Files
PaperClipAI/docs/api/issues.md
T
DottaandPaperclip 627728bdde feat: add authoritative issue PATCH receipts (#10478)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents update tasks through the issue API.
> - The update response did not state which values changed.
> - Blocker updates also did not echo the scalar blocker IDs.
> - Agents therefore used an extra GET request to confirm a successful
write.
> - This pull request adds an authoritative change receipt and an
optional small response.
> - The benefit is fewer API calls with a clear and compatible write
contract.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists for this change.

### Subsystem affected

Cross-cutting: `server/`, `packages/shared`, and the UI issue cache.

### Problem or motivation

A successful issue PATCH returned the updated issue, but it did not
identify the effective changes. Blocker writes returned relation
summaries without the scalar IDs. Agents could not distinguish a
confirmed clear operation from missing data. The response must confirm
committed field and blocker changes while existing UI clients continue
to receive the full issue by default.

### Proposed solution

Add a `changes` receipt. Add a conditional `blockedByIssueIds` echo.
Support `Prefer: return=minimal`. Keep the full response as the default.

### Alternatives considered

Make the small response the default for agent tokens. This would create
different response contracts by actor type, so this pull request does
not use that design.

### Roadmap alignment

This is a focused control-plane reliability improvement. It does not
duplicate an open roadmap milestone.

## What Changed

- Compute committed issue row and relation changes in the issue service.
- Omit no-op fields and truncate changed long text values to 200
characters.
- Echo blocker ID arrays for blocker set and clear requests.
- Add the opt-in `Prefer: return=minimal` response and
`Preference-Applied` header.
- Keep receipt metadata out of React Query issue caches.
- Add route and embedded Postgres tests for the new contract.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-activity-events-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
"returns authoritative update receipts for row fields and blocker
relations"`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `git diff --check`

## Risks

- Low compatibility risk. The default response only adds receipt fields.
- Minimal mode is opt-in. Existing clients do not receive a smaller
body.
- The receipt excludes `updatedAt` because the response already returns
it as the freshness anchor.
- Prose API and agent workflow guidance will follow after the server
contract is available.

> 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 based on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID, context window
size, and reasoning mode are not exposed to the agent. The agent used
repository tools, code execution, and test 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
- [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>
2026-07-31 18:52:59 -07:00

8.9 KiB

title, summary
title summary
Issues Issue CRUD, checkout/release, comments, documents, interactions, and attachments

Issues are the unit of work in Paperclip. They support hierarchical relationships, atomic checkout, comments, issue-thread interactions, keyed text documents, and file attachments.

List Issues

GET /api/companies/{companyId}/issues

Query parameters:

Param Description
status Filter by status (comma-separated: todo,in_progress)
assigneeAgentId Filter by assigned agent
projectId Filter by project

Results sorted by priority.

Get Issue

GET /api/issues/{issueId}

Returns the issue with project, goal, and ancestors (parent chain with their projects and goals).

The response also includes:

  • planDocument: the full text of the issue document with key plan, when present
  • documentSummaries: metadata for all linked issue documents
  • legacyPlanDocument: a read-only fallback when the description still contains an old <plan> block

Create Issue

POST /api/companies/{companyId}/issues
{
  "title": "Implement caching layer",
  "description": "Add Redis caching for hot queries",
  "status": "todo",
  "priority": "high",
  "assigneeAgentId": "{agentId}",
  "parentId": "{parentIssueId}",
  "projectId": "{projectId}",
  "goalId": "{goalId}"
}

Update Issue

PATCH /api/issues/{issueId}
Headers: X-Paperclip-Run-Id: {runId}
{
  "status": "done",
  "comment": "Implemented caching with 90% hit rate."
}

The optional comment field adds a comment in the same call. For execution-policy review or approval decisions, the decision comment must be included in this same PATCH; a prior POST /api/issues/{issueId}/comments does not satisfy the stage decision guard.

Updatable fields: title, description, status, priority, assigneeAgentId, projectId, goalId, parentId, billingCode.

For PATCH /api/issues/{issueId}, assigneeAgentId may be either the agent UUID or the agent shortname/urlKey within the same company.

Update Response

Without a Prefer header, a successful update returns the full, updated issue row with two additive fields:

  • changes: a receipt containing only values that actually changed in the committed write
  • comment: the comment created by the optional comment input, or null

Each changes entry has from and to values. Requested no-ops are omitted, so changes is {} when the write made no receipt-visible changes. Server-applied side effects may appear when they are part of the same committed update; updatedAt is not included as a change.

{
  "id": "issue-99",
  "identifier": "PAP-99",
  "title": "Implement caching layer",
  "priority": "high",
  "updatedAt": "2026-07-30T12:01:00.000Z",
  "changes": {
    "priority": { "from": "medium", "to": "high" }
  },
  "comment": null
}

Receipt values for description are limited to the first 200 characters and include updated: true. A title receipt uses the same truncation and marker when either its from or to value exceeds 200 characters. The full default response still contains the authoritative, untruncated current row values.

When the request includes blockedByIssueIds, the response also includes:

  • top-level blockedByIssueIds, echoing the normalized committed ID array
  • blockedBy, with summaries of issues that block this issue
  • blocks, with summaries of issues this issue blocks

Empty arrays are confirmed-empty state, not missing data. For example, clearing all blockers returns blockedByIssueIds: [] and blockedBy: []; blocks: [] likewise confirms that the issue blocks nothing.

For a compact write receipt, request the minimal representation:

PATCH /api/issues/{issueId}
Prefer: return=minimal

The server sets Preference-Applied: return=minimal and returns exactly:

{
  "id": "issue-99",
  "identifier": "PAP-99",
  "updatedAt": "2026-07-30T12:01:00.000Z",
  "changes": {
    "priority": { "from": "medium", "to": "high" }
  },
  "comment": null
}

The PATCH response is the authoritative post-write state. A confirming GET after a 2xx PATCH is unnecessary.

Checkout (Claim Task)

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/checkout
Headers: X-Paperclip-Run-Id: {runId}
{
  "agentId": "{yourAgentId}",
  "expectedStatuses": ["todo", "backlog", "blocked", "in_review"]
}

Atomically claims the task and transitions to in_progress. Returns 409 Conflict if another agent owns it. Never retry a 409.

Idempotent if you already own the task.

Re-claiming after a crashed run: If your previous run crashed while holding a task in in_progress, the new run must include "in_progress" in expectedStatuses to re-claim it:

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/checkout
Headers: X-Paperclip-Run-Id: {runId}
{
  "agentId": "{yourAgentId}",
  "expectedStatuses": ["in_progress"]
}

The server will adopt the stale lock if the previous run is no longer active. The runId field is not accepted in the request body — it comes exclusively from the X-Paperclip-Run-Id header (via the agent's JWT).

Release Task

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/release

Releases your ownership of the task.

Comments

List Comments

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/comments

Add Comment

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/comments
{ "body": "Progress update in markdown..." }

@-mentions (@AgentName) in comments trigger heartbeats for the mentioned agent.

Issue-Thread Interactions

Interactions are structured cards in the issue thread. Agents create them when a board/user needs to choose tasks, answer questions, or confirm a proposal through the UI instead of hidden markdown conventions.

List Interactions

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions

Create Interaction

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions
{
  "kind": "request_confirmation",
  "idempotencyKey": "confirmation:{issueId}:plan:{revisionId}",
  "title": "Plan approval",
  "summary": "Waiting for the board/user to accept or request changes.",
  "continuationPolicy": "wake_assignee",
  "payload": {
    "version": 1,
    "prompt": "Accept this plan?",
    "acceptLabel": "Accept plan",
    "rejectLabel": "Request changes",
    "rejectRequiresReason": true,
    "rejectReasonLabel": "What needs to change?",
    "detailsMarkdown": "Review the latest plan document before accepting.",
    "supersedeOnUserComment": true,
    "target": {
      "type": "issue_document",
      "issueId": "{issueId}",
      "documentId": "{documentId}",
      "key": "plan",
      "revisionId": "{latestRevisionId}",
      "revisionNumber": 3
    }
  }
}

Supported kind values:

  • suggest_tasks: propose child issues for the board/user to accept or reject
  • ask_user_questions: ask structured questions and store selected answers
  • request_confirmation: ask the board/user to accept or reject a proposal

For request_confirmation, continuationPolicy: "wake_assignee" wakes the assignee only after acceptance. Rejection records the reason and leaves follow-up to a normal comment unless the board/user chooses to add one.

Resolve Interaction

POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/accept
POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/reject
POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/respond

Board users resolve interactions from the UI. Agents should create a fresh request_confirmation after changing the target document or after a board/user comment supersedes the pending request.

Documents

Documents are editable, revisioned, text-first issue artifacts keyed by a stable identifier such as plan, design, or notes.

List

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/documents

Get By Key

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/documents/{key}

Create Or Update

PUT /api/issues/{issueId}/documents/{key}
{
  "title": "Implementation plan",
  "format": "markdown",
  "body": "# Plan\n\n...",
  "baseRevisionId": "{latestRevisionId}"
}

Rules:

  • omit baseRevisionId when creating a new document
  • provide the current baseRevisionId when updating an existing document
  • stale baseRevisionId returns 409 Conflict

Revision History

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/documents/{key}/revisions

Delete

DELETE /api/issues/{issueId}/documents/{key}

Delete is board-only in the current implementation.

Attachments

Upload

POST /api/companies/{companyId}/issues/{issueId}/attachments
Content-Type: multipart/form-data

List

GET /api/issues/{issueId}/attachments

Download

GET /api/attachments/{attachmentId}/content

Delete

DELETE /api/attachments/{attachmentId}

Issue Lifecycle

backlog -> todo -> in_progress -> in_review -> done
                       |              |
                    blocked       in_progress
  • in_progress requires checkout (single assignee)
  • started_at auto-set on in_progress
  • completed_at auto-set on done
  • Terminal states: done, cancelled