## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage agents and inspect their work. > - Task monitors schedule checks of work that is still pending. > - A task can retain a monitor after it becomes blocked. > - The UI still offered Check now, but the server rejected the task status. > - The UI also claimed that an automatic check would run on the next tick. > - This change admits an explicit human check through the normal execution gates and shows that automatic checks are paused. > - People can request the check without changing task status, and skipped checks no longer report success. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A blocked task with a retained monitor showed Check now and an overdue countdown. Clicking the button failed because manual checks required an in-progress or in-review task. The endpoint also returned success when admission skipped a check. **Expected behavior** A human can request one check through normal admission. Automatic checks stay paused while the task is blocked. A check that cannot start reports a conflict. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Schedule a monitor on an agent-owned task. 2. Let the task become blocked while it retains the schedule. 3. Open the task and click Check now. Related: #14909 addresses scheduled-retry promotion. This PR addresses retained task monitors. **Paperclip version or commit** Base:7f10cc0585. ## What Changed - Allow a human to check a retained monitor on a blocked task. Keep agent and automatic checks limited to active task statuses. - Keep the existing admission path and status guard. Do not change task status to start a check. - Return 409 when admission skips the check. Preserve the schedule when a dependency or recovery hold prevents dispatch. Keep a successful result when a new schedule replaces the consumed schedule after admission. - Show Automatic checks paused in the banner, composer strip and properties. Hide Check now on backlog and todo tasks. Provider-quota recovery stays paused on blocked tasks because it uses a direct retry path; its monitor is retained until the task resumes. - Add database, process, route and UI regression coverage, a Storybook state, API metadata, and behavior documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - `pnpm build` passed. - Server scheduling, process admission and route suites: 94 tests passed. - UI monitor, properties and time-formatting suites: 142 tests passed. - Additional admission checks passed: an explicit check starts a process on a blocked task; an unresolved dependency prevents dispatch and preserves the monitor. - Token gates, map checks, Storybook catalog checks and 30 map/catalog tests passed. - The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt reported 1 timeout among 1,621 chat integration tests: “keeps an ambiguous github text part blocked across restart and retries only that part and its tail” exceeded 15 seconds. The exact case passed in isolation on the final head (1 passed, 1,620 skipped). The remaining full-run groups were stopped to isolate that failure. This does not establish a full local pass or explain the initial timeout. Final-head CI is green, including the full chat lanes and the successful single server-shard retry. - Browser inspection passed for the blocked-task banner, composer strip and properties row. Clicking Check now set both visible buttons to disabled Checking state. The preview uses isolated fixtures. - CI server shard 7/12 failed one decision-expiry deadline assertion. The entire unchanged decision-expiry suite passed locally on the final head (20/20). The single retry of that shard passed after the first workflow attempt completed. The initial failure remains recorded here. Neither that test nor its production path changed before retry; the cause is not established by a passing retry. - Greptile reviewed final headed936f7433at 5/5. Both prior review threads are resolved. - The first CI chat job stopped after its runner received a shutdown signal. The final head completed a fresh CI run. - The process fixture uses a local no-op adapter. It proves admission and execution, not a live provider's response. The Storybook state simulates dispatch. ## Risks - An explicit human check can start work on a blocked task with no unresolved execution gate. This is intentional. Dependencies, recovery, native finalization, ownership, pause and budgets retain their existing checks. - Skipped manual checks now return 409 instead of 200. The UI already displays API errors in context. - No schema change or migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The session does not expose a more specific served model ID or context-window size. Used repository tools, code execution, and browser inspection. ## 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>
17 KiB
navigation
| navigation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Task creation and lifecycle
People create, assign, organize, discuss, and finish tasks. A task retains its owner, project, priority, history, and outputs as it moves through the work lifecycle.
Feature ID: tasks.
Implementation: new task, task list, task detail.
Agent access: companion.
Sub-features
-
create:tasks/create— capture a title/request with the intended agent, project, and attachments. -
organize:tasks/organize— filter, sort, group, and navigate tasks without losing the selected context. -
properties:tasks/properties— change status, priority, assignee, project, and relationships where authorized. -
discussion:tasks/discussion— persist comments, references, and files on the task. -
completion:tasks/completion— distinguish backlog, active work, review, blocked, done, and cancelled outcomes. -
privacy:tasks/privacy— create private tasks, share or revoke access, and inspect parent/project inheritance before changing visibility.
The Product task-properties journey checks only assignment to the signed-in user and persistence after reload. Its source is reusable across self-hosted and Cloud; Cloud live qualification is separate. It does not cover other property operations or agent authorization.
How to get to it (user POV)
Cold collection loads use a lightweight index and batched hierarchy context,
then fetch diagnostic details for visible rows. Delay the index, hierarchy, and
visible-row details independently when verifying tasks/organize: row heights,
title bounds, and the first-row origin should remain stable. Test nested expansion,
scrolling to more rows, and detail/back navigation; a collection projection must
never suppress the full task instruction fetch.
new-task
Use New task from the global launcher, task list, or project task view.
task-list
Open /issues or a project’s Issues view; legacy /tasks links redirect.
task-detail
Open /issues/:issueId from a row, mention, or direct link. Cold opens show the instruction and recent exchange first. More messages appears only when earlier comments or runs are omitted and loads that history. Fresh tasks with no omitted history have no disclosure. A single legacy run with a truncated log offers More run output instead. More task actions → Show task activity loads full activity even for a single native run; incoming messages remain visible while the task stays open.
task-sharing
Use the privacy control in New task, or open an existing task’s menu and choose Make private, Share…, or Make public where allowed. The share sheet lists direct grants and inherited access from private ancestors or project membership. Inherited rows have no local revoke action; manage that access at its source.
Driving it with Playwright and the Paperclip CLI
Preconditions: follow the baseline. Use a disposable project. Persistence checks can assign work to Me or leave it unassigned; execution checks additionally need an invokable test agent. Record whether a real or simulated harness handles execution.
Operation checkpoints
Use these checks alongside the entry-point recipes below and the operation records in the access companion. Record the actual actor, surface, saved result and denial separately. Source review and linked tests do not establish a live pass.
| Capability ID | Action and persisted result | Denial, race and retry checks |
|---|---|---|
tasks/create |
Create an unassigned task or assign it to Me; save its description and context, then reopen and reload the exact task. | Exercise required fields, inaccessible parents/projects, and the same API creation key with identical and changed input. Compare task IDs and run counts; saving a draft is not creation. |
tasks/organize |
Find the saved task through list, project, filter, and direct-link surfaces; change supported labels separately. | Compare another actor’s private results and another company. Distinguish browser sorting/grouping preferences from saved task data. |
tasks/properties |
Change title, metadata, assignee, dependencies, work mode, execution settings, and monitor/watchdog configuration as separate operations. Reload each saved change. | Use an occupied checkout, stale status version, invalid dependency, stopped run, and disallowed mode. Check the specific rejection and unchanged fields; a successful title edit does not establish assignment authority. |
tasks/discussion |
Post a unique comment, reload, and inspect attribution. Read history, inspect a queued message, and delete only an owned disposable comment where allowed. | Separate an ordinary comment from steering or a wake. Check inaccessible task history, author-only deletion, queued cancellation, and duplicate delivery. Feedback votes have their own human authority. |
tasks/completion |
Complete, block, request review, reopen, and cancel separate disposable tasks through offered controls. Inspect the saved outcome, review gates, and execution state. | Test pending dependencies/reviews, a stale or active checkout, and late writes after handoff. Terminal status does not prove provider stop or saved files. Verify checkout/release and destructive deletion separately from completion. |
tasks/privacy |
Create private work with a responsible person; share a child, inspect direct/inherited rows, revoke a direct grant, and check publication constraints. | Use separate ordinary people and an actual agent. Shared readers cannot manage grants; ancestor/project access changes at its source. Reload and retry discovery/direct reads after revocation; keep unrelated direct grants. |
new-task
Automated: board dialogs checks that the task form appears on the first synchronous open and retains its draft across reopen. Creation dialog covers typing while agent/project requests are pending and retaining that text when defaults arrive. These are component checks with mocked requests.
Manual: Create a uniquely named task with an agent and project. Open its resulting link and reload. Confirm text, attachment, assignment, and project persisted, and verify execution started only when the task and agent are eligible.
On the first New task open after a page load, confirm the form appears without a loading dialog. Delay agent and project responses, type a request, then release the responses. Confirm the choices populate without replacing the form or its text.
Creation is request-first: enter Describe a task…, choose the assignee and project, and submit Create task. A standalone title field is not always shown. Use a human/unassigned task to verify persistence without invoking a model.
task-list
Automated: task-list helpers cover search URLs, pagination, deduplication, and presentation constants. The suite does not render the page or exercise filtering, grouping, opening a task, and returning; those interactions still need a running-browser check.
Task and inbox rows omit the system interruption labels Thinking, Trying again soon, and Retry available. Shared row tests cover working, scheduled-retry, and failed interruptions in both row presentations, including suppression of replacement recovery chips. Task status and other relevant badges remain visible; retry controls remain inside the task conversation.
Manual: Seed human-created, agent-created, scheduled routine, human-initiated chat-channel, and creator-less tasks. Confirm automation is hidden by default, show agent-created tasks reveals it, reload preserves the choice, and Clear filters hides it again. Verify list and board search with automation newer than the human results, and expand contextual ancestors/subtasks without promoting unrelated automated roots. Repeat in project task lists. Agent profiles and task-detail subtasks retain complete history.
Manual: Filter by status and assignee, change grouping/sort, open a task, and return. Verify the correct records and selected view survive navigation and reload. Include an empty result and a failed request.
task-detail
Manual: Open a long task with slow historical requests. Read the instruction and recent reply before those requests finish. Edit the title/status while enrichment is pending and verify saves and rollbacks. Expand More messages, verify scroll position and no duplicate replies, return to the task, and follow an older comment link. Leave a task open across new messages and runs and confirm none disappear. Reconnect after several turns and verify watched runs settle. Reopen after steering with more than 50 newer activity rows; the delivered message must not reappear in the queue.
Automated: cold-open reads cover bounded reads, event filtering and company denial. Task detail covers component behavior, while issue service covers server contracts.
Failure markers have no dashed divider rules. An adjacent run error and no-live-execution-path notice show only the last error, with its details and retry action, including a permitted legacy run retry carried onto a later recovery notice. Intervening messages, unrelated system notices that quote error text, and credential-access denials stay visible. Explicit non-recovery titles stop grouping. Saved stranded-recovery action metadata plus a known recovery statement also identify recovery notices with a default or source-run title. Only known recovery statements use the legacy text fallback. Grouping tests and marker tests cover the presentation. The Failure notices stories mount the production thread view with fixture data. The focused browser suite checks play assertions, disclosure, retry callbacks, themes and phone width. These checks do not dispatch a real retry or change stored run history.
Automated: paused assignee relevance uses a real disposable server and paused process agent, with no inference, to check both task interfaces. Done and cancelled tasks hide the paused-agent warning; reopening restores it. The agent stays paused and no run starts.
Manual: For a disposable task owned by a legacy agent, have its current run
assign the task to a human with status In review. Verify that assignment and
status persist, that the current run finishes without issue_reassigned, and
that slow workspace restoration does not turn the task Blocked. Try a later edit
from the outgoing run and verify rejection. Repeat a board
reassignment and confirm that the outgoing run still stops.
Manual: Add a comment and edit authorized properties. Reload and verify history, actor, and values. Complete a disposable task and inspect its deliverable; reopen through an available action and confirm the next execution follows current policy.
Manual: Ask a standard native agent to schedule a future check on its current task. Reload and confirm the persisted monitor. After the agent yields, verify one later wake and a consumed schedule. For malformed-call recovery, use the agent access recipe and verify that schema feedback supports a corrected call before a wait is claimed. For a due monitor held by execution recovery, confirm that the schedule remains and task activity explains the deferral. Repeated checks must not replay the held work. Resolve the hold through its existing recovery action, then verify one wake. On a blocked task with a retained monitor, verify that automatic checks show as paused. Check now requests one check through normal admission without changing the task status. Confirm that an unresolved dependency or recovery hold prevents dispatch and does not produce a success message. Backlog and todo tasks must not offer Check now. Blocked provider-quota recovery must offer no manual check and retain its schedule until the task resumes. Agents and automatic ticks cannot check a blocked task. Hold native finalization after the provider has stopped, and verify that both scheduled and manual checks retain the due monitor. After settlement, verify one wake. If its timeout passes during workspace recovery, verify settlement followed by the configured expiry recovery, with no ordinary monitor wake or duplicate escalation. For a timer already dispatched before recovery, verify that the saved result settles without changing the task, removing a successor's checkout, or creating another wake. The monitor regression and scheduler regression cover these boundaries with PostgreSQL.
Manual: Add an ordinary Board comment while a task retry is queued or running. Confirm that the same execution keeps working and receives the saved message, without a second executor or an implicit move to Todo. Repeat with a parked retry and verify that fresh instructions can supersede it. Explicit Stop must still cancel active work. The comment route regressions and HTTP/process and interrupted-cancellation tests cover these boundaries locally; deployed runner acceptance remains separate.
task-sharing
Automated: Share sheet, privacy controls, grant routes, and privacy production review cover component actions, persisted grants, inheritance, and actor/resource denials. They do not establish a live two-person browser journey.
Manual: Use authenticated mode with two ordinary operators, an eligible agent, and disposable parent/child/sibling tasks. Create private work as the first person; confirm the second person cannot discover or cold-open it. Share only the child, reload both sessions, and verify child/descendant access without exposing the private parent, sibling, or unreadable project metadata. Inspect direct and inherited rows in Share; inherited rows must identify access managed at its source and offer no local revoke action. Confirm a shared reader cannot manage the task’s grants. Revoke the direct grant as its manager, reload, and retry list and direct reads; change inherited access at its ancestor or project source separately. Inspect blocked Make public actions under a private parent or nonpersonal private project; separately confirm the offered personal-project publish action removes that project binding while private descendants remain private. With an actual granted agent, test the responsible user’s access intersection and the allowed restriction to private; agent access must not permit sharing or publishing.
Sources: Privacy actions, share sheet, issue routes, and authorization.
Gotchas
-
Private task sharing and private project membership are distinct read sources. Revoking a direct task grant does not revoke an independent ancestor/project grant; inspect the actual access source.
-
Priority remains an API field, but ordinary priority UI editing is hidden.
-
A status label alone does not prove that the requested work exists.
-
Single-assignee and atomic checkout rules still apply when tasks are created from different hosts.
-
Use coordination, steering, and documents for their distinct workflows.
Documentation scope: Tasks, conversations, and attention
Recipes cover the main task/conversation/attention workflows. Full shell, permission, attachment, long-thread, and concurrency permutations remain to be enumerated.