mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-04 11:01:16 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
a61cf38106
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes product capabilities and user journeys. > - Small fixes and test changes have added long notes to that map. > - These notes make substantial features harder to find. > - This pull request removes those additions from the last week's changes and sets a clear rule for future additions. > - The benefit is a smaller map with stable capability IDs and accurate entry points. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Unclear or confusing documentation. **Where is the issue?** `maps/feature-map/`, the map maintenance instructions, and repository rules. **What's wrong?** Between October 27 and November 3, 2026, 115 commits changed the feature map. Many additions describe bug fixes, performance details, small UI changes, or new tests. They do not introduce substantial product features. The old synchronization instructions also encouraged a map edit for every behavior change. **Suggested fix** Add a rule that requires a substantial new feature before expanding the map. Remove minor-update notes. Keep genuine feature additions and minimal corrections to existing instructions. The review covers master through `b22ef22d56`; it does not revert application code. Conflict resolution preserves later map changes from master outside that audit snapshot. Searched open GitHub PRs and issues for related feature-map work. No duplicate cleanup was found. Substantial feature additions retained here include Coordinator (#17983), the agent YAML editor (#18036), document image galleries (#18157), remote workspace storage (#18403), native Kimi (#18391), proactive chat messages (#18374), and the Sentry receiver added in #18714. ## What Changed - Add `rules/feature-map-scope.mdc` and register its `maps/**` scope with Greptile. - Align `AGENTS.md` and the shared map contract with that rule. Routine fixes and test changes no longer require incidental map edits. - Remove 755 net lines from 23 feature recipes. Preserve all 35 areas and 192 capability IDs. - Keep substantial features and the corrections needed for current navigation, provider availability, and access boundaries. Examples from the reviewed changes: | Removed or shortened addition | Why it does not need a feature-map expansion | | --- | --- | | Rounded composer image thumbnails (#18689) | Small UI change within existing task creation. | | Connection profile reads and review-count queries (#18687, #18688) | Performance details within existing app permissions. | | Warm-session, Retry, export-capacity, and tool-wait cases | Regression details for existing execution and recovery. | | New task-search, project-context, document-persistence, and routine test journeys | Test additions for existing capabilities. The tests remain in place. | | New task button placement (#18703) | Another entry to an existing task form. | | Local browser verification notes | Run evidence belongs in the PR or test report. | ## Verification - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes: 35 areas, 192 capability IDs, valid references and contract fields. - `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs` passes: 328 files and 3,068 stories. Generated indexes remain ignored. - Compared capability keys and navigation metadata in every edited recipe with the original source. All are unchanged. - Checked rule frontmatter, Greptile registration, representative scope matches, and `git diff --check`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass on `9a60eef8eb8da9bc7c3a02203c79bec12e8c8b6b`. The final `a0801e8a939494ecde3739097a80258917428e94` commit only corrects two lines in the plugin-panel recipe; map and catalog checks pass again. - Greptile reviewed the final `a0801e8a939494ecde3739097a80258917428e94` head at 5/5 with no findings. The earlier review found one inaccurate phrase about unavailable plugin panels. The hook confirms that readiness gates automatic opening, while declared panels remain selectable. The final documentation commit corrects that phrase and the thread is resolved. Paperclip's refreshed review is advisory and remains queued. - The earlier CI run failed two assertions: [server 4/12](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41634761842/job/125914173960) counted three Anthropic identity calls instead of two in `connection-management.integration.test.ts`; [chat 1/3](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41634761842/job/125914174257) observed zero publications instead of one in the same-principal endpoint-settlement case. Both exact tests pass locally on the rebased head. This PR changes neither their source nor their expectations. These failed results remain historical evidence. - Final-head CI passed server 4/12 and all other suites except the first [chat 1/3 attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41637834618/job/125925926131), which repeated the same zero-publication assertion. The browser gate passed. The single failed-job retry was accepted for this unchanged head in [workflow attempt 2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41637834618/attempts/2). [Chat 1/3 passed on that retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41637834618/job/125933199635), and the aggregate verification gate passed. Both required gates, `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`, are green on `a0801e8a939494ecde3739097a80258917428e94`. The one retry allowance is consumed. - The first full local `pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted before completion so master could be rebased without changing source under running tests. It is not a passing test result. Full current-head CI remains required. - No application code, tests, schemas, or lockfiles changed. ## Risks - Low runtime risk. This change only edits documentation and review guidance. - Detailed regression instructions become less visible in the feature map. Their tests and technical documentation remain available. - Some additions mix a new feature with a small fix. Those blocks retain the feature and shorten the incidental detail. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, Git history inspection, repository tools, and code execution. The session does not expose a more specific model deployment 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 — map, catalog, capability-ID, and rule-scope checks; full Vitest limits are stated above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable — no new runtime tests apply to this documentation change - [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>
79 lines
4.4 KiB
Markdown
79 lines
4.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":20}
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Delegation, dependencies, and signoff
|
||
|
||
A larger task can coordinate child work, dependencies, reviewers, and execution controls while preserving a clear owner and a traceable completion decision.
|
||
|
||
Feature ID: `task-coordination`.
|
||
|
||
Implementation: [task thread](../../ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.tsx), [execution policy](../../server/src/services/issues.ts).
|
||
|
||
Agent access: [companion](../agent-access-map/task-coordination.md).
|
||
|
||
## Sub-features
|
||
|
||
- `delegation`: `task-coordination/delegation` — inspect parent/child tasks and the original request behind delegated work.
|
||
- `dependencies`: `task-coordination/dependencies` — show blocking tasks and wake eligible work when prerequisites resolve.
|
||
- `signoff`: `task-coordination/signoff` — apply the configured implementation/review completion policy.
|
||
- `tree-control`: `task-coordination/tree-control` — pause or resume a task tree without bypassing its gates.
|
||
|
||
## How to get to it (user POV)
|
||
|
||
### `task-relationships`
|
||
|
||
Open the task’s parent/child and dependency links in task detail.
|
||
|
||
### `review-and-controls`
|
||
|
||
Inspect the task’s execution policy and available review, pause, resume, or stop controls.
|
||
|
||
## Driving it with Playwright and the Paperclip API
|
||
|
||
Preconditions: follow the [baseline](./README.md#before-driving-a-journey). Prepare a parent, child, and dependent task plus implementer/reviewer agents. Record execution policy and use a disposable tree.
|
||
|
||
Parent/dependency navigation and inherited tree holds can be checked on unassigned
|
||
tasks. Agents are required for the continuation and signoff portion. A tree pause
|
||
creates a hold; it does not change task statuses to a paused status.
|
||
|
||
### `task-relationships`
|
||
|
||
Automated: [dependency wakeups](../../server/src/__tests__/issue-dependency-wakeups-routes.test.ts) checks server behavior; visual relationship navigation remains a manual check.
|
||
|
||
Manual: Block one task on another, finish the prerequisite, and observe the dependent task’s eligible continuation. Follow parent/child links back to the source request. Verify no duplicate run or false parent completion occurs.
|
||
|
||
### `review-and-controls`
|
||
|
||
Automated: [execution policy](../../server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy.test.ts), [tree control](../../server/src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts), and [signoff browser suite](../../tests/e2e/signoff-policy.spec.ts) target these layers. A linked suite is not a claim that its current run is green.
|
||
|
||
Manual: Complete implementation under a review-required policy and confirm it waits for the required review outcome. Exercise rejection and later approval. Pause the parent while child work is pending, then verify resumption respects budget and ownership gates.
|
||
|
||
Resume removes the pause without changing task status. Its wake count includes only
|
||
current agent assignees on todo, in-progress, or in-review tasks. The dialog explains
|
||
that blocked, backlog, and unassigned tasks remain idle. Verify this in both task
|
||
interfaces with [the paused composer browser suite](../../tests/e2e/paused-composer.spec.ts).
|
||
Release rechecks tasks reopened after the pause; another active pause still prevents
|
||
their execution, and uncertain prior executions must be reconciled before waking.
|
||
|
||
### Plugin task panels
|
||
|
||
An installed plugin can offer an agent detail tab in the task side panel through
|
||
its optional `taskSidePanel` declaration. Open the view from the task side-panel
|
||
launcher for the running agent, or the assigned agent when idle. The plugin owns
|
||
its label, viewer, and access checks. Missing or disabled plugins add no view.
|
||
A closed panel can be reopened from the launcher.
|
||
|
||
Implementation: [panel discovery](../../ui/src/hooks/useTaskPluginPanels.ts) and
|
||
[task panel](../../ui/src/components/task-side-panel/TaskSidePanel.tsx).
|
||
Automated: [discovery tests](../../ui/src/hooks/useTaskPluginPanels.test.tsx) and
|
||
[task panel tests](../../ui/src/components/task-side-panel/TaskSidePanel.test.tsx)
|
||
cover availability, task/agent changes, failures, inactivity and dismissal.
|
||
These mocks do not establish a particular plugin's live transport behavior.
|
||
|
||
## Gotchas
|
||
|
||
- Review completion and task completion are different events under some policies.
|
||
- Pausing a tree must not be “tested” by changing statuses until the screen looks quiet.
|
||
- Use [questions and approvals](./questions-and-approvals.md) for decision forms and [recovery](./recovery.md) for interrupted work.
|