Files
PaperClipAI/maps
d30c8f42b8 feat(ui): keep writes durable through temporary disconnects (#17960)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/123/changes/paperclip/123
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People save tasks, write documents, make decisions and send board
messages.
> - A disconnect can hide a response after the server accepts a write.
> - Recovery must keep the original account, task and request key.
> - The merged connection foundation in #15754 handles reads and shared
outage state.
> - This change adds bounded write recovery and explicit actions when
recovery stops.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Temporary failures could lose edits, report accepted writes as failures,
or require people to copy and send input again. A retry could target a
newly selected task or account. Restoring attachments could create a
second task.

**Expected behavior**

Keep the draft, its owner and its target. Retry only operations with a
server contract that prevents duplicate writes. Verify uncertain
results. Show conflicts and permanent failures, with an explicit resend
or cancel action.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Save a task title during an outage, then open another task before
recovery.
2. Restore a task creation that needs files, selecting those files in
another order.
3. Lose a document or decision response, then interrupt the verification
read.
4. Switch accounts while a create, upload or connected-channel
publication is pending.
5. Type and erase a new-task draft before the first account lookup
completes, then reopen it.

This PR carries the write layer from #15769 and its review fixes. It
targets master after #15754 merged. Related test cleanup #16952 already
covers the unchanged copy-link toast test; this PR does not duplicate
that work.

## What Changed

- Add bounded autosave and submit jobs for supported writes, with
pending, conflict and manual retry states. Retain admitted autosaves
after navigation and preserve newer task revisions.
- Keep each job with its original account, task and operation. First
account resolution adopts admitted startup work; a later account change
cancels old work. Remount inline and document editors when their owner
or document subject changes.
- Preserve task-creation keys and immutable request snapshots through
file reattachment. Restore generated document keys before comparing
reselected files. Reject changed requests instead of creating a second
task.
- Check the original account scope before creates and each upload. Save
successful upload receipts before stopping on an account change.
Identify attachments by content digest and metadata.
- Verify uncertain document and decision results. Replay only plain,
keyed comments automatically; combined reassignment, reopen and
run-setting changes require receipt reconciliation or cancel. Settle
each request once when a receipt races its retry.
- Scope drafts and connected-channel publication reads to their owner.
Keep unowned older records unread and unreplayed, with an explicit
confirmed discard action after Activity inspection. Preserve typing
through the first session lookup, keep erased text erased, and report
browser persistence only when storage succeeds.
- Wait for the first account lookup before sending startup status
changes or decisions. Retry failed required lookups with a fixed limit
and surface exhaustion to the original action. Preserve uncertain
comment keys on account cancellation. Check the account generation
before a comment retry calls its sender and again immediately before
POST after asynchronous preparation. Retire only that request’s
optimistic echo on completion.
- Return an ordinary comment’s accepted same-company, same-task,
same-user receipt before workspace reopening, task status changes or
wakeups. Reused keys with changed text still conflict. Complete
reference and activity records through the same finalizer for initial
sends and accepted retries. It locks the task before its comment,
matching task and company deletion, comment removal and tombstoning,
rejects removed or tombstoned comments, repairs references and inserts a
missing activity record in one transaction, and publishes after commit.
- Remove reader-only record and comment-body size caps so accepted
browser writes remain readable, including JSON-escaped comment requests
in local and session storage. Update four existing Storybook fixtures to
use owned draft keys.
- Document the write contracts and add regression and real browser
recovery coverage.

- Add the exact reviewed-save recovery regression for both composer
implementations and reloads. Align receipt completion, both comment
deletion methods and company deletion with task deletion by locking
tasks first. Cover real task and company deletion races.

## Verification

- The exact reviewed-unknown-save regression fails in all four cases on
original commit `1ed0af4186`. It passes with this PR for both composers,
before and after reload. Cancel keeps the text and uploaded receipt. The
retained draft sends, and the next message also sends. Run `pnpm exec
vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/composer-recovery.test.tsx`.
- The new real PostgreSQL task-deletion race fails with SQLSTATE `40P01`
on parent commit `f3253a00c4`. The company-deletion race also fails with
`40P01` on `e8cf0e02dd`. All six receipt tests pass after the final
lock-order fixes. They cover company deletion, task deletion, comment
removal, tombstoning, concurrent cross-task references and interrupted
reference repair. Run `pnpm exec vitest run --project
@paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-receipt-postgres.test.ts`.
- The full UI run passed 9,656 of 9,659 tests across 816 files. Three
cases failed under that run: two large-tree timeouts and one
plugin-panel assertion. All 67 tests in those two files passed in an
isolated rerun. These failures remain recorded; this does not claim a
clean full UI run.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, token gates and map checks pass on
the final change. The local full repository test command was started,
then stopped when the delivery moved to this existing PR. Fresh PR CI
must provide the full-suite gate.
- A local Storybook walkthrough used the real rich editor. Cancel kept
the restored text, Send cleared it after the simulated save, and a new
draft enabled Send again. Storybook simulates submission; it is not
staging acceptance.
- Earlier verification on `f3253a00c4` recorded five browser journeys
for title saves, cached-task offline recovery, startup recovery,
accepted comment replay and session lookup failure. Those results remain
prior-head evidence. No new staging deployment is claimed.

- On `e8cf0e02dd`, all CI checks passed after one browser-shard rerun.
Its first failure copied page text instead of YAML in an unrelated
agent-configuration test. On final commit `35131d4380`, Greptile is 5/5
with no unresolved review threads. The first CI attempt has two failures
outside this diff: runner close-attachment suspension and
scheduled-retry teardown. The scheduled-retry file passes all 14 tests
in isolation; the isolated runner test still fails locally. The single
standard CI rerun passed both jobs, and the aggregate verification gate
passed. All CI checks are green on `35131d4380`; Apex is 5/5 on that
same commit with no unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Automatic replay requires server duplicate prevention or result
verification. Uncertain combined mutations require receipt observation
or cancel and a fresh intentional send.
- Old unowned form drafts remain stored but are not assigned to an
account. Unowned channel records can be retired after Activity
inspection; this never cancels an accepted remote update.
- Browser storage and hashing can be unavailable. Storage failure is
reported honestly. Without a digest, replay can duplicate an upload
rather than silently drop a selected file.
- Detached autosaves remain bounded and check account ownership on each
attempt. Conflicts or exhaustion retain the draft for explicit recovery.
- No schema, credential or agent permission change is included. This PR
does not claim staging deployment or original-task acceptance.

## Model Used

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) produced the original
implementation with tool use. OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, assisted with
restoration, integration, verification and review fixes. This Codex
session does not expose its exact serving model 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
- [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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <claude@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <bippadotta@protonmail.com>
2026-10-28 10:52:06 -07:00
..

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.

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: 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 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.