory connection drafts do not prove reload persistence.
Resume-failure UI does not prove successful continuation. No-op budget
controls do not prove relief or resumption.
- Three map capabilities document existing behavior. No permission, API,
provider or production component changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution and source
inspection. The exact runtime model ID and context window 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>
2026-10-13 08:11:15 -05:00
..

Storybook map

The feature index connects the existing Storybook to stable capability IDs from the upstream feature map. Story files remain in ui/storybook/. The feature map and its maintenance skill do not depend on this catalog. New capabilities or upstream recipe drift are reported to their maintainer; this catalog does not redefine product behavior or permissions.

Ownership

  • maintain-storybook owns story alignment, fixture corrections, classification, and this catalog.
  • review-storybook consumes it to select and exercise examples, then reports evidence and drift.
  • DESIGN.md governs design. Production verification remains with the existing product recipes and verification tools.

Catalog contract

catalog.json is the maintained inventory, with one entry per authored story file. INDEX.md is generated from it, the upstream feature map, and the installed Storybook CSF parser. Titles, export filtering, story counts and IDs come from source, not filename guesses. All examples are retained, including historical suites. A file's first capability is its primary home; remaining capabilities are lookup references, not copies. Shared foundations may declare home: "foundations" to retain their folder and sidebar while linking related capabilities. This override requires an exception reason; it is not available for arbitrary feature homes. Foundations/guides and proposals without a mapped capability need an exception reason. An absent story is not automatically a feature gap.

Folders and sidebar

Story files live in ui/storybook/stories/<primary-feature-area>/, using the first capability's area slug. Related capabilities still point to the same story. Shared fixture modules and assets live in ui/storybook/support/; production wrappers in ui/storybook/prototypes/ retain their existing ownership.

The sidebar follows the section and feature names in the feature-map README, then retains each suite's useful scenario grouping. Foundations contains shared component examples with no primary product capability. Overview contains the catalog guide. Every indexed feature has an Overview page, even when it has no cataloged examples. The main guide and these pages use the same section, feature, and capability order as the upstream map. Related suite links cross primary homes without copying stories. Sidebar labels replace / with , because Storybook treats slashes as folders; the index and page heading retain the original feature name. Missing examples are explicit; historical examples and guides do not imply current behavioral coverage.

ui/storybook/generated/ contains the derived index and one CSF Overview per feature. The inline storySort.order in the preview config is also generated: Storybook's indexer requires a literal there. Regenerate these outputs with the catalog command; do not edit them or add them to the authored inventory. Their stable IDs use feature-map-<area>--overview. Generated pages are explanatory guides and do not increase example-suite counts. Storybook start/build checks this output for drift. The generator fails on unexpected files rather than silently deleting them.

Each suite declares an explicit CSF id, recorded as stableId in the catalog. The sidebarTitle can change without changing that identity. Existing story and autodocs URLs and screenshot names remain valid. Do not derive a replacement ID from a newly organized title. The checker rejects missing or changed explicit IDs, incorrect feature folders, and sidebar titles outside their primary feature home.

Each entry records purpose, capability references, review sources/date/fingerprint, notes, and three independent dimensions:

Dimension Values
Product status current: source comparison supports the named subject; proposed: intentional alternate design; historical: superseded reference retained for its original purpose; mixed: suite combines these; unreviewed: parity has not been established
Implementation production: shipped subject with fixture/layout wrappers; prototype: locally implemented subject, even if it uses shared primitives; mixed: both subjects; guide: explanatory documentation
Data boundary fixtures: props, callbacks, caches or API responses are simulated; fixture-server: requires a separately owned local API/database fixture with simulated upstream providers; static: explanatory/static examples

current is a source-review classification, not a promise that every state renders or that APIs, gates, persistence and providers passed live tests. unreviewed entries still have an inventory/classification review; notes explain the deeper parity work outstanding. Mixed files retain a note naming the important split. Production components can legitimately use mock data. A prototype directory name does not establish implementation: some wrappers there re-export shipped UI.

Review sources include the story, relevant local support and production subjects. Include directly rendered subjects regardless of import spelling, and primitives when the suite demonstrates them. Do not truncate the list to a fixed source count. Fingerprints make changes to those declared dependencies visible. They do not follow every transitive production import or infer semantic correctness. Shared preview/config/fixture changes have a separate fingerprint and require reviewing affected callers. Update fingerprints only after reviewing the change, and add missing dependencies when discovered. Date/revision context for the initial pass and executed evidence belong in REVIEW.md.

Maintenance commands

After installing workspace dependencies:

node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --write
node --test scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs scripts/storybook-feature-index.test.mjs

The checker rejects unaccounted or deleted stories, invalid capability references, duplicate entries/IDs, missing review sources, changed fingerprints and a stale generated indexes and feature pages. --write only regenerates these outputs; it never refreshes review fingerprints or blesses drift. Preserve IDs when changing titles or moving files; compare the existing built Storybook index before and after such changes. Feature outputs are regenerated before fingerprints are checked. If those writes change a review source, the command fails with the affected review entries. Inspect the generated change before updating those fingerprints and rerunning the command.

Use the existing Storybook workflow for builds, browser review, and visual tests. Report source inspection, rendering, play assertions, visual comparisons and production acceptance separately. Do not publish new visual baselines just to make catalog maintenance pass.