Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip c8efdbfba4 test(storybook): add production examples for feature map UI gaps (#16196)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - The feature map records the user-facing capabilities.
> - Storybook uses the same feature index.
> - Step 2 found 49 UI capabilities with no authored examples.
> - This pull request adds shipped-component examples with isolated
fixtures.
> - The catalog records each example's states and remaining production
checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #16167. The verification inventory is merged; this follow-up now
targets master.

## What Changed

- Add 37 suites and 257 scenarios for all 49 UI capabilities from the
step-2 inventory. Keep existing stories and IDs.
- Use shipped pages and components. Simulate API replies, sockets,
props, and callbacks at their boundaries.
- Activate story API fixtures before the application providers read
data. Block unregistered API mutations and restore owned storage/fetch
state.
- Add browser checks for rendering, declared play assertions, fixture
reset, and selected mobile/theme states. Update the catalog and
verification inventory.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- UI Vitest suite: 730 files and 8,208 tests passed. Fixture boundary
tests: 4 passed.
- Map/catalog checks, 27 generator/map tests, and token gates: passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: passed. All 2,248 previous built entry IDs
remain present.
- Pre-reconciliation static browser suite: 260 checks passed (257
scenarios, token fixture reset, and two mobile/theme cases). All
non-play stories assert an explicit subject state; 129 play functions
passed.
- `pnpm test:run` could not complete on this Mac. Embedded PostgreSQL
exhausted host shared-memory allocation. The run also reported
native-runner test timeouts. Only this task's verified runner was
stopped; other jobs and host settings were preserved.
- Reconciled onto merged master `252d9b5077`. The six draft stories and
new same-browser reset regression passed (7 checks); 16
draft-persistence tests and UI typecheck passed. Static merge
verification: 32 affected-subject/draft checks passed, including
same-browser reset. Rebuilt Storybook retains all 2,248 original IDs in
its 2,517-entry index. Four additional play-result checks passed:
visible onboarding reset, pending probe, filtered-empty runs, and
optimistic queued-response removal. UI typecheck and 27 catalog/map
tests also passed. Final static browser suite on
`3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 261 checks passed (257
scenarios plus fixture-reset and mobile checks). Latest head
`3fab35df8d912935fa86ce0de7d32d07e2b5f4c3`: all 55 CI/status checks
passed; the two optional Storybook workflow jobs were skipped. Greptile
5/5 with no unresolved threads.
- No pinned Linux visual-baseline comparison or real provider journey is
claimed.

## Risks

Fixtures can drift from production contracts. The catalog records
inspected sources and their fingerprints. Capability links provide
initial isolated UI coverage; they do not certify every recipe variant,
real permissions, persistence, or provider behavior.

The new examples expose existing UI limits. Plugin discovery failure
stays on Loading. Document and environment-list reads lack dedicated
failure feedback; Cases and Inbox fall back to empty views after errors.
Goal alignment has display views but no assignment control. These
findings remain visible in the inventory.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. The exact runtime deployment ID and context
window are not exposed in this session. Used code generation, shell
execution, and browser verification.

## 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>
2026-10-13 13:24:09 -05:00
..

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.

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.

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, review date and source commit, followed by one H2 backticked ID per product sub-feature. Each capability contains these fields:

  • Review: baseline or operation-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 none only 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 both indexes and cross-links together. An API-only change may update the companion without rewriting unchanged user instructions.

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, indexes, 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 product-map coverage.json, which records documentation scope.