Files
PaperClipAI/maps
DottaandPaperclip f66d590899 fix(ui): open the new-task form immediately (#17041)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People use New task to send work to an agent.
> - The board currently downloads the task dialog code after the first
click.
> - This shows a loading window before people can enter their request.
> - The form already loads agent and project choices after it opens.
> - This pull request loads the task dialog code with the board.
> - People can start writing immediately and keep their text as choices
arrive.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related change: #16849. Commit
`fa50cab5685b9cdbb26ad9c610cc5b6c373d3ff4` added the deferred dialog and
its loading window on October 19, 2026.

**What happened?**

The first New task click shows “Loading new task…” while the browser
downloads the dialog code.

**Expected behavior**

The form opens on click. Agent and project choices load in place. Text
entered during those requests stays in the form.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Open the board in a fresh browser session.
2. Select New task before its code is cached.
3. Observe the loading window before the form appears.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Source baseline: `8b4ab65b1c3d863d282752e83307943720a5c85c`.

**Deployment mode**

The browser code applies to local and hosted boards. Verification used a
source checkout.

## What Changed

- Import NewIssueDialog with the board. Keep the existing mount and
draft lifecycle.
- Add a first-open test that fails if the form waits for an asynchronous
render.
- Cover text entry during delayed agent and project requests and
defaults that arrive later.
- Document the behavior and its verification recipe.

## Verification

- Regression proof: the first-open test failed before the import change
and passed after it.
- All 125 tests in BoardDialogs, DeferredOverlay, NewIssueDialog and
Layout passed.
- The production UI build and UI TypeScript check passed. The typecheck
passed with `NODE_OPTIONS=--max-old-space-size=2400` after the competing
test process was stopped.
- Token gates, map validation and Git diff checks passed.
- The first UI typecheck could not resolve the unbuilt local plugin SDK.
The SDK was then built.
- Full typecheck and build attempts hit the sandbox's 4 GB memory limit
when run with the full test suite. Two later UI typecheck attempts also
hit that limit during other validation. The cgroup recorded four OOM
kills in total. The full repository test attempt and a broader UI test
attempt were stopped. No complete suite result is claimed. Serial
repository typecheck reached the missing Rust `cargo` executable. Full
CI passed on head `9dde4bc`; local limits remain recorded here.
- First CI run at `e5a99b8`: typecheck, build, all unit-test shards and
seven browser shards passed. Browser shard 2 failed at
`chat-adapters-ui-providers.spec.ts:185`, waiting for Slack setup
Success after reload. The saved page showed the working connection and
Continue button. The cause is not confirmed; this failure is retained
for follow-up. [Failed
job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522214527/job/118968542923).
- Removed the added import comment after Greptile review. Head `9dde4bc`
changes only that comment. The review thread is resolved. Fresh CI
passed on head `9dde4bc`. Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5 with
no open findings. All eight browser shards passed, including the earlier
Slack failure. The earlier failure remains unexplained; the only
intervening code change removed a source comment. A passing retry
establishes recovery, not its cause.
- Component tests use mocked directory requests. No deployed latency or
browser persistence claim is made.

Latest CI: [run
39523376437](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39523376437).
Reviewed head: `9dde4bc0caa3556e315a2fc197268b7c9879efa4`.

## Risks

- Task dialog code is part of board startup again. This adds its
dependencies to the initial code graph. No startup latency benchmark is
claimed.
- Other creation dialogs retain their existing lazy imports and loading
behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code
execution. The runtime does not expose a more precise 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>
2026-10-24 08:15:35 -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.

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.

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.