39279aa34f
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The board reads API data and keeps the current task on screen. > - A restart or temporary network failure can interrupt those reads. > - Separate page error handlers can hide cached data or expose raw server codes. > - The app needs one connection state, readable error copy and a consistent read policy. > - This change provides that foundation and moves affected read surfaces onto it. > - The dependent write layer in #17960 preserves edits and submissions across the same failures. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Temporary API failures could replace loaded content with errors. Different surfaces handled the same outage differently. Some showed raw server codes. A successful query to an unrelated service could also falsely report that Paperclip had recovered. **Expected behavior** Keep cached content visible. Show one connection banner during sustained trouble. Confirm recovery through the Paperclip health probe or its WebSocket. Retry transient reads and show readable errors for permanent failures. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a populated task or workspace page. 2. Interrupt API requests with a 503 or a dropped connection. 3. Keep an unrelated external request in flight. 4. Confirm that cached content remains and that the external result cannot clear the outage. 5. Restore the API and check that reads refresh. The write layer first merged into this feature branch in #15769 now has its own dependent PR, #17960. This PR contains the shared foundation and read changes. Merge this PR first. ## What Changed - Classify API errors and provide readable error copy, including non-JSON proxy responses and Retry-After handling. - Use one connection store and health probe with bounded backoff. Confirm recovery from the server health probe or live-updates WebSocket. - Pause reads while disconnected, retry transient errors, and refresh active reads after recovery. - Keep cached data visible through shared query views and affected page, panel and plugin read surfaces. - Add one app-level connection banner and support the pending-write count consumed by the dependent write layer. - Add a query-error rendering guard. Call it directly from the existing CI step. Update development documentation. ## Verification - Historical-chat lookup now follows the same ready/stale roster state as rendering. Three regressions fail before the fix; the six new cases pass after it, including working Retry, fresh data, no-cache error, permanent 403 and company isolation. All six focused query/recovery suites pass 200 tests. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. Canary Dry Run initially refused a preview version that was already on npm. It passed after one rerun with fresh registry metadata; no check was disabled. - Integrated current master and retained both transcript interest registration and connectivity reporting on socket open. The seven focused recovery/query suites pass 288 tests, and UI typecheck and production build pass. All 9,451 UI tests across 799 files pass on the merge commit. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Current head `70d9335d732219352ef0f98414439766bbcb33df`: all hosted CI checks pass. Apex is **5/5** on that head with no unresolved findings. The branch has no merge conflict. GitHub still requires code-owner approval. - The foundation passes 9,430 UI tests in 804 files. After integrating current master page paths, 190 focused page tests pass. - Two unrelated-success regressions fail before the latest fix. With the fix, 62 focused UI tests, all six guard tests and UI TypeScript pass. - The composed foundation and write layer pass **9,505 UI tests in 808 files**, UI TypeScript, a production UI build, and query-error, token and map guards. - A real Chromium journey on the composed source injects a 503 during title save. The loaded task stays visible; one reconnect banner appears; the edit saves after recovery; another task stays unchanged; the saved title survives reload. - Full recursive local checks were not repeated because Runner compilation exhausted local disk during another repair. Hosted checks must pass before merge. No new staging deployment is claimed. - Latest review follow-up: a cached CaseDetail now survives a failed HTTP 429 refresh. Its page regression fails before the fix and passes after it. Eighty focused foundation tests, UI TypeScript, build and guards pass after that change. - Earlier CI evidence is retained: several foundation jobs received a runner shutdown signal together. The write-layer head also failed an unchanged Runner descriptor close test with `provider_transport_failed`. The same Runner source passed that suite in the foundation run. New CI runs cover the updated heads; no check or assertion was weakened. ## Risks - Shared retry defaults change the time before transient read errors appear. Permanent errors still fail promptly. - ApiError.message now contains readable copy. Callers that compare raw codes must use ApiError.code. - Cache success can come from another service or local data. It must not confirm Paperclip recovery. - Durable writes are reviewed separately in #17960. This PR does not change database or mutation contracts. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) produced the original work with tool use. OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, assisted with restoration, integration, tests and review fixes. The Codex session does not expose its exact serving model ID or context window size. ## 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <claude@users.noreply.github.com>
5.5 KiB
navigation
| navigation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Agent conversations and project handoff
A person can hold a persistent conversation with an agent, return to its history, and hand useful work into a project or task. The gated conference-room chat is a separate conversation surface.
Feature ID: agent-chat.
Implementation: agent chat, chat landing, conference room.
Agent access: companion.
Sub-features
discovery:agent-chat/discovery— find an agent and reopen an accessible recent conversation.history:agent-chat/history— send messages, inspect replies/files, and return to the same conversation.handoff:agent-chat/handoff— create or identify a project/task from chat and follow the resulting work.conference-room:agent-chat/conference-room— use the separately gated board chat without assuming parity with agent chat.
How to get to it (user POV)
agent-conversation
Open /chats, choose an agent, or use /chats/:agentRef and its conversation sidebar.
project-handoff
Ask for project work in Agent Chat and follow its created project/task links.
conference-room
Open /board-chat only when its conference-room gate is enabled.
Driving it with Playwright and the Paperclip CLI
Preconditions: follow the baseline. Enable the applicable chat feature, use a configured test agent, and distinguish model replies from a mocked conversation fixture.
agent-conversation
Automated: chat landing checks recent-chat routing; conversation service covers persisted conversation behavior.
Automated: historical chat keeps an older conversation reachable after a cached roster refresh ends in HTTP 429. It checks lookup Retry and preserves permission and company boundaries. This is component evidence with real query state, not live provider proof.
Automated: thread and composer keeps an in-flight attachment through first-chat creation on desktop and mobile, while initial history for an existing conversation stays deferred. The first-upload browser journey checks the visible file chip, server attachment, no premature agent run, and attachment count after send and reload. That journey uses a simulated agent.
Manual: In a conversation with no messages, attach a file before the first send. Confirm the same file stays in the composer after the chat is created. Send it once, reload, and confirm the file and message remain.
Manual: Start a conversation, send a recognizable request, and inspect its reply.
Navigate away and reopen the same history. Use /new for a fresh session within
the same standing conversation. Test an unavailable historical agent and an
inaccessible saved conversation; verify no cross-user or cross-company history appears.
project-handoff
Automated: chat project tools checks tool contracts; live model choice and UI handoff require a manual run.
Explicit live evals: chat feature journeys send natural requests to save a backlog task or delegate an announcement. They check project/assignee, execution or non-execution, saved output, return to chat, and click the actual same-instance task link after reload. Registration alone does not establish a pass. Production chat guidance uses company-prefixed relative task links unless the platform supplied a verified absolute origin.
Manual: Ask the configured agent to create bounded project work, inspect the proposed/created target, and open the resulting task. Verify the request context and intended project survived and the task produces a useful output.
conference-room
Automated: board chat gate proves route gating, not a live conversation.
Preconditions for this entry point: local_trusted mode and an installed,
authenticated claude CLI, in addition to the Conference Room flag. These are
separate from Agent Chat's configured-agent prerequisites.
Manual: Check disabled access first, enable in the disposable instance, then send and reload a conversation. Inspect the actual responding agent and persisted history; report this result separately from Agent Chat.
Gotchas
- Idle chat is not failed execution.
- See steering for in-flight messages and questions for interactions.
- An API tool test does not prove that every harness will choose the same handoff tool.
Storybook verification
conference-room
Capability ID: agent-chat/conference-room.
Scope: ui Storybook: Conference-room flag disabled, empty/history/reply, busy and explicit failure states. Production: Exercise separate BoardChat route gate, local-trusted deployment and authenticated Claude CLI; send/reload real conversation with responding agent attribution. Sources: Source: BoardChat.tsx, board-chat.ts. Tests: BoardChat.test.tsx, board-chat-route-feature-flag.test.ts