DottaandPaperclip
ebeac833a6
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps operators manage AI agents and inspect their work. > - Run history supplies recent execution records to the board and API clients. > - The list repeats eight reads of a large stored JSON context. > - A caller can also omit the limit and read the complete history. > - This pull request expands context fields once and bounds every list read. > - The benefit is lower database cost and bounded redaction work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #958. Related community reports: #13962 and #10631. This is an independent implementation. It does not use their commits or code. It covers the history bounds reported in both. Process memory monitoring from #10631 is outside this change. **What happened?** The run-history query repeatedly extracts fields from large context JSON. Requests without a limit also load every historical run before authorization and redaction. Accumulated staging query statistics showed 271 ms for summary history and another 58 ms for its redaction lookup. **What did you expect to happen?** Normal reads must use a bounded recent history. Context projection must preserve the existing values and privacy behavior with less repeated database work. **Steps to reproduce** Run the disposable benchmark below against the baseline revision. It creates 1,400 synthetic runs with 192 KiB contexts. It compares the exact service SQL and every returned column for both summary and full history. ## What Changed - Expand context fields with one lateral record projection. Preserve non-object legacy contexts and the first-class issue binding. - Enforce a 200-row default and a 1,000-row maximum in the route and service. - Apply the default in the shared UI client, including both agent detail implementations. - Preserve response arrays, authorization, result projection and secret redaction. - Fetch older linked runs by ID in both agent pages. Check company and agent scope, navigation races and visible retry errors. - Update OpenAPI, data-path documentation and capability maps. - Add real PostgreSQL and HTTP regressions plus a reproducible benchmark. ## Verification - Local benchmark: summary history 37.72 ms to 19.34 ms; full history 37.84 ms to 19.01 ms. All 200 complete positional rows match in each comparison. These are synthetic local SQL timings, excluding HTTP and redaction. - History, route, privacy and redaction suites: 160 server tests passed across six files. Twenty-two UI API, selection, run-panel and log-visibility tests passed. Both agent-page variants render an older linked run with an empty history page on desktop and mobile. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Map validation and `git diff --check` passed. - All current-head CI and security checks passed, including the full general and serialized suites, browser shards, Runner verification and build. Greptile reviewed the exact commit at 5/5 with no remaining findings. - The full local sweep began before the final compatibility fixes. It was stopped after the final commits passed complete CI. The focused local suites listed above passed on the final code. Before interruption, the broader local sweep passed 31,743 tests across the general server, UI and several package groups, with no reported failures. The full local command is not claimed as a completed pass. ```sh pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/heartbeat/run-state.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-list.test.ts src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-privacy-routes.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/api/heartbeats.test.ts pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-run-history.ts --baseline-ref=1e731520bb ``` ## Risks - Clients that relied on an unbounded array now receive 200 rows by default. Explicit limits allow up to 1,000. This change does not add pagination. - Legacy context conversion must stay identical. Real database regressions cover null, array, scalar, nested values and native issue precedence. - No schema migration or persistent cache is introduced. Redaction and access checks remain active. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, shell tools and local code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific backend 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Paperclip feature map
Start here when reproducing a user-facing bug, verifying a change, or deciding which surfaces a fix must cover. Each recipe describes what a person can do, where they can do it, the expected result, and the evidence needed to verify it. Product behavior is still governed by the implementation spec.
The sibling agent access map records APIs, agent entry points and permission boundaries for the same capability IDs. Follow the shared map contract when maintaining either map.
Browse features
Open the published Storybook guide for the assembled feature and capability index. The Markdown recipes in this directory are the authored source. Each has a same-named agent-access companion.
Run node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs to generate local navigation in
maps/generated/feature-map.md, maps/generated/agent-access-map.md, and the
Storybook guide. A new recipe is discovered automatically; do not register it in
this README or maintain counts here.
Before driving a journey
- Use this checkout's isolated test drive for manual product checks. It creates a temporary instance and prints its URL and data directory. Do not guess that a server on port 3100 belongs to you.
- Record the commit, URL, company, login role, relevant experimental settings, adapter, runtime mode, and live versus simulated dependencies. Use disposable tasks and provider resources. A fresh test drive creates a company and CEO, but no task or first run.
- Use the current navigation and company prefix. Paths in recipes omit that prefix. Record whether the streamlined or production shell is selected; Agent Chat, chat connectors, and the combined Inbox/Tasks view have separate gates. A hidden surface is an unmet prerequisite, not a successful test.
- Run the smallest relevant test first. Vitest commands below run from the repository root after installing dependencies. Playwright recipes use their named configuration and its isolated environment, not an unrelated running instance. Reserve expensive runner/provider tests for the behavior at issue.
- Exercise the actual user action, inspect its result, reload, and verify the persisted state or continuation. Use read-only API checks to corroborate UI evidence; creating state through the API does not prove the creation UI.
For agent-driven acceptance work, start with the Paperclip verification skill for an isolated launch, ownership/readiness checks, browser driving, evidence, and cleanup. It uses this directory as its feature map. The existing dev-workspace run/verify skill and evaluation skill describe runtime ownership and evidence handling. Reuse them; this map introduces no environment launcher, credentials, scheduled job, or second test framework.
Evidence contract
Report each entry point as passed, failed, blocked (with its missing prerequisite), or not run. Include the feature filename and entry-point ID, commit/environment, user action, expected and observed result, command/exit code, and evidence links. Screenshots or traces should show both the action and the discriminating result. Include task/run/request IDs when relevant, without secrets.
A fix is verified across its affected surfaces only when each has evidence or an explicit reason it does not apply. Shared code alone does not prove parity. Keep product regressions visible; do not change the recipe to bless a failure. For Paperclip-assigned work, attach evidence through the artifact workflow.
Inventory and remaining depth
The generated maps/generated/coverage.json lists the current non-test TSX page
modules and the recipes that directly reference each one. An unreferenced module
is a documentation candidate, not proof that its feature is absent or untested.
Remaining workflow limits live in each recipe. Inventory and example associations
describe documentation scope, not runtime health.
Maintaining the reference
The map documents user journeys. It does not execute them automatically; generated inventories record documentation scope rather than live test health.
When maintaining a recipe, compare its entry points and expected results with
the current source. Check that linked tests still exercise the stated behavior
and that local references still exist. Keep the same-named agent access companion
and stable sub-feature IDs aligned when behavior or access changes. Source-only
access inventory remains distinct from live verification. Run
node scripts/check-maps.mjs after map edits for structural/reference checks;
follow the shared contract for the source and behavioral checks it cannot perform.
Each recipe starts with a small frontmatter navigation record, then an H1:
---
navigation: {"section":"Tasks and conversations","sectionOrder":20,"order":10}
---
The H1 supplies the feature title, and the first paragraph supplies its summary. Orders are local to the section; leave gaps for additions. Equal orders use the stable filename as a tie-breaker. Keep a section's name/order consistent across its recipes. A new feature or capability needs only its recipe and companion.
Optional ### Storybook verification guidance lives inside the recipe's Gotchas
section. Each level-four heading contains a backtick-quoted capability key and
has Scope (ui, cli, or browser),
Storybook, Production, and Sources fields. These are verification instructions
and intentional scope limits, not run results or a required story for every API.
The generated gap report combines this guidance with current story associations.
After frontmatter, each recipe starts with an H1 and a user-visible description, then exactly:
- Sub-features — stable backticked IDs and observable behavior/states.
- How to get to it (user POV) — one H3 backticked entry-point ID per surface.
- Driving it with — starts with
Preconditions:; repeat each entry-point H3, withAutomated:andManual:paragraphs. Name test scope and gaps honestly. - Gotchas — misleading look-alikes, feature gates, and invalid evidence.
New or updated entries follow
Poteto's feature-map examples.
Existing entries with a Driving it heading can adopt the named harness when
their recipes are updated. The original format was inspired by
Omnigent's feature map.
Paperclip's recipes and checks follow its own task model and test infrastructure.