Files
PaperClipAI/ui/src/lib/pipeline-references.ts
T
DottaandPaperclip 43b005b704 Add pipeline workflow primitives and operator UI (#7903)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The pipeline subsystem models repeatable work as items moving
through stages, with agent automation, review gates, blockers, drift
notices, and linked work.
> - Operators need this to be usable as one coherent workflow surface,
not just as backend primitives or disconnected route experiments.
> - The branch now carries the pipeline data model, service/routes,
CLI/tutorial path, aggregation feeds, operator UI, stage automation
controls, liveness/retry handling, and follow-up polish that make the
primitive reviewable end to end.
> - This pull request is the single review target for that pipeline
workflow primitive stack.
> - The benefit is that reviewers can evaluate the full operator
experience and server contract together against `master`.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this work. The underlying feature
request is described inline.

### Problem or motivation

Paperclip needs a first-class way to model multi-stage agent/company
workflows where upstream items can spawn downstream work, request
review, carry fields across pipelines, surface drift, retry automation,
and show operators where work is blocked or active. Without a unified
pipeline primitive, these workflows spread across ad hoc issues,
routines, and comments, making the state hard to inspect or operate.

### Proposed solution

Add the pipeline workflow primitive stack: database schema and
migrations, shared validators/types, server services and REST routes,
aggregation and liveness helpers, CLI/tutorial smoke support, and the
React operator UI for pipeline lists, boards, item detail,
review/learnings views, settings, stage automation, secrets, carry-over
fields, and retry/recovery flows.

### Alternatives considered

- Keep workflows as loosely linked issues and routines: rejected because
operators need a single board/detail/settings surface for repeated
workflow patterns.
- Ship backend primitives first and defer UI: rejected for this branch
because the operator experience is the main way to validate the
primitive.
- Add a narrower one-off content workflow: rejected because the same
primitives are useful across future company processes.

## What Changed

- Added and evolved pipeline schema, migrations, shared contracts,
server services, REST routes, route tests, and CLI/tutorial smoke
support.
- Added pipeline aggregation, health/liveness, drift acknowledgment,
blocker/carry-over, automation retry, stage automation environment, and
permission recovery behavior.
- Added the operator UI for pipeline index/board/item
detail/settings/review/learnings flows, including stage secrets,
automation controls, markdown/item descriptions, linked issue assets,
liveness banners, and source automation metadata.
- Refactored issue document frame rendering through the shared
`DocumentFrameHeader` component to keep document controls consistent
with the pipeline document surfaces.
- Kept this PR as the single base-branch review target for the current
pipeline branch.

## Verification

Current branch refresh:

- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts` — 31
passed
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts` — 19
passed
- `pnpm --filter ./server typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` — passed
- Verified Pipelines remains gated by `enablePipelines === true`:
sidebar item is hidden unless the flag is enabled, direct pipeline
routes redirect to `/dashboard` when disabled, and the Experimental
settings UI still has no Pipelines toggle.
- GitHub status checks on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
all complete with no failing conclusions, including Actions, Socket,
Superagent/Security, and Greptile Review
- Greptile summary on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` —
Confidence Score 5/5
- GitHub review-thread sweep — 0 unresolved Greptile threads

Previously recorded during branch development:

- Server pipeline service/route and aggregation tests
- Shared validator tests
- UI pipeline page/settings/item-detail/learnings/liveness tests
- Pipeline tutorial smoke path

## Risks

- High review surface: this is a large feature branch spanning database,
shared contracts, server behavior, CLI/docs, and UI.
- Migration ordering and schema compatibility need reviewer attention
because this branch has been kept current across multiple `master`
syncs.
- GitHub still reports merge state `BLOCKED` because the PR is awaiting
normal human review/branch-protection completion; all current status
checks are green.
- Branch-name checklist exception: this PR uses the pre-existing
requested branch name, which predates the current public-branch naming
rule. The PR title/body avoid internal issue references.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with repository tool use,
shell execution, git/GitHub CLI operations, and local verification
commands. Earlier commits in this branch were assisted by Paperclip
agents and other AI coding agents as recorded in commit authorship.

## 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)
- [ ] 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>
2026-06-26 12:02:44 -05:00

144 lines
5.1 KiB
TypeScript

/**
* Typed work references for pipeline cases.
*
* Cases carry references to the actual work — a workspace folder, an external
* URL, a linked issue — inside `fields` (and the dedicated `workspaceRef`
* column). This module formalises those loosely-shaped values into a small
* typed union so the case detail panel can render real links/chips instead of
* dumping "[object Object]" or "Added details" into the plain field list.
*
* Detection is intentionally tolerant: references can arrive as explicit
* `{ kind: "url", url }` records, as bare URL strings, or as records that simply
* carry a tell-tale field (`url`, `issueId`, `path`). Anything we don't
* recognise is left in the plain Details list untouched.
*/
export type WorkReference =
| { id: string; kind: "workspace"; label: string; path: string | null; branch: string | null }
| { id: string; kind: "url"; label: string; url: string }
| { id: string; kind: "issue"; label: string; issueId: string | null; identifier: string | null };
interface ReferenceCaseInput {
fields?: Record<string, unknown> | null;
workspaceRef?: Record<string, unknown> | null;
}
function readString(value: unknown): string | null {
return typeof value === "string" && value.trim() ? value.trim() : null;
}
function readRecord(value: unknown): Record<string, unknown> | null {
return value && typeof value === "object" && !Array.isArray(value) ? (value as Record<string, unknown>) : null;
}
function isHttpUrl(value: string): boolean {
return /^https?:\/\//i.test(value.trim());
}
function humanizeKey(key: string): string {
return key
.replace(/[_-]+/g, " ")
.replace(/([a-z0-9])([A-Z])/g, "$1 $2")
.trim()
.replace(/\s+/g, " ")
.replace(/^./, (char) => char.toUpperCase());
}
function normalizeKind(raw: unknown): WorkReference["kind"] | null {
const kind = readString(raw)?.toLowerCase();
if (!kind) return null;
if (kind === "workspace" || kind === "folder" || kind === "workspace_folder" || kind === "file") return "workspace";
if (kind === "url" || kind === "link" || kind === "external") return "url";
if (kind === "issue" || kind === "task" || kind === "ticket") return "issue";
return null;
}
function workspaceFromRecord(id: string, label: string, record: Record<string, unknown>): WorkReference {
return {
id,
kind: "workspace",
label,
path:
readString(record.path) ??
readString(record.folder) ??
readString(record.workspacePath) ??
readString(record.name) ??
readString(record.label),
branch: readString(record.branch) ?? readString(record.ref),
};
}
/** Parse a single `fields` entry into a typed reference, or null if it isn't one. */
function referenceFromField(key: string, value: unknown): WorkReference | null {
const label = humanizeKey(key);
const url = readString(value);
if (url && isHttpUrl(url)) {
return { id: key, kind: "url", label, url };
}
const record = readRecord(value);
if (!record) return null;
const explicitKind = normalizeKind(record.kind ?? record.type);
// URL-shaped.
const recordUrl = readString(record.url) ?? readString(record.href);
if (explicitKind === "url" || (recordUrl && isHttpUrl(recordUrl))) {
if (!recordUrl) return null;
return { id: key, kind: "url", label: readString(record.label) ?? label, url: recordUrl };
}
// Issue-shaped.
const issueId = readString(record.issueId) ?? readString(record.id);
const identifier = readString(record.identifier) ?? readString(record.issueIdentifier);
if (explicitKind === "issue" || ((issueId || identifier) && (record.issueId || record.issueIdentifier))) {
return {
id: key,
kind: "issue",
label: readString(record.title) ?? readString(record.label) ?? label,
issueId,
identifier,
};
}
// Workspace-shaped.
if (explicitKind === "workspace" || record.path || record.folder || record.workspacePath) {
return workspaceFromRecord(key, readString(record.label) ?? label, record);
}
return null;
}
/**
* Extract every typed work reference for a case, starting with the dedicated
* `workspaceRef` column and then any reference-shaped `fields` entries.
*/
export function extractWorkReferences(caseItem: ReferenceCaseInput): WorkReference[] {
const references: WorkReference[] = [];
const workspaceRef = readRecord(caseItem.workspaceRef);
if (workspaceRef && (workspaceRef.path || workspaceRef.folder || workspaceRef.workspacePath || workspaceRef.name)) {
references.push(workspaceFromRecord("workspaceRef", "Workspace folder", workspaceRef));
}
for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(caseItem.fields ?? {})) {
const reference = referenceFromField(key, value);
if (reference) references.push(reference);
}
return references;
}
/**
* The set of `fields` keys that render as typed references, so the plain
* Details list can exclude them and avoid showing the same value twice.
*/
export function referenceFieldKeys(fields: Record<string, unknown> | null | undefined): Set<string> {
const keys = new Set<string>();
for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(fields ?? {})) {
if (referenceFromField(key, value)) keys.add(key);
}
return keys;
}