Files
PaperClipAI/doc/design/CHANGING-THE-UI.md
T
7b9334cd10 Draft: Build agent-ready design proposal system (#16875)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their work.
> - People need consistent UI patterns to review and control that work.
> - The current board uses related layouts and controls with different
spacing, type, and behavior.
> - That drift makes it hard for a designer or an agent to build a new
page from a reliable reference.
> - Storybook can show the shared patterns and the states they need to
support.
> - This pull request adds design proposals, a local sandbox, and
reusable UI controls so people can compare the patterns in context.
> - The benefit is a clearer design system that agents can use to build
consistent UI.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

`ui/` — React board UI and Storybook.

**Problem or motivation**

Board pages repeat visual and interaction decisions. Storybook did not
provide a complete reference for task views, conversation states,
typography, toolbars, tabs, and light/dark colors. People could not
compare a proposed pattern with the running board in one place.

**Proposed solution**

Add a staged Design Proposals catalog with foundations, components,
layouts, and page specimens. Add an opt-in sandbox. Reuse production
components where possible. Include synthetic conversation states and
shared controls so reviewers can compare and refine them.

**Alternatives considered**

Separate static mockups would not show keyboard behavior, responsive
layout, or real component states. Rebuilding each page only in Storybook
would allow the reference to drift from the board.

**Roadmap alignment**

This improves existing board UI and Skills Manager surfaces. It does not
add a new control-plane capability.

## What Changed

- Added dark and light color references, typography and conversation
specimens, and component stories for buttons, tabs, toolbars, sidebar,
popovers, activity, and task lists.
- Added a local design sandbox with synthetic task conversation playback
and representative states.
- Shared collection toolbars and navigation patterns across task, agent,
project, routine, skill, connector, and artifact pages.
- Added the streamlined Skills tabs and a My Skills collection that uses
the shared skill cards.
- Restored saved-thread access during synthetic playback, kept connector
searchbox semantics, and updated reproduction checks after moving trial
stories.
- Documented the proposed patterns and added focused UI, catalog, and
browser checks.

## Verification

- `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `node
scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` passed.
- Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after
merging master. After the review fixes, focused UI typecheck, `pnpm
build-storybook`, 23 Skills Sources tests, and all 15 Storybook
typography browser tests passed.
- Focused task-thread and system-notice suites passed: 251 tests.
Connector Browse passed 84 tests; the connector, attachment, recovery,
and Storybook flyout browser journeys passed locally.
- A local full Vitest run hit one intermittent chat-channels integration
failure; that test passed in isolation. GitHub CI
[39347996059](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39347996059)
passed on the exact latest commit: 55 successful checks and two skipped
draft-only Storybook jobs.
- Greptile reviewed the exact latest commit at 5/5 with no new comments
or open review threads. GitHub reports the branch as cleanly mergeable.

## Risks

- This PR changes 206 files and exceeds the repository's 100-file review
target. Review by commit and consider a scoped split before merge.
- Design Proposals are staged references. Fixture interactions do not
prove API behavior, permissions, or provider execution.
- UI changes to shared controls may affect pages outside the proposal
sandbox. Focused browser checks and the full CI matrix passed.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact runtime model ID and context
window are not exposed in this session. The model used reasoning, code
execution, browser inspection, and local tests. Earlier branch commits
were also AI-assisted in this Codex conversation.

## 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 available in this session)
- [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 where applicable
- [x] I have either linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run focused 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 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: Scott Tong <scott@scotts-mbp-m5-max.local>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-19 17:45:26 -07:00

8.0 KiB
Raw Blame History

Changing Paperclip's UI — a field guide

How to make visual changes now that the design system exists. Written for everyone: designers, engineers, and AI agents (AGENTS.md points here via DESIGN.md).

The one-minute mental model

Paperclip's look lives in three layers, and you almost always work in the first one:

  1. Tokens — every color, text size, spacing, radius, and shadow is a named value in ui/src/index.css. Change a token, and every surface using it follows.
  2. Components — consume tokens, never raw values. One component per job (one Button, one Card, one ToggleSwitch).
  3. Screenshots — 510 baseline images (255 stories × light/dark) downloaded into tests/storybook-visual/.snapshots/ from the pinned external archive in tests/storybook-visual/baseline-manifest.json. They are the proof of what the UI looks like. Any visual change shows up as a screenshot diff; no visual change proves itself the same way.

The rules live in DESIGN.md (repo root). The reasoning behind past decisions lives in DECISION-SHEET.md. If you disagree with a rule, change DESIGN.md first (with review) — don't quietly diverge in code.

The three commands

pnpm check:token-gates        # am I allowed to write this? (no hardcoded values)
pnpm test:storybook-visual    # what does my change look like? (diff vs baseline)
pnpm test:storybook-visual:update   # accept my intentional changes as the new baseline

Recipe 1 — change how something looks everywhere

"Make the corners rounder." "That amber is too loud." "Bump the smallest text size."

  1. Find the token in ui/src/index.css (they're named and commented: --radius, --status-task-todo, --text-micro, …).
  2. Change the value.
  3. pnpm test:storybook-visual — it will "fail" on every affected story. That's the point: each failure writes a before/actual/diff image triplet into tests/storybook-visual/test-results/. Review them (or npx playwright show-report from tests/storybook-visual/ for a browsable version).
  4. Happy? pnpm test:storybook-visual:update, review the generated bundle under tests/storybook-visual/baseline-review/, publish it from a trusted maintainer environment, then commit the token edit and the updated manifest metadata together.

Notable single-knob tokens: --radius drives the entire corner ladder (sm→4xl are derived); the --status-task-* / --status-agent-* family is the app-wide status vocabulary (chips, charts, bars, live dots all follow it).

Recipe 2 — retheme the whole app

The core palette follows the shadcn token names, so a theme built at ui.shadcn.com/create applies as token values:

cd ui && pnpm dlx shadcn@latest init --preset <CODE> --force --no-reinstall

Then review the git diff and keep only the CSS-variable value changes — the CLI also tries to rewrite components.json, lib/utils.ts, and add dependencies; revert those (it once deleted 240 lines of our utils). Never use shadcn apply --preset (it overwrites component files). After the token diff is clean: Recipe 1 steps 3–4, plus a sanity pass on the Paperclip-specific tiers (agent gradients, WCAG-tuned status hues) for clashes.

Recipe 3 — build or style a component

  • Values: tokens only. No hex, no text-[11px], no p-[13px]. If no token fits, add a token — that's a feature, not a workaround.
  • Type: use the named ladder — --text-nano (10px) / --text-micro (11px) / Tailwind text-xs (12) / --text-compact (13) / text-sm (14). Letter-spacing: --tracking-label / --tracking-eyebrow / --tracking-caps.
  • Status: anything that means running/idle/paused/error/todo/done/blocked uses the status system (ui/src/lib/status-colors.ts helpers or --status-* tokens). Liveness is always blue.
  • Primitives: check ui/src/components/ui/ and doc/design/COMPONENT-INVENTORY.md before writing a new component. Switches are ToggleSwitch; badges/chips route through brandChipBadge.
  • Give it a story. New visual surface = new Storybook story = automatic screenshot coverage forever.
  • pnpm check:token-gates before you push. If a value genuinely can't be a token (third-party config, canvas fills, intentional one-off decoration on demo pages), it goes on the allowlist with an inline comment saying why.

Proposed task collections

For work explicitly implementing the staged design refresh, review Design proposals → Pages → Tasks and the component stories. Compose shared UI with useTaskListCollection (ui/src/hooks/useTaskListCollection.ts) rather than reimplementing search, creator identity mapping, views, filter transitions or hierarchy expansion. Its visibleItems include parent context for the list; boards use matchingItems. Pass its namespaced creators into the filter menu. The caller supplies accessible data and handles API mutations. See DESIGN.md for the contract and trial acceptance cases; the proposed controller is not yet wired into production routes.

Recipe 4 — you changed something and snapshots failed

That's the system working. Two cases:

  • You meant it → review the diffs (they're your design review), then pnpm test:storybook-visual:update, publish the packed baseline archive, and commit the manifest update with the change. A PR with visual changes but no baseline-manifest update is incomplete; baseline changes with no explanation are a red flag.
  • You didn't mean it → you broke something. The diff images show you exactly where. Do not update the baseline to make it green.

Three stories are known to flake under full parallel load (they pass in isolation — see DECISION-SHEET). Re-run a single story with npx playwright test --config tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts -g "<story name>" before assuming a real failure.

For AI-agent sessions

(Running a session as the human? See AGENT-SESSIONS.md — this section is instructions for the agent itself.)

This system was built to be steered by instruction. "Make all running indicators blue" or "collapse these three grays into one" should land as a token edit or a small codemod plus a snapshot diff — not a manual hunt. If a change is mechanical and touches many files, write an idempotent script in scripts/ (see codemod-*.mjs for the pattern) instead of hand-editing. DESIGN.md is loaded via AGENTS.md; follow it exactly, and record consequential choices in DECISION-SHEET.md.

What's deliberately not done yet (don't fix ad hoc)

  • Tailwind palette classes (bg-red-500, ~3,100 sites) — scheduled for a dedicated cluster-by-cluster conversion pass; piecemeal fixes will collide with it.
  • Hand-rolled cards/pills → Card/Badge, sidebar agents-section unification — queued as a component-convergence pass with per-site snapshot verification.
  • ESLint ratchet — will eventually enforce the token rules at lint time; until then check:token-gates is the gate.

See DECISION-SHEET.md for the full ledger.

Task artifact galleries

The task Artifacts tab renders images and videos with MediaArtifactCard, including agent attachments that have not been promoted to work products. Its container-responsive grid preserves run grouping and chronological order; documents and other outputs span the full width. RichWorkProductCard supports gallery for media and keeps card/compact rows for other outputs. Rows use a stretched native link or button so titles, thumbnails, metadata, and padding activate the same action, with keyboard focus and normal link modifiers preserved.

ArtifactPreview is shared with the company gallery. Video previews are muted, never autoplay, and seek up to one second into the clip after metadata loads. Changing the source resets preview state. The existing task gallery handles playback and download. Storybook Tasks → Artifact Gallery covers eight generated video outputs, mixed images/files, full-row activation, narrow/expanded panels, empty state, unavailable previews, and light mode using small offline fixtures.