## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task conversations must show the saved instruction and recent replies quickly. > - Compact task reads already limit the saved message window. > - The conversation still waits for completed run transcripts even when a saved reply contains the result. > - Removing that wait alone can insert activity after the reader starts reading. > - This pull request defers that output until the reader opens history and keeps required output in the initial reveal. > - The benefit is a useful conversation sooner, with a stable first layout and a working composer. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17593, #18092, #18312, #18358, #18422. **What happened?** Opening a task with a long saved investigation can wait for native events or legacy logs before showing its existing replies. A slow transcript request can hold the conversation behind the loading screen until the 15-second fallback. **Expected behavior** Show the bounded saved conversation without reading completed output that already has a usable saved reply. Keep that output available through the existing history controls. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a task with many completed runs and long saved agent replies. 2. Delay its run events and logs. 3. Open the compact task directly. Before this change, the transcript read blocks the saved replies and composer. ## What Changed - Defer completed successful run transcripts on compact task opens when a usable saved reply is present. Load that output through the existing history controls. - Keep required output on the initial path: live and failed runs, yielded runs, pending interactions, placeholder/progress-only replies, explicit anchors, chats, and full history. Retain output already selected during this visit when its run completes. - Keep saved plans visible when their owning run output is deferred or still loading. - Keep the same composer and draft through history expansion. Offer **More run output** when a single saved run has deferred output. - Position same-task comment links after their target arrives. Wait only for a missing target, with a 15-second limit. Unrelated stalled metadata cannot block an available target after the reveal deadline. - Preserve the reading anchor when a queued scroll event arrives during a properties-pane width transition. - Add a 200-reply/200-run PostgreSQL browser fixture with a saved plan, covering both task views on desktop and mobile. Correct stale browser setup for current routes and the shared mobile scroller. - Remove a random company-prefix collision in the isolated privacy test fixture that failed during CI. ## Verification - Final revision `fba3f2fcbb`: 386 focused thread/scroller unit cases and all 32 production-browser journeys passed. The browser cases cover both task views on desktop/mobile, saved plans, delayed transcripts, history, comment links, Back, drafts, retry, avatar continuity, media and pane resizing. The 25 privacy fixture cases also passed against PostgreSQL. - Workspace typecheck and full build passed with Node 24. A broader local UI run passed 10,220 cases across 849 files before the final navigation/plan review fixes; the changed components were then rechecked in the 386-case focused run. - Five alternating pairs compared master `12b0cc6304` with this revision, using 200 long saved replies and 200 completed native runs. Both production UI builds used the same loopback API/database, Chromium 151.0.7922.34, 1440 × 900, fresh browser contexts, service workers blocked, no CPU throttle, and a controlled 3-second events/log delay. Builds and other suites were stopped during measurement. No page errors occurred. | Useful conversation + editable composer | Baseline median (range) | Fixed median (range) | | --- | --- | --- | | Cold direct open | 3.570s (3.538–3.616s) | 1.056s (1.022–1.141s) | | Task-list navigation | 3.373s (3.342–3.394s) | 0.899s (0.885–0.915s) | | Back | 22ms (22–25ms) | 25ms (25–28ms) | - Median paired savings: 2.519s cold, 2.470s from the list. Completed-output requests: two per baseline sample, zero per fixed sample. Recent-comments API control medians were 13.6ms for both, with ranges 12.1–18.7ms and 11.6–50.8ms. No Back improvement is claimed; an earlier revision's run also included one 1-second Back outlier, retained in the local evidence. - The full local default test command did **not** pass: it stopped on the existing chat test line-selection error. After restoring embedded PostgreSQL library symlinks omitted by an install with scripts disabled, Node 24 passed 672 cases in the first two chat shards, then failed to select the third. This is separate from the passing focused suites and remote CI. - Earlier CI failures were addressed: the privacy prefix collision is fixed; the delegated task-completion reply case passed locally after merging master's reply-recovery fix (#18465). Browser fixture corrections retain the original behavior assertions. Red tests reproduced the loading, navigation, resize and saved-plan regressions before their fixes. - Map, module-boundary, token-gate and added-line token checks passed. The full-tree token scan still finds pre-existing active-username fixtures; this PR adds zero forbidden token lines. - Greptile: **5/5**, final revision, all four review threads resolved. The final-revision PR CI workflow passed, including build, typecheck, all server/chat/workspace test shards, all eight E2E shards, and every Runner lane. GitHub reports 55 successful checks and three skipped checks. The separate **Paperclip Review** check remains queued with **Waiting for the assigned agent**; it has not produced an assessment and has not been bypassed. The branch has no merge conflicts. ## Risks - The default compact task omits completed transcript details when the saved result is sufficient. The reader must open history to inspect them. - Required structural data remains inside the initial reveal boundary. Slow server responses for that data remain visible latency. - Link positioning falls back after 15 seconds when its target never arrives. The conversation remains readable. - The measurements use a controlled local delay. They do not establish a deployed staging speedup. - No API, schema, authorization, or migration changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with tool use and code execution. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites pass; the full default wrapper has the existing selection error documented above) - [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 - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (code CI passed; the separate assigned-agent Paperclip Review remains queued) - [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>
Paperclip maps
The maps describe the same capabilities from two perspectives:
- Feature map: what a person can do, where to reach it, and how to verify the user journey. Preserve its Poteto format.
- Agent access map: the APIs and agent entry points for those capabilities, their permission boundaries, and access verification.
The chat scenario catalog adds natural-language requests, starting context and expected conversational outcomes for the same capability IDs. It lives with Product E2E as planning data; a scenario reference is neither a registered execution nor evidence that a journey passed.
These are sibling directories under maps/. Each feature file has a same-named
agent access companion. Reuse the product map's sub-feature IDs, so tasks/create
identifies the same capability in both maps. Product behavior remains governed by
the implementation spec; a map cannot grant
authority or redefine a permission denial as success.
Capability identifiers
The feature ID is the recipe filename without .md, such as onboarding.
The full capability ID joins that feature ID and a Sub-features key with /:
the company key in feature-map/onboarding.md is onboarding/company.
Its agent-access-map/onboarding.md companion uses the same local company key.
The feature-map index lists the existing
feature and full capability IDs.
Each child page states Feature ID: `onboarding`. after its introduction or
product-map link. In feature recipes, show the full ID beside the parsed local
key: - `company`: `onboarding/company` — create a company. In access
companions and Storybook verification guidance, keep the existing local heading
and put Capability ID: `onboarding/company`. beneath it. These labels make
the existing identifiers visible without changing keys, anchors, or ID generation.
Use full capability IDs in cross-feature references, Storybook annotations, tests, issues, PRs, and verification evidence. Both segments use lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens. Keep filenames and keys stable when display titles or navigation labels change; renaming either changes the capability ID.
Entry-point IDs describe a surface, such as web-wizard, and are scoped to their
recipe. Reference them with a recipe link, such as
onboarding.md#web-wizard, and record the
capability exercised separately. Navigation section labels are not capability IDs.
See IDs and references for examples.
Access contract
Every business operation needs both an API and a usable agent entry point for an
actor authorized to perform it. A dedicated tool is optional when REST, the CLI,
an assigned MCP client, or native search_api / call_api already provides the
operation. Record which agent surfaces actually have that path; an installed CLI
or optional MCP package cannot be assumed available to every native/remote run.
Track these independently:
| Dimension | Values and meaning |
|---|---|
| API | present, missing, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Use exact methods/paths; distinguish protocols from REST. |
| Agent access | available, partial, missing, restricted, operator-only, not-applicable, or unreviewed. Name the supported surface and actual entry point. |
| Policy | Actor, action/grant, company/resource/ownership scope, responsible-user intersection, run requirements, work modes, and gates relevant to the operation. |
| Evidence | source-only, verified, failed, blocked, or not-run. Source presence and successful board calls are not agent verification. |
| Review depth | baseline records representative operations and known gaps; operation-reviewed enumerates the capability's meaningful operations and their individual access contracts. |
Broad capabilities such as task properties must be split into operations before they count as operation-reviewed: renaming, metadata edits, assignment, dependencies, and lifecycle changes can use different tools and permission rules. An available read path cannot certify a write path. List/get/create/update/delete, execution/control, credential handling, and resolution are separate where their authority or transport differs. Do not duplicate request schemas from OpenAPI.
Exceptions and restrictions
Presentation-only state, static developer fixtures, and pre-start/local operator
work may use not-applicable for a domain API, with a concrete reason and the
existing local path. When a capability combines shared data with presentation,
split the operations: browser recents do not exempt resource lookup from API
coverage. Promoting local state to a shared feature requires revisiting the entry.
A board-only endpoint is restricted for agent identity, not an automatic
exception or a missing API. Cite the enforced policy and record whether the
agent can request the authorized human's action and observe its result. An
unresolved delegation question remains in Gaps. Company access, a job title,
a personal assistant's OAuth grant, or an accepted interaction does not grant
board identity. Keep budget, approval, secret and execution authority intact.
Check actual route/service authorization and production tool admission. OpenAPI actor labels and scenario/evaluation tool declarations are supporting metadata; record disagreements rather than using them as proof of access. Native API fallback restrictions, tool field/scope limits, and rollout settings are part of the agent path, even when a legacy agent can call the REST endpoint directly.
Companion file format
Each agent-access-map/<area>.md has an H1, a relative link to its product file,
and its feature ID, followed by one H2 backticked local key per product
sub-feature. Each capability starts with its full capability ID and contains
these fields:
- Review:
baselineoroperation-reviewed. - API: presence state and exact operation IDs, or a reasoned exception.
- Agent access: availability state and concrete entry points by surface.
- Policy: relevant permission and runtime boundaries, with source references.
- Evidence: evidence state, reviewed commit and sources or executed proof.
- Verification: allowed/denied assertions and observable result; record what has actually run separately from the proposed recipe.
- Gaps: missing APIs/paths, discovery drift, unreviewed operations or policy
decisions; use
noneonly for the enumerated scope that was reviewed.
For an operation-reviewed capability, use H3 backticked operation IDs and repeat
API, Agent access, Policy, Evidence, Verification and Gaps for each operation.
Use small operation names such as create, update, read, or run-now.
The enclosing capability has Review: operation-reviewed only after its
meaningful operations have been enumerated. The following excerpt shows one
operation; include the others before using that review label:
## `definition`
Review: `operation-reviewed`.
### `create`
API: `present` — POST /api/companies/{companyId}/routines.
Agent access: `available` — agent REST, CLI routine create and native call_api
under the enabled rollout and active-run/mode gates.
Policy: same company; assigneeAgentId must be the calling agent; cite the
routine authorization and native API policy sources.
Evidence: `source-only` — reviewed commit and source links; no live proof.
Verification: `not-run` — create an owned routine; reject assignment to another
agent; inspect saved configuration, attribution and retry behavior.
Gaps: verify ownership and responsible-user resolution with a permitted agent
context; source presence alone does not qualify this operation.
Keeping the maps synchronized
When a change adds/removes a capability or changes its behavior, API, permission, tool binding, CLI support, or work mode, update the affected companion and product recipe as appropriate in the same change. Preserve IDs across renames where the capability is unchanged; update the affected cross-links together. Indexes discover recipes automatically. An API-only change may update the companion without rewriting unchanged user instructions. Update the corresponding chat scenarios when their request, assumptions or expected outcome changes; use multiple cases for meaningfully different starting conditions rather than treating an API path as conversational coverage.
maintain-verification-skill owns reconciliation of both maps. It follows changed source and authorization, checks real agent reachability, and records product gaps without implementing them during a maintenance pass. The creation skill uses this structure. verify-paperclip consumes the relevant recipes and reports evidence/drift; map editing belongs to maintenance.
Run the structural check after map changes:
node scripts/check-maps.mjs
It checks paired areas/IDs, navigation metadata, required fields, and local references. It does not certify endpoint authorization, production bindings, operation completeness, or live behavior. Source audits must check those against the existing API and tool contracts; avoid a second schema catalog or runtime.
For live access proof, use Paperclip's existing API/runner/MCP fixtures or an owned
isolated instance. Use the actual agent identity, target and work mode. Assert the
allowed result and relevant denial (another company/private resource, wrong
owner, missing grant, invalid run, restricted mode or resolver). Mutations also
need persisted state/attribution and retry behavior. Capture evidence using the
existing artifact workflow; keep executed run results
separate from generated maps/generated/coverage.json, which lists page references.
Local authorship and generated indexes
Change only the recipes, access contracts and stories whose behavior or intent
changed. Feature recipes own navigation metadata; stories own small
parameters.paperclip annotations. Keep the feature-map README's readable ID
index aligned with those sources; it does not register entries for generation.
Do not refresh counts in shared READMEs, inventories, fingerprints or review
journals.
node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs validates and generates aggregate navigation,
Storybook data, verification routes and the page inventory. All outputs live in
ignored maps/generated/, ui/storybook/generated/, and the ignored Storybook
preview.tsx wrapper. Start/build and UI typechecking generate their own inputs.
A clean merged checkout therefore assembles both branches' changes automatically.
Git provides history and diffs. PRs, issues and CI artifacts retain review/run evidence for the named revision. Capability associations do not create whole-file review dependencies. Keep durable scenario limits in the affected recipe or story.