1179 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Devin Foley	d9f91576a0	Add accepted-plan decomposition exact-once guards and UI state (#6831) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, so planning approvals and child-issue fan-out are part of the core control-plane loop. > - Accepted plans are supposed to be a safe bridge from planning into execution, especially when agents wake from review decisions and reuse isolated workspaces. > - The duplicate-subtask incident showed that an accepted plan revision could be interpreted more than once across overlapping runs, which broke the single-source-of-truth model for issue decomposition. > - Fixing that required tightening the backend contract first: accepted-plan decomposition needs an exact-once fingerprint, durable claim state, and retry-safe child creation. > - Once that backend behavior existed, the board still needed visibility into what happened, so the issue detail view needed a dedicated decomposition section instead of forcing operators to reconstruct child creation from raw activity. > - This pull request adds the exact-once decomposition primitive, hardens wake routing and regressions around the incident, and surfaces decomposition state in the UI so future incidents are both prevented and easier to inspect. ## What Changed - Added accepted-plan decomposition semantics to `doc/execution-semantics.md`, including the exact-once fingerprint, durable claim/result expectations, and retry/resume behavior. - Added persistent accepted-plan decomposition claims in the backend, including schema, shared types/validators, service logic, and issue routes for creating and listing decomposition state. - Hardened heartbeat routing so an accepted-plan continuation stays scoped to the relevant planning issue instead of opportunistically re-decomposing another accepted issue on the same assignee. - Added regression coverage for the original failure modes: concurrent same-parent retries, cross-issue accepted-plan isolation, and partial child recreation under the same fingerprint. - Added the `Plan decomposition` issue-detail section plus supporting API/query-key/activity formatting updates so operators can see revision status, owner, child counts, and the linked child issues directly in the UI. - Included the small follow-up UI fix so the decomposition section still renders when the issue work mode is no longer `planning`. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t "lists persisted decompositions with child issue summaries"` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t "accepted plan decomposition" server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts` - Manual UI path: create a planning issue without an isolated execution workspace, add a `plan` document, accept the `request_confirmation`, let Paperclip create child issues, then reopen the parent issue detail page and confirm the `Plan decomposition` section shows the accepted revision, status, idempotent-claim badge, and child links. - Separate follow-up bug noted during manual UI validation: accepting a plan on an issue whose run never records `workspace_finalize` is tracked in `PAPA-445` and is not part of this PR’s fix scope. ## Risks - This adds a new migration and a large Drizzle snapshot update; reviewers should confirm the schema shape and generated metadata match the intended decomposition table. - The exact-once claim changes sit on the accepted-plan fan-out path, so regressions there could block legitimate child creation or mis-handle retries if the claim state machine is wrong. - The new UI only appears when decomposition records exist; reviewers should use the manual verification path above rather than expecting existing issues on a stale local instance to show the section automatically. - `PAPA-445` remains an open follow-up for the `workspace_finalize` accept gate when a planning handoff never records finalize; that bug can interfere with reproducing the UI flow on isolated workspaces but does not change the correctness of the exact-once decomposition feature itself. > Checked `ROADMAP.md`: this PR is a bug fix / control-plane hardening change for accepted-plan decomposition, not a new uncoordinated roadmap feature. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` (GPT-5-based coding agent; exact backend model ID/context window not exposed in the run context), with repository tool use, shell execution, and code-editing capabilities. <img width="806" height="1069" alt="Screenshot 2026-05-27 at 11 05 48 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5b00b670-96cd-4470-b0a3-581743bcae28" /> ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-28 23:30:18 -07:00
Dotta	9eac727cf1	[codex] Add skills CLI and catalog management (#6782) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies through company-scoped control-plane workflows. > - Agents need reusable, inspectable skills that can be installed, reset, audited, exported, and assigned without bespoke local setup. > - The existing skill truth model needed cleanup so bundled skills, optional catalog skills, runtime skills, and adapter-provided skills have clear provenance. > - Operators also need a practical CLI and board UI for discovering and managing company skills. > - This pull request adds the skills CLI, packaged skills catalog, company skills APIs, and catalog-aware board UI. > - The benefit is a more reusable Paperclip company setup where skills are portable, auditable, and easier for operators and agents to manage. ## What Changed - Added `paperclipai skills` CLI commands and coverage for catalog listing, installing, resetting, and inspecting company skills. - Added a packaged `@paperclipai/skills-catalog` workspace with bundled and optional skill content plus validation/build tests. - Added shared company-skill types and validators used across CLI, server, and UI contracts. - Added server catalog APIs/services for company skill catalog operations, reset semantics, audit behavior, and portability provenance. - Updated adapter skill handling so runtime/catalog provenance remains explicit across local adapters. - Added board UI support for browsing and managing catalog-backed company skills. - Updated docs for the skills CLI/catalog flow and the company skills Paperclip skill reference. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master`; no `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `.github/workflows`, or migration files are included in the final PR diff. ## Verification - Passed: `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/skills.test.ts packages/skills-catalog/src/catalog-builder.test.ts packages/skills-catalog/src/shipped-catalog.test.ts packages/shared/src/validators/company-skill.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts packages/plugins/create-paperclip-plugin/src/entrypoints.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-catalog-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-skills-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts`. - Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts -t "default branch|origin/master|symbolic-ref"`. - Attempted: full `server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts`. Four provisioning tests failed while seeding an isolated worktree database from the local Paperclip instance because the local plugin schema dump contains a duplicate-column foreign key (`plugin_content_machine_18a7bc327b.content_case_signals`). The default-branch tests touched by the rebase conflict passed in the focused run above. - Checked final diff: no `pnpm-lock.yaml`, no `.github/workflows`, and no migration-file changes relative to `master`. ## Risks - Medium: this is a broad skills/catalog change touching CLI, server APIs, shared contracts, adapter skill sync, and UI. - Catalog validation and reset semantics need careful reviewer attention because they affect reusable company setup and portability. - No database migrations are included in this PR, so there is no migration ordering/idempotency risk in the final diff. - No lockfile is included by design; dependency resolution will be handled by the repository lockfile workflow. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, running in Paperclip via the `codex_local` adapter with shell, git, GitHub CLI, and code-editing tool access. Exact hosted model build/context-window metadata is not exposed in this runtime. ## 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 run targeted tests locally and documented the local workspace-runtime seed failure above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, screenshots were intentionally omitted per PAP-10124 instructions; UI behavior is covered by tests and reviewer inspection - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-28 07:33:51 -10:00
Dotta	8da50dbcf8	[codex] Add private browser first-admin claim flow (#6755) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Fresh self-hosted deployments need an operator path before any invite exists. > - Umbrel installs are private LAN deployments, so a one-time browser claim is appropriate only when the deployment is private and unclaimed. > - Public deployments and installs with active invites must keep the existing invite-only model so admin creation is not exposed broadly. > - GitHub PR #2927 established the useful direction, but it needed to be adapted onto current `master` rather than merged as-is. > - This pull request adds that adapted private-only claim flow across server, UI, docs, and regression coverage. > - The benefit is that a fresh private Umbrel-style install can be claimed from the browser without weakening public deployment access. ## What Changed - Added a first-admin claim service and access route support for one-time admin claim eligibility on private unclaimed deployments. - Updated the bootstrap/access UI so eligible private installs show a setup claim path, while public and invited deployments keep invite-first behavior. - Added a bootstrap-pending setup UX lab covering claim, invite, public, and signed-in access states. - Updated deployment and local development docs for authenticated private/public behavior and the Umbrel-style claim path. - Added server and UI regression tests for private claim, public no-claim, active invite fallback, existing board/no-access flows, and health exposure reporting. - Stabilized PR handoff verification by serializing the aggregate server Vitest workspace run, forcing `NODE_ENV=test`, and relaxing the heartbeat batching test around legitimate recovery follow-up runs. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm vitest --run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest --run server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts` - `pnpm test:run` - QA validation: PAP-10115 passed browser validation with screenshots for private fresh install claim, active invite versus claim conflict, public invite-only/claim-absent behavior, existing invite fallback, and normal board/no-access flows. - GitHub closeout: issue #2579 and PR #2927 were updated with the accepted direction: adapt the implementation, do not direct-merge #2927 as-is. ## Risks - The claim endpoint must remain private-only and one-time; a regression here could expose admin creation on public deployments. - Existing invite behavior must remain intact for public deployments and installs that already have an active invite. - The stable Vitest harness now serializes the aggregate server workspace group; this is slower, but it avoids DB-backed suite collisions under root workspace mode. > 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`. > > ROADMAP.md checked: this is a scoped deployment bootstrap/access fix and does not duplicate a listed roadmap project. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` for product engineering, implementation, and verification, with tool-enabled local code execution. Paperclip QA browser validation was performed in PAP-10115 by the assigned QA agent; exact adapter model metadata for that QA run is not exposed in this PR context. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-27 21:15:01 -10:00
Dotta	b7545823be	[codex] Add document annotations and comments (#6733) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through issues, documents, runs, and durable company-scoped state. > - Issue documents are where agents and operators capture plans, handoffs, and work products. > - Before this change, document collaboration could only happen through whole-document edits and detached issue comments. > - Inline document annotations need stable anchors, revision-aware persistence, and UI affordances that do not break existing document editing. > - This pull request adds company-scoped document annotation threads, comments, anchor snapshots, API routes, and board UI. > - The benefit is that operators and agents can discuss specific document passages without losing context as documents evolve. ## What Changed - Added document annotation tables, schema exports, shared types, validators, anchor hashing, and text-anchor helpers. - Added server-side document annotation services and issue routes for listing, creating, commenting, resolving, and reopening annotation threads. - Included annotation summaries in relevant issue document reads and backup/recovery document workspace behavior. - Added React UI for inline document highlights, comment panels, mobile sheet behavior, deep-link focus, and resolved/open filtering. - Added annotation design artifacts, Storybook coverage, screenshots, and a screenshot helper script. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip` `master` and renumbered the annotation migration from `0085_old_swarm` to `0091_old_swarm`; the SQL uses `IF NOT EXISTS` guards so environments that previously applied the old migration number can safely apply the new one. - Adjusted the new annotation UI tests to use a local async flush helper because this workspace's React 19.2.4 export does not expose `React.act`. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/document-anchors.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts ui/src/components/DocumentAnnotationLayer.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/lib/document-annotation-hash.test.ts ui/src/lib/document-annotation-selection.test.ts` - Confirmed `git diff --check` passes. - Confirmed no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` files are included in the PR diff. ## Risks - Medium risk: this adds new persisted annotation tables and routes across db/shared/server/ui. - Migration risk is reduced by moving the branch migration to `0091_old_swarm` after upstream `0090_resource_memberships` and keeping the SQL idempotent for old `0085_old_swarm` adopters. - UI risk is mostly around text range anchoring and panel positioning across long documents, folded content, and mobile layouts; the PR includes focused unit coverage and design screenshots. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-using software engineering mode. Context window size is not exposed in this Paperclip runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-26 06:41:23 -07:00
Dotta	f0ddd24d61	[codex] Show bundled plugins in plugin manager (#6734) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The plugin system is how Paperclip exposes optional capabilities and integrations without bloating the control plane. > - Operators need the Instance Settings plugin manager to show both installed external plugins and bundled built-in plugins. > - Bundled plugins were available in the server/UI surface but were not represented consistently in the plugin manager list. > - Workspace runtime reuse also needed to stay pinned to the current branch/base so the plugin manager can be validated from the intended checkout. > - This pull request shows bundled plugins in the manager, marks experimental bundled plugins clearly, and tightens runtime/worktree reuse guards. > - The benefit is that operators can discover bundled plugins from the same management screen as installed plugins without stale workspace sessions hiding the latest branch state. ## What Changed - Lists bundled monorepo plugin packages through the plugin routes API, including plugin status and install metadata needed by the UI. - Updates the plugin manager UI/API client to render bundled plugins and display experimental badges based on installed plugin records. - Adds server authorization coverage around plugin routes so board and agent access stay company-scoped. - Guards execution workspace/runtime reuse against stale base refs and defaults new worktrees to the fetched target base. - Expands workspace runtime tests for service reuse, stale workspace prevention, and controlled runtime stops. - Addressed Greptile feedback by respecting `origin/HEAD`, using async cached bundled-plugin discovery, and avoiding duplicated UI experimental plugin lists. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `gh pr checks 6734 --repo paperclipai/paperclip` reports all checks passing on `10e1ba9e0f505637cd913713fb28c2c99ae92011`. - Greptile Review reports 5/5 on `10e1ba9e0f505637cd913713fb28c2c99ae92011`. - Confirmed the branch is rebased onto `public-gh/master` and the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. - UI screenshots were not captured in this PR-creation pass because the available local board runtime is authenticated; the visible UI path is covered by the plugin manager code changes and server/API tests above. ## Risks - Medium risk: this touches shared plugin listing behavior and workspace runtime reuse, so regressions could affect plugin manager visibility or service reuse across execution workspaces. - No database migrations. - No lockfile or GitHub workflow changes. > 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 GPT-5 Codex, coding-agent workflow with shell/tool use in a local Paperclip worktree. Context window not surfaced by the runtime; reasoning mode not externally reported. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-26 07:32:45 -06:00
Dotta	9aea3e3d35	[codex] Add resource membership controls (#6677) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped issues, projects, agents, and board-visible workflows. > - The board sidebar and project list are the daily navigation surface for that control plane. > - Users need to keep all projects and agents accessible while hiding resources they have intentionally left from their own sidebar. > - That requires user-scoped resource membership state backed by company-scoped API and database contracts. > - The branch also needed to preserve HTTP worktree login sessions and keep the project list easier to scan after membership grouping. > - This pull request adds resource membership controls, sidebar leave actions, grouped/sortable project listings, and focused tests. > - The benefit is a cleaner personal workspace view without weakening company-scoped access to the underlying project or agent detail pages. ## What Changed - Added `project_memberships` and `agent_memberships` tables with API/shared/server contracts for current-user join/leave state. - Renumbered the membership migration to `0090_resource_memberships` after rebasing onto current `master`, and made it idempotent for anyone who had applied the old branch-local `0087` migration. - Added project and agent sidebar leave actions, plus list filtering that waits for membership state before hiding resources. - Added grouped project listing, project sorting controls, and reserved row subtitle height for cleaner scanning. - Fixed HTTP auth cookie security handling so HTTP worktree sessions can persist. - Updated focused server and UI tests for the new membership, sidebar, project list, and auth behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/better-auth.test.ts server/src/__tests__/resource-memberships-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/Projects.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx ui/src/components/MembershipAction.test.tsx ui/src/components/EntityRow.test.tsx` - Confirmed the branch is rebased on current `origin/master`. - Confirmed the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Migration safety: low to medium. The migration now uses `IF NOT EXISTS` / guarded constraints and is numbered after current master migrations, but it should still get CI coverage against fresh databases. - UI behavior: low. Left resources are hidden from sidebar only after membership state loads; direct detail access remains available. - Auth behavior: low. Cookie security is relaxed only for HTTP/private local-style origins where secure cookies would prevent login persistence. > 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 GPT-5 Codex coding agent, tool-enabled shell/git workflow, context window not exposed by runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Screenshot note: no browser screenshots were captured in this heartbeat; the UI changes are covered by focused component tests above. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-25 13:12:41 -05:00
Dotta	ece8a51e22	[codex] Bundle local branch fixes from PAP-10032 (#6604) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - This branch accumulated multiple already-tested control-plane, adapter runtime, invite, workspace, plugin, and UI quality fixes on the primary Paperclip checkout. > - `origin/master` advanced while those commits were still local, so the branch needed to be preserved and reconciled before review. > - Splitting the branch commit-by-commit against the new base produced overlapping conflicts with recently merged upstream PRs. > - This pull request keeps the remaining branch as one standalone PR because the final diff is 38 files after removing screenshot artifacts, under Greptile's 100-file cap, and can be merged independently after review. > - The benefit is that none of the local work is lost, the branch is now based on current `origin/master`, and reviewers can evaluate the reconciled changes in one place. ## What Changed - Merged the local accumulated branch with current `origin/master` and resolved the invite-flow overlaps from the newer upstream companies query helper. - Preserved the local fixes for invite existing-member behavior, invite link copy fallback, reusable workspace selection, worktree auth, static SPA fallback, markdown wrapping, plugin slot registration, cloud upstream UX/server polish, project sorting, and related tests. - Removed screenshot artifacts from the PR per review request. - Kept the PR under the requested file limit: 38 files changed, with no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` changes. ## Verification - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyInvites.test.tsx ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Projects.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/slots.test.ts ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/invite-accept-existing-member.test.ts server/src/__tests__/static-index-html.test.ts server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/better-auth.test.ts server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Confirmed `git diff --name-only origin/master...HEAD | wc -l` is `38`. - Confirmed no PR diff entries match `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `.github/workflows/*`, or `screenshots/*`. ## Risks - Medium review risk because this is a bundled rescue PR rather than several narrow feature PRs. - Invite flow and company cache behavior overlapped with newer upstream changes; the merge resolution intentionally keeps the shared `companiesListQueryOptions` helper while preserving local existing-member invite behavior. - Visual review evidence is no longer attached in-repo because screenshots were removed from this PR per review request. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent, with repository tool access, terminal execution, and git/GitHub CLI operations. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] UI screenshots were intentionally removed from this PR per review request - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: CodexCoder <codexcoder@paperclip.local>	2026-05-25 07:25:26 -05:00
Aron Prins	897cc322c7	Improve external agent invite flow (#6183) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Agent creation can happen through local runtimes, managed runtimes, and external agents that onboard through invites. > - The old OpenClaw-oriented invite UX lived under company settings/invites and made a gateway-specific path look like a company access setting. > - That hid the broader bring-your-own-agent flow and forced operators to leave the add-agent modal when adding an external agent. > - This pull request moves external agent invite generation into the add-agent modal and makes the copy agent-oriented instead of OpenClaw-only. > - The benefit is a clearer agent-first onboarding path while company invites stay focused on human access. ## What Changed - Added an external-agent invite branch to the add-agent modal, including a dedicated prompt result view with Back navigation. - Added a shared agent onboarding prompt builder and focused modal coverage for prompt replacement/back navigation. - Removed the agent invite prompt UI from Company Settings and Company Invites, leaving Company Invites focused on human access links and invite history. - Updated the hidden OpenClaw Gateway runtime hint to direct operators to the add-agent invite flow instead of presenting it as a blocked runtime card. - Updated invite/onboarding docs, storybook coverage, and server-side onboarding copy toward generic agent language while preserving existing gateway compatibility. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `FAKE_BIN="$(mktemp -d)/bin"; mkdir -p "$FAKE_BIN"; printf '#!/bin/sh\nexit 1\n' > "$FAKE_BIN/tailscale"; chmod +x "$FAKE_BIN/tailscale"; PATH="$FAKE_BIN:$PATH" pnpm test:run` - `pnpm test:run` without the fake `tailscale` shim was also attempted; it failed only in two pre-existing CLI tailnet fallback tests because this host has a real Tailscale address (`100.125.202.3`) where those tests expect no Tailscale. - Focused confirmation for that host-env issue: `FAKE_BIN=... PATH="$FAKE_BIN:$PATH" pnpm exec vitest run --project paperclipai cli/src/__tests__/network-bind.test.ts cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts` - Manual UI verification: served UI locally in light mode, opened add-agent modal, generated external agent prompt, verified the generated prompt replaces the form and Back returns to the form. ### Screenshots    ## Risks - Existing OpenClaw gateway compatibility remains, but operators now discover external agent onboarding from the add-agent modal instead of company settings. - Agent invites still appear in the invite history table, so that page may show agent-scoped invite rows even though it no longer creates agent onboarding prompts. - Low migration risk: no schema changes. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent in Codex desktop; tool-enabled repository, shell, browser, and GitHub workflow. Context window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-23 09:09:40 -05:00
Aron Prins	e85ff094ec	fix(ui): invite page goes blank from companies query-key collision (#6433) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies; humans operate the board through the React UI. > - The board gates company access via `CompanyProvider` (CompanyContext) and onboards new humans through the invite landing page at `/invite/:token`. > - Reported symptom: opening an invite link and signing in works, but the page then renders completely blank (black in dark mode). > - End-to-end browser testing reproduced a client-side crash: `companiesQuery.data?.some is not a function` and `Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'filter')`. > - Root cause: `CompanyProvider` and `InviteLandingPage` both use the React Query key `["companies"]` but return **different shapes** — `{ companies, unauthorized }` vs a bare `Company[]` — so they silently corrupt the shared cache entry; whichever component reads the other's shape calls `.some()`/`.filter()` on the wrong type and throws, unmounting the tree. > - Owners never hit it (they never mount the invite page); only invitees landing on `/invite/:token` crash. > - This PR unifies the `["companies"]` query into a single shared definition so the cache entry always has one shape and the two consumers can't drift apart again. > - The benefit is a working invite/onboarding flow and removal of a whole class of cache-shape bugs on this key. ## What Changed - Add `ui/src/api/companies-query.ts` exporting a single shared `companiesListQueryOptions` (and `CompanyListResult`) — one `queryKey` + one `queryFn` that always returns the wrapped `{ companies, unauthorized }` shape, documented with the shared-cache contract. - `ui/src/context/CompanyContext.tsx` now uses `useQuery(companiesListQueryOptions)` instead of an inline copy of that query. - `ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.tsx` uses the same `companiesListQueryOptions` (with its own `enabled` gate), reads `companiesQuery.data?.companies` for the membership checks, and uses `queryClient.fetchQuery(companiesListQueryOptions)` in the post-auth path — so it reads and writes the identical shape. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean. - `vitest run src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx src/context/CompanyContext.test.tsx` — 17/17 pass, unchanged. - Manual end-to-end via a real browser against a LAN-exposed authenticated instance: - Owner creates an Owner-role invite. - New user opens the link and registers — **the "awaiting approval" screen renders** (previously blank), `POST /api/invites/:token/accept` returns `202`, no console errors. - Owner approves at Company Settings → Access (`200`); invitee becomes an active member. - Invitee signs in — full board loads; smoke test of dashboard / issues / inbox / routines / goals / company settings — all render, zero `pageerror`s. - Before: invite page `#root` empty after sign-in (blank/black). After: awaiting-approval panel renders. (Screenshots available on request.) ## Risks - Low. `CompanyProvider`'s query behavior is unchanged (same `queryFn` logic, just extracted into a shared module). `InviteLandingPage` now reads the same shape it writes. No API, schema, or migration changes. Existing tests pass unchanged. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-opus-4-7` (Opus 4.7), 1M-context, extended thinking + tool use; driving Claude Code with browser automation for end-to-end reproduction and 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 run tests locally and they pass - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable (existing InviteLanding/CompanyContext tests cover the touched code and pass; a cross-provider regression test that mounts both consumers is a sensible follow-up) - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (described textually above; this is a crash/blank-page fix, screenshots available on request) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-05-22 15:28:49 -05:00
Aron Prins	4811d8dd33	Fix wrapped company issue prefix conflicts (#6423) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Company creation is the first control-plane object operators create, and the generated issue prefix becomes part of task identity. > - The company service already retries when a generated issue prefix collides with the `companies_issue_prefix_idx` unique constraint. > - Drizzle 0.45.x wraps PostgreSQL errors in `DrizzleQueryError`, leaving the real `23505` constraint error on the `.cause` chain. > - The existing retry detector only inspected the top-level error, so wrapped prefix collisions surfaced as 500s instead of retrying. > - This pull request walks the error cause chain for the exact prefix constraint and verifies the retry path against embedded Postgres. > - The benefit is company creation no longer fails when generated prefixes collide under Drizzle 0.45.x wrappers. ## What Changed - Walk the error `.cause` chain when detecting `companies_issue_prefix_idx` unique violations, with a cycle guard and support for `constraint` / `constraint_name` fields. - Added an embedded Postgres regression test that seeds `ARO`, creates `Aron & Sharon`, and verifies the retry produces `AROA`. - Stabilized existing async tests touched by full verification: instance sidebar plugin rendering now waits for React Query results, and Tailscale-unavailable CLI tests explicitly hide host `tailscale` detection. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/companies-service.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter paperclipai exec vitest run src/__tests__/network-bind.test.ts src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts` - `pnpm test:run` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` ## Risks - Low runtime risk: the retry behavior only expands detection for the existing exact company issue-prefix unique constraint. - The cause-chain walk is bounded by visited objects to avoid cycles. - The sidebar and CLI changes are test-only stabilization and do not change production behavior. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent in Codex desktop, with local shell/tool 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A: no UI behavior change) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A: bug fix with no user-facing docs change) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Closes #6350	2026-05-22 15:27:54 -05:00
Dotta	90117827eb	[codex] Polish board UI mobile flows (#6550) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the board UI and control plane for supervising AI-agent companies. > - Operators repeatedly use mobile navigation, issue creation, inbox scanning, and markdown reading surfaces. > - Small layout and interaction rough edges add friction to those high-frequency workflows. > - The branch included a set of related board UI polish changes that were too small to review as many separate PRs. > - This pull request groups the remaining mobile/navigation/markdown polish into one standalone branch. > - The benefit is smoother board operation without mixing in unrelated backend feature work. ## What Changed - Tightened company settings navigation behavior on mobile. - Fixed mobile new issue dialog height and moved issue priority into the overflow controls on small screens. - Restored browser controls for home-screen app mode. - Fixed plugin-route sidebar selection on nested page loads. - Added markdown preformatted-block wrapping controls and coverage. - Kept updated issue list pages sorted by updated time in the board UI. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.wrap.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx ui/src/components/access/CompanySettingsNav.test.tsx ui/src/lib/pwa-install-mode.test.ts ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` The targeted UI tests passed. React emitted existing act-wrapping warnings in a few test files, but there were no test failures. ## Risks - Medium-low: changes span several UI surfaces, but they are mostly layout/interaction polish with targeted component tests. - Visual screenshots are not newly captured in this split PR; follow-up review should include browser/visual QA before marking ready. > 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 GPT-5 Codex via `codex_local`, tool-enabled coding session; exact context window not exposed by this runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-22 10:13:47 -05:00
Dotta	e43b392a79	[codex] Add local Cloud Upstream sync (#6548) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Operators need a path to move local company state toward Paperclip Cloud without losing local-first control. > - The Cloud Upstream flow needs API, persistence, CLI, and board UI surfaces that agree on the same manifest/run model. > - The existing branch had the feature work plus UX and error-handling follow-ups. > - This pull request packages the remaining Cloud Upstream sync work into one standalone branch. > - The benefit is an inspectable local-to-cloud sync workflow with preview, conflicts, activation, and captured UX review states. ## What Changed - Added Cloud Upstream shared types, server routes/services, and persisted run schema/migration. - Added Paperclip Cloud CLI sync helpers and local connection storage. - Added the Cloud Upstream board UI, settings entry points, query keys, and UX lab page. - Added preview/activation checklist behavior, redirect handling, manifest-only preview support, friendly errors, in-flight hints, and entity count summaries. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/cloud.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-settings-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/CloudUpstream.test.tsx ui/src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/cloud-upstreams.test.ts` Worktree setup note: the isolated worktree install skipped native sqlite build scripts, so I copied the already-built local sqlite binding from the main checkout before running `server/src/__tests__/cloud-upstreams.test.ts`. The test then passed. ## Risks - Medium: this adds a database migration and a broad feature path across CLI/server/UI. - Merge order: this is the only PR in this split with a DB migration; merge it before any future Cloud Upstream migration follow-up. - Mitigation: the PR is based directly on current `origin/master`, has targeted route/service/UI tests, and keeps the feature behind existing experimental Cloud Sync settings. > 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 GPT-5 Codex via `codex_local`, tool-enabled coding session; exact context window not exposed by this runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, screenshot artifacts are intentionally omitted per reviewer request - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-22 09:56:22 -05:00
Dotta	38c185fb8b	[codex] Add agent permissions and controls plan (#6386) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies by keeping task ownership, approvals, and operator control inside one control plane. > - Agent permissions and plugin-hosted company settings sit on the boundary between autonomy and governance. > - V1 needs scoped task assignment rules, plugin extension points, and clearer company access surfaces without weakening company boundaries. > - The branch builds the core authorization service, plugin SDK/host APIs, and UI simplifications needed to support those controls. > - Paperclip EE plugin surfaces were intentionally moved out of this core PR per review direction, so this PR now carries only the public core/plugin infrastructure work. > - The latest updates preserve the PAP-9937 branch changes that belong in this PR, remove the `design/` artifacts, and exclude the experimental `plugin-briefs` package. > - Greptile feedback was applied through the authorization/audit paths and the final cleanup commit was re-reviewed at 5/5 with no unresolved Greptile threads. > - The benefit is safer assignment control with extension hooks for richer permission products while preserving simple defaults for normal operators. ## What Changed - Added scoped task-assignment authorization decisions and routed issue/agent assignment mutations through the authorization service. - Added plugin SDK and host APIs for company settings slots, authorization policy/grant management, assignment previews, and bridge invocation scope propagation. - Simplified core company access UI and moved advanced controls behind plugin-provided settings surfaces. - Added retry-now affordances for blocked issue next-step notices. - Added protected-assignment enforcement for persisted agent/project/issue policies, including explicit-grant fallback behavior. - Added incremental principal-access compatibility backfill for active agent memberships and role-default human permission grants. - Added the Markdown code block wrap action fix from the latest branch changes. - Removed `design/` artifacts from the PR and removed `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs` from the final diff. - Addressed Greptile feedback for plugin actor sanitization, legacy membership handling, audit pagination, unknown grant-scope metadata, and startup test mocks. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 2 files passed, 54 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 62 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-access-authorization-host-services.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 28 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` -> passed. - `git diff --check` -> passed. - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` -> passed. - `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` -> passed with no lockfile update. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.interaction.test.tsx` -> 1 test passed. - `git ls-files design packages/plugins/plugin-briefs | wc -l` -> 0. - GitHub CI on `40cd83b53` -> all checks passed, merge state `CLEAN`. - Greptile on `40cd83b53` -> 5/5, 102 files reviewed, 0 comments/annotations added, 0 unresolved review threads. - Confirmed the PR diff contains no `design/`, `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Medium: task assignment authorization paths are behaviorally stricter for protected/private policy data, so existing plugin-authored policies may block assignment until explicit grants or approval flows are configured. - Medium: plugin-host authorization APIs expand the surface area available to trusted plugins and need careful review for company scoping. - Low: startup now performs a principal-access compatibility backfill, but the migration and runtime backfill use conflict-tolerant inserts. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled workflow with shell, git, and GitHub CLI access. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-22 08:12:52 -05:00
Dotta	c91a062326	[codex] Runtime control-plane fixes (#6380) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a server-side control plane > - That control plane depends on reliable issue state transitions, plugin lifecycle behavior, import limits, and startup/shutdown handling > - Several small runtime fixes had accumulated on the working branch and were mixed with larger feature work > - Keeping them separate makes the correctness fixes reviewable and mergeable without waiting for cloud-sync UI work > - This pull request groups the server/runtime control-plane fixes into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a tighter, safer runtime baseline for retries, imports, plugin migrations, feedback flushing, and trusted cloud import handling ## What Changed - Fixed updated issue list pagination sorting and scheduled retry comment handling. - Re-applied pending plugin migrations during hot reload and fixed plugin-schema worktree seed restore. - Hardened public tenant DB startup, portable import body limits, trusted cloud import errors, and trusted cloud tenant import mutation access. - Expired stale request confirmations after user comments. - Added feedback export shutdown hardening so database-unavailable flush loops stop cleanly. - Guarded plugin worker `error` event emission when no listener is registered. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `npm run install --prefix node_modules/.pnpm/sqlite3@5.1.7/node_modules/sqlite3` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-lifecycle-restart.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/body-limits.test.ts server/src/__tests__/feedback-flush-controller.test.ts server/src/__tests__/error-handler.test.ts server/src/__tests__/board-mutation-guard.test.ts packages/db/src/backup-lib.test.ts` initially exposed local setup issues and two 5s test timeouts. - Rerun after local prereq build: `pnpm exec vitest run --testTimeout 15000 server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/feedback-flush-controller.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` passed. - Some embedded Postgres-backed tests skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. ## Risks - Runtime-touching branch: startup/shutdown and issue interaction behavior should be reviewed carefully. - The feedback export change disables repeated flush attempts only for database connection-refused failures; other upload failures still log normally. - The plugin worker error guard avoids process crashes from unhandled EventEmitter errors but may hide errors from code paths that expected an emitted listener. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-20 10:37:11 -05:00
Dotta	f257530537	[codex] UI and dev ops quality-of-life (#6384) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip operators spend most of their time scanning the board, inbox, sidebar, and local dev status surfaces > - Small UI and dev-ops frictions make repeated operator workflows feel slower than they need to be > - The working branch contained several independent quality-of-life improvements mixed with larger cloud work > - Grouping these smaller UI/dev-ops changes together keeps review overhead reasonable without merging them into feature PRs > - This pull request collects the operator-facing QoL polish into one standalone branch > - The benefit is a cleaner board navigation and local dev recovery experience without depending on cloud upstream sync ## What Changed - Relaxed forced 44px touch targets for small inline widgets. - Fixed mobile mention menu scrolling and sidebar spacing on touch/mobile layouts. - Synced inbox hover state with j/k selection. - Moved plugin sidebar entries into the Work section. - Added manual dev-server restart action/banner behavior. - Logged plugin bridge 502 causes for better diagnosis. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx ui/src/components/DevRestartBanner.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/dev-server-status.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` initially failed only because plugin SDK `dist` was not built in the fresh worktree. - Rerun after build: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` passed. - The remaining targeted UI/dev-server tests passed on the first post-install run. ## Visual Evidence - Sidebar layout and plugin Work section:  - Inbox/task row selection and hover-state surface:  - Dev restart banner desktop:  - Dev restart banner mobile:  ## Risks - Mostly UI/dev ergonomics with low data risk. - Sidebar and inbox changes touch frequently used navigation surfaces, so visual review on desktop/mobile is still useful. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-19 15:52:39 -05:00
Dotta	d67347be77	[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change:  AWS discovery candidate flow:  Provider vault removal confirmation:  ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
Dotta	bfe6369ef5	Guard cheap recovery model usage (#6371) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane that coordinates AI-agent work through issues, heartbeats, comments, approvals, and auditable recovery paths. > - The affected subsystem is heartbeat/recovery orchestration, especially the optional cheap model profile used for operational recovery overhead. > - Cheap recovery should repair status and liveness, but it must not become the worker lane that writes deliverables, continues source work, or propagates cheap execution hints into downstream retries. > - The gap was that cheap-profile hints could follow recovery wake contexts and assignment overrides farther than intended, making real work eligible to run on the cheap model. > - This pull request separates status-only cheap recovery from normal source-work continuations, adds route guards for deliverable mutations during cheap status-only runs, and documents the invariant. > - The benefit is safer retry/recovery behavior: cheap runs can clean up control-plane state, while any remaining source work resumes through a normal/original model path. ## What Changed - Added recovery model-profile work classes so status-only recovery carries explicit guard context and normal-model continuations scrub cheap hints. - Updated heartbeat, productivity review, liveness continuation, and recovery service wakeups to request cheap only for bounded status-only recovery work. - Blocked cheap status-only recovery runs from writing issue documents, plans, attachments, work products, or assigning downstream work back to `modelProfile: "cheap"`. - Added/updated server tests for cheap profile propagation, artifact/document guards, route authorization, retry scheduling, and successful-run handoff behavior. - Documented the recovery model-profile lane in `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` and `doc/execution-semantics.md`. - After rebasing onto current `public-gh/master`, stabilized the new `InstanceSidebar` plugin-filter tests so the PR check lane stays green. ## Verification - Local: `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/services/recovery/model-profile-hint.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-document-restore-routes.test.ts` from `server/` - 3 files, 37 tests passed after final edits. - Local: `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` from `server/` - 44 tests passed after rerunning the cleanup-sensitive file alone. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx` - 4 tests passed. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - passed. - Local: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed. - PR checks on latest head `6f8c3b1380f5bd872c6f49f6f7188ecf3bb6d263` - all green, including `verify`, build, typecheck, server/general/serialized tests, e2e, Snyk, and policy. - Greptile: pass 3 returned Confidence Score 5/5 with zero unresolved Greptile review threads. ## Risks - Medium risk: recovery behavior is intentionally stricter, so any path that incorrectly relies on cheap recovery to keep doing source work will now need to hand back to a normal-model run. - Low migration risk: no schema changes. - No product UI changes; the UI file touched is a test-only stabilization after rebasing onto current `master`. > 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 coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool use and local code execution enabled; context window not exposed in this environment. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A: no product UI changes) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-19 13:46:02 -05:00
Devin Foley	24748de421	fix(ui): hide sandbox-provider plugins from Instance Settings sidebar (#6341) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Plugins extend Paperclip with new capabilities; the Instance Settings sidebar exposes per-plugin settings pages under a "Plugins" group > - Some plugins contribute only sandbox-provider drivers (E2B, exe.dev, Modal). They have no per-plugin settings UI — `PluginSettings` already redirects sandbox-provider-only plugins to the Environments page > - As a result, listing them as their own sidebar rows produced confusing entries that visually nested below the "Adapters" group and only lead to a stub redirect — there was no value to the user > - This pull request hides sandbox-provider-only plugins from the Instance Settings sidebar, and reorders the indented plugin list so it sits directly under the "Plugins" group it actually belongs to > - The benefit is a cleaner sidebar that only surfaces plugins with real per-plugin settings, and removes the visual mis-nesting under Adapters ## What Changed - `ui/src/components/InstanceSidebar.tsx`: filter out plugins whose only contribution is `sandboxProviders` (hybrid plugins that contribute sandbox providers *plus* something else still get a sidebar entry). Move the indented plugin list so it renders between the "Plugins" row and the "Adapters" row instead of after Adapters. - `ui/src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx`: new test file with 4 cases — sandbox-only plugins hidden, hybrid plugins shown, ordering (plugin list appears under Plugins and before Adapters), and the existing non-plugin sidebar items still render. ## Verification - `pnpm -C ui vitest run src/components/InstanceSidebar.test.tsx` → 4/4 pass. - `pnpm typecheck` clean on the changed files. - Manual: visit `/instance/settings/plugins` — "E2B Sandbox Provider" and "exe.dev Sandbox Provider" rows no longer appear in the sidebar; remaining plugins are listed directly under the "Plugins" group, not below Adapters. **Before:** see the screenshot embedded in the linked issue (`PAPA-375`) — sandbox-provider plugins show as sidebar rows visually nested under "Adapters". **After:** sandbox-provider-only rows are gone; plugin list sits directly under the "Plugins" group. (A live runtime screenshot was not captured for this PR because the local server requires an authenticated browser session not currently available to the agent — happy to add one on request.) ## Risks - Low risk. Pure UI filter + reorder, scoped to `InstanceSidebar.tsx`. No backend or plugin-loader changes. Hybrid plugins that legitimately need a settings entry are explicitly preserved by the filter. Covered by 4 new unit tests. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`), Anthropic, via Claude Code in a Paperclip heartbeat. Standard tool-use mode (no extended thinking). 200K context. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — before is in the linked issue; after pending live capture (see Verification) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Closes PAPA-375. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-19 09:06:24 -07:00
Devin Foley	c0c5a8263d	feat(ui): wire SecretBindingPicker into JsonSchemaForm secret-ref fields (#6339) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Plugin authors expose configuration via JSON schemas, including secret fields marked `format: "secret-ref"` > - At the same time, Paperclip already has a first-class secrets store, and `SecretBindingPicker` is the canonical UI for binding to one of those stored secrets > - But `JsonSchemaForm`'s `SecretField` rendered only a plain password input, so configuring an E2B (or Modal / Cloudflare / Daytona) sandbox required leaving the form, copying a secret UUID, and pasting it back > - This pull request wires `SecretBindingPicker` into `SecretField` so every plugin secret-ref field gets the picker plus an optional raw-value fallback > - The benefit is that secret reuse becomes one click instead of a tab switch, and the raw-paste path still works for one-off keys or long SSH-style secrets ## What Changed - `ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.tsx` `SecretField` now renders `SecretBindingPicker` above the existing password/textarea input. UUID-shaped values are treated as bound refs (no raw input shown). Non-UUID values keep the password/textarea visible (auto-opened) for SSH keys and other long secrets. Empty fields show the picker plus a small "Or paste a raw value" toggle. - Selecting a secret writes the secret UUID to the form value — the server-side resolution in `server/src/services/environment-config.ts` (`resolveConfigSecretRefsForRuntime` / `collectEnvironmentSecretRefs`) is unchanged. The version selector on the picker is suppressed (`allowVersionSelector={false}`) because plugin secret refs always resolve at `"latest"`. - `ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx` mocks the picker (which requires `CompanyContext` + `QueryClient` providers) and adds coverage for: picker render, UUID-bound state hides the raw input, picker selection writes the UUID through `onChange`, raw text keeps the password fallback. The original multiline (SSH key) case still asserts a textarea + no password input. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test src/components/JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx` → 4/4 passing - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test src/pages/PluginSettings.test.tsx` → 5/5 passing (existing consumer of `JsonSchemaForm`) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit` → clean - Manual: in the company Environments page, edit an environment with a sandbox driver that exposes a `secret-ref` field (e.g., E2B `apiKey`). The field should render the secret dropdown above the raw-value toggle; selecting an active secret persists its UUID, and saving the form continues to resolve the secret at runtime. Before/after screenshots: deferred — change was validated by [@devinfoley](https://github.com/devinfoley) on the main Paperclip instance before this PR was opened. Happy to add screenshots if a reviewer wants them. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is additive in the SecretField: the raw-value password/textarea path is preserved and auto-opens whenever the stored value is not a UUID, so existing SSH-key entries and unsaved raw values are untouched. - The new heuristic is "if `value` is a UUID, treat it as a bound secret". A user who somehow pasted a UUID as a literal value (not as a secret ref) would now see it rendered as a bound (possibly missing) secret in the picker. The previous UI already treated UUID values as opaque secret refs at save time (server converts UUIDs straight through), so the runtime behavior is unchanged. - Picker pulls company secrets via the existing `secretsApi.list` query. No new endpoints, no migrations. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic - Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (`claude-opus-4-7`) - Capabilities: tool use, extended reasoning - Surfaced through: Claude Code via Paperclip heartbeat (issue PAPA-377) ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — deferred; user validated locally before opening the PR. Will add if requested. - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no docs needed — internal behavior of an existing form field) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-18 21:17:41 -07:00
Dotta	a07e6cef7b	[codex] Fix new issue autocomplete pointer selection (#6311) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Human operators create and edit issues through modal-heavy board UI workflows. > - The new-issue dialog embeds markdown editors that render autocomplete menus through body-level portals. > - Radix Dialog treats those portal clicks as outside-dialog pointer events and prevents their default behavior. > - That prevention made completion items hard or impossible to select from inside the new-issue dialog. > - This pull request marks the markdown editor floating autocomplete menu as allowed dialog-external UI and extends the dialog outside-pointer handler to preserve those interactions. > - The benefit is that users can click/tap autocomplete completions while keeping the existing modal behavior intact. ## What Changed - Added a stable `data-paperclip-floating-ui` marker and explicit pointer event handling to the markdown editor mention/autocomplete portal. - Updated the new issue dialog outside-pointer guard so editor autocomplete portals are handled like Radix popover portals. - Added regression coverage for markdown editor portal markup and new issue dialog completion selection behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx` passed: 2 files, 38 tests. - Confirmed the branch is rebased onto current `public-gh/master` before opening this PR. - Confirmed the diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is scoped to allowing pointer events from known body-level UI portals while keeping other outside-dialog pointer events under Radix Dialog control. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent with repository tool use and local command execution. Exact hosted context window is not surfaced in this runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Screenshot note: this is an interaction/event-handling fix with no visible UI change; verification is covered by the focused regression tests above. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-18 14:28:49 -05:00
Dotta	32605b71ad	Remove planning badge from inbox issue rows (PAP-9691) (#6269) ... ## Summary - Removes the amber "Planning" pill from inbox / issue-list rows in `IssueRow` - Updates the focused IssueRow test to assert the badge is no longer rendered - Per [PAP-9691](https://paperclip.ing/PAP/issues/PAP-9691): user just doesn't want to see the badge in list rows The underlying `issue.workMode === "planning"` data, the issue detail composer toggle, and the server/plugin/heartbeat work-mode contract introduced in #5353 are all untouched. Planning mode still functions; the list-row indicator is just gone. ## Test plan - [x] `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx` (11 passed) - [ ] Visual: open `/PAP/inbox` with a planning-mode issue assigned and confirm no amber Planning pill on the row 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-05-18 09:27:05 -05:00
Dotta	5071c4c776	[codex] Add workspace diff viewer plugin (#6071) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators need to inspect what agents changed inside execution and project workspaces. > - The existing workspace detail views did not provide a first-party rich diff surface for staged, unstaged, head, renamed, binary, oversized, and untracked changes. > - The plugin system is the intended extension point for optional rich UI surfaces. > - This pull request adds a workspace diff plugin plus host services and shared contracts so Changes tabs can render workspace diffs through plugin slots. > - The diff-renderer dependency should stay owned by the plugin package rather than the core UI app. > - The dependency surface must stay aligned with repository PR policy, including intentionally omitting `pnpm-lock.yaml` from the PR. > - The benefit is a more reviewable workspace surface without hard-coding the renderer into every page. ## What Changed - Added `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff`, including diff normalization, plugin manifest/worker/UI entrypoints, and focused plugin tests. - Kept `@pierre/diffs` scoped to `@paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff`; removed the core UI lab diff-renderer surface and direct UI package dependency. - Added shared workspace diff types and validators, plus plugin SDK surface for workspace diff host services. - Added server workspace diff service support and route coverage for execution/project workspace diff flows. - Wired Execution Workspace and Project Workspace Changes tabs to load the diff plugin, including loading/error fallback behavior. - Added UI tests and fixtures for the Changes tabs and plugin bridge behavior. - Added the new plugin package manifest to the Docker deps stage so PR policy can validate dependency coverage. - Addressed review hardening around empty untracked patches, workspace path exposure, project workspace read capability checks, and default base refs. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff test` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/workspace-diff.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-diff-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/ProjectWorkspaceDetail.test.tsx ui/src/pages/ExecutionWorkspaceDetail.test.tsx` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-routes-authz.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-workspace-diff typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` - Browser screenshot captured from the local worktree dev server: https://files.catbox.moe/ofdpsp.png - Confirmed branch is rebased onto `public-gh/master`, `.github/workflows/pr.yml` is not included in the PR diff, `ui/package.json` is not included in the PR diff, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not included in the PR diff. ## Risks - Medium UI integration risk: the Changes tab depends on the plugin slot and host diff service path. - Medium dependency risk: this adds `@pierre/diffs` in the plugin package, but `pnpm-lock.yaml` is intentionally omitted per packaging instructions because repository automation manages lockfile updates. - Current CI blocker: downstream frozen installs fail until the repository policy path for new plugin package dependencies is chosen. - Diff rendering edge cases are covered for common working-tree and head diff states, but very large repositories may still expose performance limits. - No migrations are included. > 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, GPT-5 class coding model, tool-enabled local execution environment. Exact context window was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-18 08:50:06 -05:00
Devin Foley	734385102c	Fix new secret form textarea overflow (PAPA-348) (#6222) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Operators manage per-company secrets through the Secrets page in the web UI > - A long secret value pasted into the "New secret" textarea blew out the form's width, which pushed the Create/Cancel buttons off-screen and made the form unusable > - Root cause: the shadcn `Textarea` primitive sets `w-full` but does not constrain `min-width`, so a flex parent honors the textarea's intrinsic content width when a long unbreakable string is present > - This pull request adds `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the shared `Textarea` primitive and `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden break-all` on the secret-value usage so a long token wraps inside the form bounds > - The benefit is the Create/Cancel buttons stay reachable regardless of pasted token length, and every other `Textarea` consumer also gets the flexbox-friendly width constraint ## What Changed - `ui/src/components/ui/textarea.tsx`: added `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the base shadcn `Textarea` so it cannot exceed its flex parent - `ui/src/pages/Secrets.tsx`: added `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden break-all` on the new-secret value `Textarea` so long opaque tokens wrap instead of pushing the form - `ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx`: new regression test that opens the New Secret dialog and asserts the value textarea carries the width-constraint classes ## Verification - `cd ui && npx vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 3/3 pass - Manual: open the Secrets page, click "New secret", paste a long unbroken string (e.g. a 500-char token) into the value field. The form stays within its dialog and the Create/Cancel buttons remain in view. Before: <img width="1772" height="1432" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cb31a290-f82a-41dc-9346-91d18cbb5911" /> After: <img width="672" height="734" alt="Screenshot 2026-05-17 at 5 39 38 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a08800c2-b09b-43be-b0e8-114d9149b8f5" /> After: the value field wraps with `break-all` inside the dialog; Create/Cancel stay clickable. Covered by the new render test which asserts `min-w-0`, `overflow-x-hidden`, and `break-all` are present on `#new-secret-value`. ## Risks - Low risk. The base `Textarea` change adds `min-w-0 max-w-full`, which only affects layouts where a textarea was previously allowed to grow past its parent — those cases were already buggy. `break-all` on the secret-value textarea is the right behavior for opaque tokens; it would be wrong for prose, but this field is explicitly a secret token. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic Claude - Model: claude-opus-4-7 (Opus 4.7) - Mode: standard Claude Code agent, tool use enabled ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-17 17:54:15 -07:00
Dotta	d734bd43d1	[codex] Roll up May 17 branch changes (#6210) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, so agent work needs visible ownership, recovery, and operator controls. > - This local branch had accumulated several related control-plane reliability and operator-experience fixes across recovery actions, watchdog folding, model-profile defaults, mentions, markdown editing, plugin launchers, and small UI polish. > - The branch needed to be converted into a PR against the current `origin/master` without losing dirty work or including lockfile/workflow churn. > - The safest standalone shape is a single rollup PR because the recovery/server/UI files overlap heavily across the local commits and splitting would create avoidable conflicts. > - This pull request replays the local branch onto latest `origin/master`, preserves the uncommitted work as logical commits, and adds a Zod 4 validator compatibility fix found during verification. > - The benefit is that the May 17 local branch can be reviewed and merged as one coherent, conflict-free branch under the 100-file Greptile limit. ## What Changed - Rebased the local May 17 branch work onto current `origin/master` in a dedicated worktree. - Preserved and committed previously dirty changes for recovery retry handling, plugin/sidebar launcher polish, and `.herenow` ignores. - Added recovery-action behavior for returning source issues to `todo` when retrying source-scoped recovery. - Included the existing local recovery/liveness/watchdog fold, Codex cheap-profile, markdown/mention, duplicate-agent, and UI polish commits from the branch. - Normalized shared validator `z.record(...)` schemas to explicit string-key records for Zod 4 compatibility. - Confirmed the PR has no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` changes and stays below the 100-file Greptile limit. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `npm run install` in `node_modules/.pnpm/sqlite3@5.1.7/node_modules/sqlite3` to build the local native sqlite3 binding after installing with scripts disabled - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts packages/shared/src/project-mentions.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-local-folders.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx ui/src/lib/duplicate-agent-payload.test.ts ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx` - First pass: 13 files passed with 201 passing tests; 3 server files failed before sqlite3 native binding was built. - After rebuilding sqlite3: `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-model-profile.test.ts`, `server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts`, and `server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts` passed/loaded; embedded Postgres tests were skipped by the local host guard. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ## Risks - Medium risk: this is a broad rollup PR across recovery semantics, server tests, shared validators, and UI surfaces. - Some embedded Postgres tests skipped locally due the host guard, so CI should provide the stronger database-backed signal. - UI changes were covered by component tests, but no browser screenshot was captured in this PR creation pass. - This branch may overlap with existing recovery/liveness PR work; merge this PR independently or restack/close overlapping branches rather than merging duplicate implementations together. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled local repository and GitHub workflow, medium reasoning effort. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-17 17:15:06 -05:00
Dotta	705c1b8d81	[codex] Add routine env secrets support (#6212) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Scheduled routines are the control-plane path for recurring agent work. > - Routines already had dispatch/history, but their runtime environment did not carry routine-owned secret bindings through execution. > - Operators need routine-specific secrets that can override project/agent env without exposing secret values in history, logs, or access events. > - This pull request adds the routine env runtime contract, wires it into execution, and makes the routine UI/history surfaces show safe secret metadata. > - The benefit is that routine executions can use scoped secret refs predictably while preserving company boundaries and auditability. ## What Changed - Added routine env persistence/runtime support, including `routines.env`, `routine_runs.routine_revision_id`, revision snapshots, and idempotent migration `0086_routine_env_runtime_contract`. - Resolved routine env during heartbeat adapter config assembly with precedence `agent < project < routine` and secret access events recorded against the routine consumer. - Added secret binding synchronization for routine create/update/restore flows and guarded cross-company, missing, disabled, and deleted secret cases. - Added a Secrets tab to routine detail, env/secret history diff rendering, and Storybook coverage for the new UI states. - Added server/UI regression tests, including an embedded-Postgres QA path for routine secret execution and restore behavior. - Updated implementation/database docs for routine env and secret-binding behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` after rebasing onto `public-gh/master` to refresh workspace links for the newly-added upstream Grok adapter package. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-project-env.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/qa-routine-secrets-e2e.test.ts ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx` passed: 5 files, 92 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed across the workspace. - `pnpm build` passed. Vite emitted the existing large-chunk/dynamic-import warnings. - UI screenshots were captured locally during QA in `artifacts/pap-9521/` and `artifacts/pap-9522/`; generated screenshots are not committed to avoid adding binary artifacts to the repo. ## Risks - Migration risk is limited by `IF NOT EXISTS` guards for the new columns, FK, and index, and the migration is ordered as `0086` immediately after upstream `0085`. - Runtime behavior changes env precedence for routine executions by adding routine env as the highest-precedence layer; tests cover agent/project/routine precedence. - Secret handling is security-sensitive; tests cover value-free manifests/events/errors, disabled/missing/deleted secrets, and cross-company rejection. - UI history now renders routine env/secret diffs; tests and Storybook stories cover the main rendering paths. > 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with shell/tool use and medium reasoning effort. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-17 16:30:34 -05:00
Devin Foley	573e9ec909	fix(grok-local): restore turn boundaries in streaming reasoning text (#6142) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The `grok-local` adapter streams reasoning text to the issue "Working..." panel as the grok CLI runs > - The `grok` CLI's `--output-format streaming-json` mode silently drops the `\n` separator between reasoning turns around tool calls > - Consecutive `thought` chunks (e.g. `` "`" `` followed by `"The"`) arrive with no intervening whitespace event, so the UI's `delta: true` concatenator merged them into run-on text like `"…planningGreat, now I have the issue descriptionThe only co"` > - This PR adds a small turn-boundary helper that detects sentence boundaries in the upstream `thought` stream and inserts a single `\n` only when the previous chunk ended with sentence punctuation (or a balanced closing backtick) AND the next chunk begins a new uppercase sentence > - The benefit is readable streaming reasoning in the UI without changing how completed messages are stored ## What Changed - Added `packages/adapters/grok-local/src/shared/turn-boundary.ts` with per-stream state (last chunk + backtick parity) and a `restoreTurnBoundary()` helper that inserts `\n` only between balanced, sentence-terminated `thought` chunks - Wired the helper into `parseGrokJsonl` (server) and added a new `createGrokStdoutParser` factory used by `grokLocalUIAdapter` for the live "Working..." panel - Added focused tests in `shared/turn-boundary.test.ts`, plus regression assertions in `server/parse.test.ts` and `ui/parse-stdout.test.ts` ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclip/grok-local test` — 23/23 adapter tests pass - `pnpm --filter @paperclip/grok-local typecheck` and UI typecheck — clean - Replayed an actual broken `grok 0.1.210` stream from the report; previously-merged boundaries (`` `ls`The ``, `returned:Confirmed`) now render with a separating newline; chunks inside un-closed backtick spans are left alone ## Risks - Low risk. Boundary insertion only fires when prev ends with `.`/`!`/`?`/balanced `` ` `` and next begins with an uppercase ≥2-char word, with no whitespace on either side. Worst case: a rare missed split or a misplaced newline inside reasoning — both purely cosmetic and confined to the live streaming panel. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 4.7 (claude-opus-4-7), Anthropic, extended thinking + tool use via Claude Code ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-16 11:48:51 -07:00
Devin Foley	ab8b471685	Add built-in grok_local adapter (#6087) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, so adapter quality directly affects what runtimes the control plane can supervise. > - Local CLI adapters are one of the core execution surfaces because they turn real coding tools into Paperclip-managed employees with heartbeats, transcripts, and reviewability. > - Grok Build was installed on the Paperclip host, but Paperclip had no built-in `grok_local` adapter, so the runtime could not be configured through the normal server/UI/CLI adapter path. > - That gap needed to be closed with the same built-in registry, environment diagnostics, transcript parsing, and skill/instructions behavior that the other local adapters already rely on. > - After the initial adapter landed, a real follow-up run showed that Grok streaming text was being rendered one fragment per line, which made transcripts harder to read even though the runtime itself was working. > - This pull request adds the built-in `grok_local` adapter end-to-end and then fixes the transcript parser so streamed Grok output is coalesced into readable assistant/thinking blocks. > - The benefit is that Grok Build becomes a first-class Paperclip runtime with a usable operator experience instead of a partially wired runtime with noisy transcript output. ## What Changed - Added a new built-in `@paperclipai/adapter-grok-local` package with server, UI, and CLI entrypoints. - Implemented Grok execution, session handling, environment diagnostics, config building, skill syncing, and parser coverage inside the new adapter package. - Registered `grok_local` across the built-in adapter inventories and capability/display metadata in server, UI, CLI, and shared constants. - Added adapter route coverage for the new built-in type. - Fixed Grok transcript readability by emitting streamed `text` and `thought` fragments as deltas so the shared transcript builder coalesces them into readable message blocks. - Added regression tests for the Grok parser and transcript coalescing behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/grok-local/src/ui/parse-stdout.test.ts ui/src/adapters/transcript.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-grok-local build` - Manual runtime verification on the Paperclip host during implementation and follow-up review: - confirmed the Grok CLI was installed and authenticated - confirmed the worktree dev server could be restarted cleanly and health-checked after the parser follow-up - No screenshots attached. This change is primarily adapter plumbing plus transcript formatting behavior; reviewers can verify via the Grok-backed run surfaces directly. ## Risks - This adds a new built-in adapter, so any missed registration surface could create inconsistencies between server, UI, and CLI behavior. - The adapter depends on Grok Build's current event/output shape; if upstream Grok streaming JSON changes, transcript parsing or session extraction may need follow-up updates. - The transcript readability fix intentionally changes how Grok fragments are grouped, so any downstream code that implicitly expected one entry per fragment would behave differently. > 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 via Paperclip `codex_local` agent runtime. - GPT-5-class coding model with tool use, shell execution, file editing, and repo inspection enabled. - Exact backend model ID/context window were not surfaced to the agent in this Paperclip session. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-16 09:51:09 -07:00
Dotta	63821bfe4c	[codex] Add full locale catalog (#6070) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a board-facing control plane. > - The UI is the operator surface where onboarding and company creation flows need to remain understandable across languages. > - The i18next foundation now supports locale resource loading and validation, but only English was present on `master`. > - The branch exists to populate that foundation with the supported language catalog without changing routing, data contracts, or runtime behavior. > - This pull request adds locale JSON resources for the current non-English language set. > - The benefit is that future locale selection work has validated message catalogs ready for the first translated onboarding strings. ## What Changed - Added 39 localized message catalogs under `ui/src/i18n/locales/` for the existing no-companies onboarding strings. - Kept the PR rebased onto current `master` so it only contains the all-languages layer on top of the already-merged i18next foundation. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/i18n/locale-validation.test.ts` - Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is scoped locale catalog follow-up work and does not duplicate a listed roadmap feature. - No before/after screenshots included because this PR only adds resource JSON files and does not change rendered layout or visible default-English UI behavior. ## Risks - Low risk: static JSON resource additions validated against the English reference schema. - Translation quality may need native-speaker review before enabling visible locale switching broadly. > 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 CLI, GPT-5 family coding agent, tool-enabled repository access, medium reasoning effort. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-16 08:24:31 -05:00
Dotta	4c47eb46c3	[codex] Add multilingual issue preservation coverage (#6069) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for autonomous companies. > - Agents and board operators coordinate through company-scoped issues, comments, documents, and heartbeat wake payloads. > - Chinese, Japanese, and Hindi text needs to survive the full issue lifecycle without normalization or prompt serialization damage. > - The riskiest paths are board issue creation, server issue/comment/document round-tripping, and scoped wake prompt rendering. > - This pull request adds focused regression coverage across those surfaces. > - The benefit is higher confidence that multilingual operators and agents can create, search, comment on, complete, and wake on issues using non-Latin text. ## What Changed - Added adapter-utils wake payload and prompt rendering coverage for Chinese, Japanese, and Hindi issue/comment text. - Added UI New Issue dialog coverage proving multilingual title and description text is submitted unchanged. - Added server route coverage that round-trips multilingual issue text through create, search, comments, documents, completion comments, and heartbeat context. - Addressed Greptile feedback by using a typed storage mock and splitting the server route integration path into smaller ordered assertions. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/multilingual-issues-routes.test.ts` - Result: 3 test files passed, 51 tests passed. ## Risks - Low risk: this PR adds regression coverage only and does not change runtime behavior. - The new server test uses embedded Postgres support and skips on unsupported hosts using the existing helper pattern. - No migrations are included. - No `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes are included. > 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, GPT-5 based coding agent, with shell, git, Vitest, and GitHub connector/CLI tool use. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-15 12:49:57 -05:00
Dotta	e2d7263b07	[codex] Add minimal i18next i18n foundation (#5943) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through a web control plane. > - The UI currently renders operator-facing copy directly from React components. > - Internationalization needs a smallest-possible starting point before broader locale work can proceed. > - The package declarations for `i18next` and `react-i18next` landed separately, so this PR can stay focused on the implementation slice. > - The implementation keeps the first surface English-only and deliberately tiny while using the established `i18next` + `react-i18next` runtime. > - Future language contributions should be able to add a single locale JSON file, with validation guarding key shape, interpolation parity, suspicious payloads, and string length. > - Locale strings must remain display-only UI copy and must not flow into prompts, agent instructions, tool calls, shell commands, issue content, approvals, adapter config, or other LLM-visible control paths. ## What Changed - Initialized `i18next` behind the existing `@/i18n` boundary with fixed English resources, fallback English, no detector plugin, no backend plugin, no language picker, and no rich-text translation component. - Kept `ui/src/i18n/locales/en.json` as the English source locale and converted the validated JSON locale registry into i18next resources before app rendering. - Routed the no-companies start page title, description, and button through `t(key, { defaultValue })` while preserving unchanged rendered English copy. - Added locale validation and focused Vitest coverage for missing/extra keys, non-string leaves, interpolation parity, suspicious executable/link payloads, and length caps. - Addressed Greptile i18n review feedback: case-insensitive event-handler detection, multi-violation diagnostics, future-locale-friendly registration test, surfaced i18next init errors, and removed the redundant side-effect import. - Rebasing note: rebased onto current `public-gh/master` after the package-only PR landed; this PR no longer changes `ui/package.json` or `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Verification - `pnpm install --no-lockfile --ignore-scripts` to install local dependencies without reading or writing `pnpm-lock.yaml`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/i18n/locale-validation.test.ts` -> passed, 7 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` -> passed. - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD` shows only i18n implementation files and the touched App copy call site; no package manifest or lockfile changes remain in this PR. - Visual impact is intentionally unchanged for the touched no-companies copy because the English translations match the previous literal strings. ## Risks - Locale validation reduces prompt-injection risk, but the main safety invariant is architectural: locale strings must remain display-only and must never be used as LLM-visible control text. - This intentionally does not add non-English locales, a language picker, browser detection, HTTP/backend locale loading, server localization, adapter localization, broad copy migration, or new package scripts. - Repository-wide CI may still depend on the separate lockfile-refresh workflow for the already-merged package declaration, but this PR no longer introduces package manifest or lockfile changes itself. > 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, GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent in medium reasoning mode. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots, or documented why screenshots are not applicable because there is no intended visual change - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or confirmed no docs changed because behavior/commands did not change - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-15 11:11:02 -05:00
Emad Ibrahim	afb73ba553	Scale issue kanban board for high-volume columns (#5309) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI-agent companies, and the board UI needs to keep operator visibility clear as company work scales. > - The involved subsystem is the Issues page board mode, specifically the Kanban rendering path for issue status columns. > - The current board keeps the classic Kanban model, but high-volume columns can become tall, slow, and hard to scan when hundreds of issues are loaded. > - We explored alternatives and chose the conservative Scaled Kanban direction: preserve status lanes and drag/drop, but bound visible cards and collapse low-signal lanes. > - This pull request adds UI-only density controls and high-volume defaults rather than introducing schema or API changes. > - The benefit is a board that remains usable with large issue inventories while keeping active workflow lanes visible. ## What Changed - Added scaled Kanban behavior with compact cards, collapsed cold-lane rails, per-column visible-card limits, and per-column "show more" reveal controls. - Added persisted board density preferences to the Issues page view state, scoped through the existing company-specific localStorage path. - Added board toolbar controls for compact cards, collapsed cold lanes, cards-per-column page size (`10`, `25`, `50`), and density reset. - Added a design spec and implementation plan under `doc/plans/`. - Added focused Vitest coverage for `KanbanBoard` and `IssuesList` high-volume board behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/components/KanbanBoard.test.tsx` — pass, 35 tests. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — pass. - `pnpm build` — pass before the upstream merge; not rerun after docs/assets cleanup. - `curl -fsS http://127.0.0.1:3100/api/health` — pass against restarted local dev server after applying pending migration `0078_white_darwin.sql`. - `pnpm test:run` — previously failed in unrelated Cursor remote-sandbox server tests: - `server/src/__tests__/cursor-local-adapter-environment.test.ts`: expected probe status `pass`, received `fail`. - `server/src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts`: two remote sandbox execution cases exited `127` instead of `0`. Local dev server for manual UI inspection: `http://127.0.0.1:3100`. Screenshots were captured for review and attached in the PR thread rather than committed to source. ## Risks - Low schema/API risk: this is UI-only and uses the existing issue data path. - Board users may need to notice the new density controls if they want to override high-volume defaults. - Collapsed cold lanes remain valid drop targets, so status moves can happen without expanding the destination lane. - Very large remote columns can still hit the existing 200-item per-column query cap; this PR improves rendering, not server-side board pagination. > 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with repository tool use, shell execution, local test/build execution, and inline implementation planning. No subagents were used. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-15 10:53:09 -05:00
Dotta	d5ba3348a9	[codex] Add UI i18n runtime packages (#6058) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through a web control plane. > - The UI i18n slice needs `i18next` and `react-i18next` available as runtime packages before the implementation PR can stay focused on code changes. > - The implementation PR should not mix package declaration work with Greptile-driven i18n code feedback. > - This pull request isolates only the package manifest additions requested by the maintainer. > - The benefit is a tiny dependency-declaration PR that can be reviewed and merged independently before rebasing the i18n implementation PR. ## What Changed - Added `i18next` to `ui/package.json` dependencies. - Added `react-i18next` to `ui/package.json` dependencies. - Intentionally did not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, matching the repository policy that PRs do not commit lockfile changes. ## Verification - `node -e "JSON.parse(require('fs').readFileSync('ui/package.json','utf8')); console.log('ui/package.json valid JSON')"` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD` shows only `ui/package.json`. - `npm view i18next version` -> `26.2.0`. - `npm view i18next@26.1.0 version` -> `26.1.0`. - `npm view react-i18next version` -> `17.0.8`. - `npm view react-i18next@17.0.7 version` -> `17.0.7`. - Did not run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` because this PR intentionally changes only `ui/package.json` and leaves lockfile handling to the repository's separate lockfile workflow. ## Risks - CI jobs that run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` may fail until the repository lockfile workflow handles these package declarations. - Low behavioral risk: this PR does not import or execute the packages and changes no runtime code. > 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, GPT-5, tool-enabled coding agent in medium reasoning mode. ## 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 run the applicable local validation for this manifest-only change - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots, or documented why screenshots are not applicable because there is no runtime UI change - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or confirmed no docs changed because behavior/commands did not change - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-15 10:31:01 -05:00
Dotta	dfcebf082b	[codex] Refresh issue documents from live updates (#6005) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - The board UI keeps issue pages responsive by subscribing to live activity events and invalidating TanStack Query caches. > - Issue documents are first-class issue artifacts, but document activity events were not refreshing the document list, active document, or revision caches. > - That meant a user could update a document on an issue and another open board would keep showing stale document content until a page reload. > - This pull request routes issue document activity events through the same live invalidation path used for issue and comment updates. > - The benefit is that issue document changes become visible automatically on active issue pages without forcing operators to reload the board. ## What Changed - Added live-update cache invalidation for `issue.document_created`, `issue.document_updated`, `issue.document_restored`, and `issue.document_deleted` activity events. - Invalidated the issue document list, the active document cache, and document revisions for both issue id and identifier references when the activity payload includes a document key. - Added regression coverage for document activity events so active issue pages refetch document caches without inactive-only behavior. - Simplified the document invalidation test mock after Greptile feedback so the test only models the cache reads it actually uses. ## Verification - `git rebase public-gh/master` reported the branch was up to date after fetching `public-gh/master`. - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts` passed: 1 file, 16 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - PR checks passed on `eecd19f7b0355490f17314c94bffa06aada8f9e3`: `policy`, `verify`, `e2e`, all 4 serialized server shards, `Canary Dry Run`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review`. - Greptile completed with `5/5` confidence and no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Low risk. This expands cache invalidation for existing live activity events and does not change API contracts, database schema, migrations, or document persistence behavior. - No migrations or `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes are included. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled local repository workflow. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] No visible UI layout changed; screenshots are not applicable for live cache invalidation behavior - [x] No documentation changes were needed for this internal UI cache refresh fix - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-15 08:55:54 -05:00
Dotta	03ad5c5bea	[codex] Add issue document locking (#6009) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped issues, comments, and issue documents. > - Issue documents are the durable place where plans, handoffs, and other work artifacts are revised over time. > - Some documents need to be preserved as operator-approved snapshots while agents continue working on the same issue. > - Without document locking, a later board or agent write can overwrite the document key that reviewers expected to remain stable. > - This pull request adds board-managed issue document locks and makes agent writes to locked keys create a derived document instead of mutating the locked document. > - The benefit is safer document handoffs: approved or frozen issue documents stay immutable until the board explicitly unlocks them. ## What Changed - Added `locked_at`, `locked_by_agent_id`, and `locked_by_user_id` document fields plus migration `0085_tranquil_the_executioner.sql`. - Added document lock/unlock service behavior, route endpoints, activity events, and locked-document write protections. - Made agent document writes to locked keys create a new derived key such as `plan-2` rather than overwriting the locked document. - Surfaced lock state through shared issue document types, UI API methods, document header lock controls, and activity formatting. - Added server and UI tests for lock/unlock behavior, locked document immutability, and UI action visibility. - Updated `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` with the V1 document lock contract and endpoints. ## Verification - `git rebase public-gh/master` completed cleanly after committing the branch changes. - `git diff --check` passed before commit. - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/documents-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueDocumentsSection.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueContinuationHandoff.test.tsx ui/src/lib/document-revisions.test.ts` passed: 5 files, 32 tests. ## Risks - Medium risk because this changes the document persistence contract and adds a migration. - The migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` and guarded foreign-key creation so it remains safe for users who may have already applied an earlier copy of the migration. - Locked documents intentionally reject board edits/deletes/restores until unlocked; any existing workflows that expected direct overwrite need to unlock first. - Agent writes to locked keys now create derived documents, which may create extra issue documents when agents retry locked writes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent based on GPT-5, with tool use and local code execution in the Paperclip worktree. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-15 08:54:55 -05:00
Dotta	4142559c37	[codex] Add blocked inbox attention view (#5603) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies through company-scoped issues, comments, approvals, and execution workspaces. > - Operators need the Inbox to show not only active work, but also blocked work that may need human or agent attention. > - The existing inbox experience did not have a dedicated blocked-work surface, so blocked tasks were harder to triage and resume deliberately. > - Backend consumers also needed a compact attention signal that distinguishes actionable blockers from covered or waiting blocker states. > - This pull request adds a Blocked Inbox tab backed by issue blocker-attention metadata, shared validators, and UI helpers. > - The benefit is a clearer triage path for stalled or blocked Paperclip work without exposing external wait internals in the operator-facing UI. ## What Changed - Added shared issue blocker-attention types, validators, and exports for the API/UI contract. - Added backend blocker-attention computation and issue route support for blocked inbox data. - Added the Blocked Inbox tab, blocked reason chips, filtering/search UI, responsive layouts, and Storybook stories. - Updated inbox helpers and page behavior so toolbar controls only appear where they apply. - Added coverage for shared validators, server blocker-attention behavior, blocked inbox UI helpers/components, and the Inbox page. - Added a screenshot helper script for the blocked inbox Storybook stories. - Addressed Greptile feedback by making urgency sorting deterministic for null stop times, avoiding full blocked-inbox list enrichment for counts, and hardening the screenshot helper. ## Verification - Rebased the branch cleanly onto `public-gh/master`. - Confirmed the diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. - Confirmed the diff does not include database migration files. - Ran `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts ui/src/components/BlockedInboxView.test.tsx ui/src/components/BlockedReasonChip.test.tsx ui/src/lib/blockedInbox.test.ts ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx`. - Ran `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`. - Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is scoped inbox/operator triage work and does not duplicate a listed roadmap feature. - Greptile Review is green on the latest head and all four Greptile review threads are resolved. - GitHub PR checks are green on the latest head: policy, security/snyk, e2e, verify, Canary Dry Run, Greptile Review, and serialized server suites 1/4 through 4/4. ## Risks - Medium review surface because this touches the shared issue contract, server issue services, and the Inbox UI together. - Blocker-attention classification may need product tuning after operators use it on real blocked queues. - UI screenshots were not attached in this PR-opening pass; the branch includes `scripts/screenshot-blocked-inbox.mjs` and Storybook stories for visual capture. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent with shell, git, GitHub CLI, GitHub connector, and Paperclip API tool use. Reasoning mode: medium. Context window: not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-13 16:41:36 -05:00
Dotta	012a738729	Add ordered sub-issue navigation (#5938) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped issues, comments, and execution context. > - The issue detail page is the board surface where operators and agents inspect a task in its parent/child workflow. > - Ordered sub-issues need a low-friction way to move through work without returning to the parent list after every issue. > - Existing issue detail navigation only covered sibling transitions and did not continue into a parent issue's first ordered child. > - This pull request adds ordered previous/next navigation for issue detail views and extends it to continue from a parent or last sibling into the first direct child. > - The benefit is a smoother review/execution path through hierarchical work while preserving hidden issue filtering and dependency-aware ordering. ## What Changed - Added `IssueSiblingNavigation` and route-state handling so issue detail footers can link to previous/next ordered issues. - Extended sub-issue ordering helpers to build navigation from siblings plus direct children, including root-parent and last-sibling-to-first-child cases. - Added page, component, and library tests for ordered sibling navigation, child fallback navigation, hidden issues, and link rendering. - Fixed the quicklook blur/click race Greptile found by deferring close until after portaled link clicks can complete, with a regression test. - Polished the navigation landmark label so it remains accurate when the next target is a direct child rather than a sibling. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueLinkQuicklook.test.tsx src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts src/components/IssueSiblingNavigation.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --config vitest.config.ts` from `ui/` - 31 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed. - `git diff --check` - passed. - GitHub PR checks on latest head `34046be2` - passed: Greptile Review, verify, e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, Snyk, and serialized server shards. - Screenshots: not captured in this heartbeat; this PR is a draft and the changed states are covered by focused component/page tests. ## Risks - Low risk; this is a UI navigation addition with no database or API contract changes. - The main behavioral risk is navigation ordering drift if `workflowSort` expectations change later. - The IssueDetail navigation now waits for child issue loading, which avoids stale child fallback links but can delay footer navigation briefly while data loads. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent with repository tool use and shell 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-13 15:43:51 -05:00
Dotta	0808b388ee	[codex] Add source-scoped recovery actions (#5599) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies, where work must end with a clear disposition rather than ambiguous agent liveness. > - Recovery currently detects stalled or missing-next-step issues, but source issue recovery can become split across child recovery issues, blockers, and comments. > - That makes it harder for operators and agents to see who owns recovery and what exact action is needed on the original issue. > - Source-scoped recovery actions give the original issue a first-class active recovery state with owner, evidence, wake policy, and resolution outcome. > - This pull request adds the recovery-action data model, backend reconciliation and resolution APIs, and board UI indicators/actions. > - The benefit is clearer stalled-work recovery without losing source issue context or relying on comments as the liveness path. ## What Changed - Added the `issue_recovery_actions` schema, shared types/constants/validators, and an idempotent `0084_issue_recovery_actions` migration ordered after current `master` migrations. - Updated stranded/missing-disposition recovery to create source-scoped recovery actions, wake the recovery owner on the source issue, and avoid locking the source issue for recovery-action wakes. - Added API support for reading active recovery actions on issue detail/list surfaces and resolving them with restored, blocked, cancelled, or false-positive outcomes. - Require blocked recovery resolutions to have an unresolved first-class blocker, and removed the UI shortcut that could mark recovery blocked without a blocker selection path. - Surfaced recovery indicators/actions in the issue UI, blocker notices, active run panels, issue rows, and Storybook coverage. - Updated docs and focused tests for recovery semantics, ownership, races, stale comments, and UI behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueBlockedNotice.test.tsx ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` — 5 files, 72 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — passed, including migration numbering check. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - Follow-up verification after blocker-resolution guard: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRecoveryActionCard.test.tsx ui/src/api/issues.test.ts` — 3 files, 27 tests passed. - Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - Follow-up `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - UI states are available in `ui/storybook/stories/source-issue-recovery.stories.tsx`; screenshot capture helper is `scripts/screenshot-recovery-card.cjs`. ## Risks - Medium: recovery behavior changes from child recovery issue ownership toward source-scoped actions, so operators may see stalled-work state in new places. - Migration risk is mitigated by using the next migration slot after `master` and making the table/constraints/index creation idempotent for anyone who previously applied the old branch-local `0082_dizzy_master_mold` migration. - Existing child recovery issue paths are still guarded for already-created recovery issues, but new source-scoped flows should be watched in CI and Greptile review. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool use enabled for shell, Git, GitHub, and local test execution. Context window not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-12 09:37:15 -05:00
Devin Foley	c445e59256	fix(ui): fix message attribution for agent-posted comments with user author IDs (#5780) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip’s issue chat is an audit surface: reviewers need to trust who actually authored a message. > - Some historical agent comments were persisted with `authorUserId` and no surviving `createdByRunId`, so the UI rendered real agent output as if it came from the board user. > - A pure timestamp-window fallback is too risky because human reviewers can comment while agents are running. > - The safe recovery path is to derive attribution only when the server can prove it from same-issue run logs that include the exact posted comment id, then let the chat renderer prefer that recovered agent attribution. > - This keeps historical threads trustworthy without mutating old database rows or guessing in ambiguous cases. ## What Changed - Added shared `IssueComment` fields for derived attribution so server and UI can carry recovered `derivedAuthorAgentId`, `derivedCreatedByRunId`, and `derivedAuthorSource` consistently. - Added server-side attribution recovery in `server/src/services/issues.ts` that reads same-issue run logs and only derives agent authorship when a run log contains the exact `comment id: ...` emitted during posting. - Updated issue chat rendering in `ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.ts` to prefer direct agent authorship, then activity-log `runAgentId`, then the server-derived attribution. - Removed the unsafe UI-only run-window fallback from `ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.tsx` so human comments posted during an active run are not silently relabeled as agent output. - Added regression coverage for both the run-log derivation path and the chat-rendering fallback behavior. - Bounded server-side run-log enrichment to 8 concurrent reads per request and removed the unused `issueCommentSchema` declaration during PR cleanup. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - `pnpm test:run:general` - Live validation on May 12, 2026 in `PAPA-322`: confirmed the previously misattributed historical comments on `PAPA-316` now render as Claude-authored on `http://goldie.gerbil-company.ts.net:3100`. - Reviewer check: open `PAPA-316` in the running instance and confirm historical comments such as `## Investigation: exe.dev 422 + codex re-test` render under Claude instead of the board user. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is scoped to comment attribution recovery and rendering. - Derived attribution is intentionally conservative: if there is no exact run-log proof, the comment remains user-authored instead of guessing. - Run-log recovery depends on retained same-issue logs, so older comments without that evidence remain unchanged. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via the Paperclip `codex_local` adapter (GPT-5-class coding agent with tool use in the local Paperclip runtime; the exact deployment/model ID is not surfaced by this workspace). ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-12 01:20:49 -07:00
Dotta	563413ecd4	Fix LLM wiki type contracts (#5758) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies, and plugins extend that control plane without bloating core. > - The LLM Wiki plugin adds a knowledge surface through the plugin runtime and shared plugin UI components. > - After the LLM Wiki work merged to `master`, CI exposed TypeScript contract drift between plugin code, SDK component types, and update settings types. > - The ingestion settings update path intentionally accepts partial source toggles, but its type intersected with the full settings shape and required every source key. > - The LLM Wiki UI also passes managed routine default-drift metadata through the shared routine list item shape, but that metadata was missing from the public item type. > - This pull request narrows those type contracts to match the existing runtime behavior. > - The benefit is restoring typecheck on `master` with a small, non-behavioral follow-up. ## What Changed - Added a `WikiEventIngestionSettingsUpdate` type that permits partial source updates without weakening normalized stored settings. - Added managed routine default-drift metadata to the plugin SDK `ManagedRoutinesListItem` type. - Mirrored that managed routine default-drift type in the host UI component item type. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-llm-wiki typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `git diff --check` ## Risks - Low risk. This is a TypeScript type-contract fix only; no runtime behavior or database schema changes. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent, tool-enabled local repository editing and command 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Notes on checklist applicability: no screenshots are included because the UI change is a shared type-only contract update with no visual behavior change; no docs were required because no behavior or commands changed. Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-11 21:07:06 -05:00
Dotta	8af38fb054	Revert "fix(ui): prevent lossy cron rewrites + redesign routine triggers tab" (#5725) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through visible, governable task and routine workflows. > - Routines are the recurring-work surface where operators configure schedules, runs, and activity. > - PR #3569 moved routine operational tabs into the right-hand properties panel while also redesigning the routine trigger editor. > - The current product request is to remove that routine properties right-tab change for now and come back to it later. > - The cleanest way to do that is a direct revert of #3569 on top of current `master`, which already includes the #5703 revert. > - This pull request restores the pre-#3569 routine trigger/detail behavior and removes the right-tab properties-panel routine layout. > - The benefit is a simple, reviewable rollback with no schema or API changes. ## What Changed - Reverted #3569: `fix(ui): prevent lossy cron rewrites + redesign routine triggers tab`. - Restored the previous `RoutineDetail` inline tabs and trigger editing flow. - Restored the earlier `ScheduleEditor` implementation. - Removed the UI components and tests introduced by #3569: `ConfirmDialog`, `TriggerDialog`, `TriggerListCard`, and `ScheduleEditor.test.ts`. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` Notes: - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` was run in the clean worktree before verification. It completed with known workspace bin-link warnings for `paperclip-plugin-dev-server` because the plugin SDK `dist/dev-cli.js` has not been built in that fresh worktree. - `Routines.test.tsx` emitted existing Radix dialog accessibility warnings during the test run; the tests passed. ### Screenshots This is a direct revert of #3569. The visual state after this PR corresponds to the old screenshot from #3569, and the state being removed corresponds to the new/right-panel screenshots from #3569. | Before this revert | After this revert | | --- | --- | | <img width="1410" height="1325" alt="routine-triggers-before-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d70dd35b-e72f-4fc6-bb21-be9b0d92b3b1" /> | <img width="721" height="707" alt="routine-triggers-after-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/260bb682-32cb-4dff-b038-d55e45824b04" /> | Right-hand properties panel state removed by this revert: <img width="1409" height="830" alt="routine-properties-panel-removed" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f1d42f07-7cd3-4614-8e93-5b585affd4bf" /> ## Risks - Low technical risk: this is a clean Git revert of a UI-only PR. - Product risk: #3569 also fixed lossy cron editing and added broader schedule presets, so this rollback intentionally removes those improvements along with the right-tab routine layout. - Follow-up risk: if we want only the schedule-editor fixes back later, they should be reintroduced separately from the routine properties-panel layout. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled with local shell and GitHub CLI access. Context window size was not exposed in this session. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-11 13:24:48 -05:00
Dotta	0c6f9bdcf8	Revert "fix(ui): improve routine properties panel and history UX" (#5723) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through visible, governable task and routine workflows. > - The routines UI includes the routine detail page, properties panel, history tab, and shared sidebar components. > - PR #5703 changed that workflow by widening the routine properties panel and moving revision inspection/comparison into dialogs. > - The product direction for that change is being paused for now, so the safest path is a direct revert instead of partial edits. > - This pull request reverts merge commit `74cb560c41305ac3283067d1ec8d3060ffdc28cb` from #5703. > - The benefit is restoring the prior routines UI behavior while keeping the revert easy to review and re-apply later if needed. ## What Changed - Reverted #5703: `fix(ui): improve routine properties panel and history UX`. - Restored the previous routine properties panel sizing, panel context API, routine detail layout, and routine history rendering behavior. - Removed the reverted sidebar pane test additions and restored the previous focused routine history test expectations. ## Verification - `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` ### Screenshots This is a direct revert of #5703. The visual state after this PR corresponds to the "Before" screenshots from #5703, and the state being removed corresponds to the "After" screenshots from #5703. #### Trigger Panel Width | Before this revert | After this revert | | --- | --- | | <img width="1742" height="1288" alt="triggers-before-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9e818978-283c-49a3-9401-879be550c67b" /> | <img width="1741" height="1289" alt="triggers-after-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2a391769-c355-4219-8da3-d1ea18698430" /> | #### History Panel | Before this revert | After this revert | | --- | --- | | <img width="1741" height="1290" alt="history-before-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4c139238-8494-4438-89e1-4277d05bc3aa" /> | <img width="1739" height="1289" alt="history-after-this-revert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/eaea4f3d-bb65-4af6-b67f-3ba3026fe0c9" /> | ## Risks - Low technical risk: this is a clean Git revert of a recently merged UI-only PR. - Product risk: the routine properties panel and revision history return to the older, narrower workflow that #5703 was improving. - Re-application risk: future work that wants the #5703 behavior back should re-apply it deliberately rather than cherry-picking around this revert. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled with local shell and GitHub CLI access. Context window size was not exposed in this session. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-11 13:10:40 -05:00
Devin Foley	5a64cf52a1	Add exe.dev sandbox provider plugin (#5688) ... > _Stacked on top of #5685 → #5686 → #5687. Diff against master includes commits from earlier PRs in the stack — review focuses on the two new commits (`Add long-secret textarea variant to JsonSchemaForm SecretField` + `Add exe.dev sandbox provider plugin`)._ ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Each agent runs in a sandbox environment, and operators choose the provider — today E2B, Daytona, and (in this stack) Cloudflare > - exe.dev offers per-VM sandboxes via a small CLI / HTTP API — useful for operators who want full Linux VMs (vs container/runtime-only sandboxes) > - The plugin shape mirrors the e2b plugin: lifecycle hooks (`new`, `ls`, `rm`) drive exe.dev's CLI; SSH plumbing handles direct VM access for adapters that need it > - exe.dev VMs come up bare — `node` is not preinstalled, so the Paperclip sandbox callback bridge (a Node script) needs Node 20 installed at VM init via `--setup-script`. The plugin defaults the setup script to a Nodesource install > - The auth field accepts long SSH private keys, which need a textarea variant of the existing `SecretField` in `JsonSchemaForm` — added behind a `maxLength > THRESHOLD` opt-in so other secret fields are unaffected > - The benefit is that operators get exe.dev as a fully working sandbox provider out of the box, with no manual VM provisioning required ## What Changed **Shared UI support (`Add long-secret textarea variant to JsonSchemaForm SecretField`):** - `ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.tsx` + new `JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx`: when a secret-formatted field declares `maxLength` larger than the existing single-line threshold, render a monospace textarea instead of the masked input. Short secrets (API keys, tokens) keep the existing masked-input + show/hide toggle behavior. **The exe.dev plugin (`Add exe.dev sandbox provider plugin`):** - `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev/`: plugin entry, manifest, plugin runtime, README, and 19-test Vitest suite. - Manifest fields: API token (with `secret-ref` + `/exec` permission notes — needs `new`, `ls`, `rm`), API URL override, optional SSH username, optional SSH private key (uses the new `JsonSchemaForm` textarea variant via `maxLength: 4096`), optional SSH identity-file path, optional setup script. - Default `--setup-script` is a Nodesource Node 20 install. exe.dev VMs come up bare and the Paperclip sandbox callback bridge is a Node script, so without Node preinstalled the bridge can't start. Operators can override by supplying their own setup script. - `runLifecycleCommand` redacts env values from the executed command before surfacing it in error messages, so secrets passed via `--env=KEY=VALUE` don't leak into operator-visible failures. - The plugin distinguishes exe.dev's SSH onboarding failures (`Please complete registration by running: ssh exe.dev`) from general SSH failures and surfaces a clear remediation message. - `scripts/release-package-manifest.json`: register the new plugin for CI publish alongside the existing daytona / e2b providers. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` - `pnpm exec vitest run --no-coverage ui/src/components/JsonSchemaForm.test.tsx` - `(cd packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/exe-dev && pnpm test)` — 19 passing For an operator-side smoke test: 1. Get an exe.dev API token with `/exec` permission for `new`, `ls`, `rm`. 2. Register the plugin in your Paperclip instance, configure an environment with the token. 3. Create a sandbox env whose provider is `exe-dev`, then run a Codex or Claude job against it. The default Node 20 setup script should bring the VM up automatically. ## Risks - Adds a new sandbox provider plugin that follows the existing daytona / e2b shape; behavior on existing providers is unchanged. - The `JsonSchemaForm` textarea variant only engages for fields that opt in via `maxLength` larger than the existing threshold. All existing secret fields (which don't declare a `maxLength`) keep their current rendering. Test coverage pins both paths. - The redaction in `runLifecycleCommand` is a defense-in-depth measure; the test suite exercises the redaction path. If the redaction misses a future env-arg shape, the worst case is restored behavior (secrets in error messages), which is what the existing daytona / e2b plugins also do today. - Default setup script downloads from `deb.nodesource.com` over HTTPS at VM init. Operators on air-gapped networks or with a different package strategy can override the setup script. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic - Model: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) - Capabilities used: extended reasoning, tool use (Read/Edit/Bash/Grep) ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — UI change is a textarea variant of an existing secret field; will attach screenshots before requesting merge - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (plugin README, manifest descriptions) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-11 07:42:18 -07:00
Aron Prins	74cb560c41	fix(ui): improve routine properties panel and history UX (#5703) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Routines are the recurring-work surface where operators configure schedules, executions, activity, and revision history. > - The routine detail view uses a contextual right properties panel for triggers, runs, activity, and history. > - That panel was too cramped for routine workflows: the routine header could collapse at constrained widths, and revision previews/comparisons were trying to live inside the same narrow panel. > - This pull request makes the routine properties panel wider and responsive without changing the default panel behavior for other pages. > - It also moves routine revision viewing and comparison into focused dialogs so history stays usable instead of rendering dense revision content inside the right panel. > - The benefit is a cleaner routine workflow: triggers remain scannable, the main routine stays readable, and revisions can be inspected, compared, and restored without fighting the sidebar width. ## What Changed - Added optional per-panel layout options for storage key, default width, min/max width, and compact viewport behavior. - Set the routine properties panel to use its own 400px default width and persistence key, while compacting to 320px on narrower viewports. - Made the shared resizable sidebar support right-side panes, custom width bounds, compact max width, and keyboard resizing. - Fixed the routine detail header so title text and action controls remain readable beside the properties panel at constrained widths. - Reworked routine history so selecting a revision opens a read-only snapshot dialog instead of trying to render the whole revision inside the right panel. - Added a side-by-side current-vs-selected revision comparison dialog with clearer diff markers for structured fields, triggers, and variables. - Added focused tests for the resizable pane and routine history behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx ui/src/components/ResizableSidebarPane.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `git diff --check` - Browser E2E in TestCo at `http://localhost:3100/TES/dashboard`: - created and edited a routine - added, edited, toggled, and deleted schedule triggers - paused automation - ran the routine and stopped the live run - verified runs, activity, history, snapshot dialog, compare mode, restore confirmation, routine list, recent runs, row actions, panel close/reopen, and constrained-width layout ### Screenshots #### Trigger Panel Width | Before | After | | --- | --- | | <img width="1741" height="1289" alt="triggers-before" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2a391769-c355-4219-8da3-d1ea18698430" /> | <img width="1742" height="1288" alt="triggers-after" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9e818978-283c-49a3-9401-879be550c67b" /> | #### History Panel Before, selecting a revision attempted to show dense revision content inside the already narrow right panel. After, history remains a compact list and revision details open separately. | Before | After | | --- | --- | | <img width="1739" height="1289" alt="history-before" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/eaea4f3d-bb65-4af6-b67f-3ba3026fe0c9" /> | <img width="1741" height="1290" alt="history-after" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4c139238-8494-4438-89e1-4277d05bc3aa" /> | #### Revision Snapshot The selected revision now opens in a dedicated read-only dialog instead of crowding the properties panel. <img width="1740" height="1289" alt="revision-single" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f930f50f-7016-434b-bd81-d8d97304c528" /> #### Revision Compare Historical revisions can be compared side-by-side with the current revision, including changed structured fields and trigger differences. <img width="1740" height="1287" alt="revision-compare" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5640201e-de4f-446b-8941-1b0f140c56d7" /> ## Risks - Low to moderate UI risk: the shared resizable pane API gained optional layout parameters, but existing callers keep the previous defaults. - Routine history now uses dialogs for revision viewing and comparison, so reviewers should confirm the new workflow feels right for restore and compare. - Routine panel width now persists under a routine-specific key, so previous global properties panel width preferences do not carry into routines. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent in Codex Desktop, tool-enabled with local shell, git, and in-app browser automation. Context window size was not exposed in this session. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-11 07:37:30 -07:00
Aron Prins	c0c58d6b01	fix(ui): prevent lossy cron rewrites + redesign routine triggers tab (#3569) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Humans configure when those agents run via **routines**, which are driven by cron-backed triggers > - The routine detail page exposed triggers through an always-visible inline add form and per-row inline editor, with a ScheduleEditor that only understood a narrow set of cron shapes > - That combination was actively lossy: pasting `0 9,13,17 * * *` silently collapsed to `0 10 * * *` on save, and common shapes (every-N-minutes within a window, multiple times per day, monthly on several dates) had no first-class UI > - This pull request rebuilds the triggers tab around a list of cards + add/edit modal, teaches ScheduleEditor the cron shapes users actually want, and prevents cron round-trips from dropping data > - It also *optionally* tucks the Triggers/Runs/Activity tabs into the shared right-hand PropertiesPanel (same pattern as Issues and Goals) so they stay in view alongside the routine instead of being hidden below the main content > - The benefit is that routine scheduling becomes non-destructive and legible — operators can see, describe, and edit real-world schedules without dropping into raw cron and without fear that saving will silently rewrite their trigger ## What Changed **Core fixes + redesign (required):** - **ScheduleEditor correctness** — `parseCronToPreset` now detects comma lists, ranges, steps, and unknown tokens across every cron field and routes anything it can't round-trip losslessly to the `custom` preset (except `dow === "1-5"` → `weekdays`). Fixes the `0 9,13,17 * * *` → `0 10 * * *` regression. - **ScheduleEditor presets** — adds first-class support for every-N-minutes (with optional hour window + weekdays-only), every-N-hours, hourly at minute offset, daily with multiple times/day, selected-days-of-week with multiple times, and monthly on multiple dates. `describeSchedule` unfolds multi-value hour/day lists into readable sentences. - **ScheduleEditor polish** — swaps raw `<input type=\"checkbox\">` for the shadcn `Checkbox` primitive so hour-window and weekdays-only toggles match the rest of the app. - **Triggers tab redesign** — replaces the inline add form + inline editor with a header + \"Add trigger\" button, compact `TriggerListCard` entries, and a `TriggerDialog` add/edit modal. Enable/disable is now a single-click switch on each card; delete goes through a `ConfirmDialog`. - **Webhook trigger gating** — webhook kind is visible but disabled with \"— COMING SOON\" in the add dialog, matching the old inline form's production behaviour. Editing existing webhook triggers still works. - **Tests** — adds `ScheduleEditor.test.ts` covering the regression cron strings (`0 9,13,17 * * *`, `0 */4 * * *`, `0 10,16 * * *`) plus existing preset patterns as regression guards in the other direction. **Optional layout change (commit `145a86b5` — can be dropped without affecting the rest):** - Moves Triggers/Runs/Activity into the shared right-hand `PropertiesPanel` (persisted open/close, header toggle button), mirroring `IssueDetail` and `GoalDetail`. The reasoning: these tabs are the primary way a human *operates* a routine, and keeping them docked on the right means they're always in view next to the routine content rather than hidden below the fold. Mobile parity is preserved by rendering the same tabs inline below `md`. Trigger cards and run/activity rows were restructured into vertical stacks so they fit the 320px panel without overflow, and the last-result badge became a wrapping inline chip so long error strings no longer fill the card width. - **If reviewers prefer to keep the tabs inline below the routine, this commit can be reverted cleanly without touching any of the fixes above.** ## Screenshots: Old: <img width="721" height="707" alt="triggers-old" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/260bb682-32cb-4dff-b038-d55e45824b04" /> New: <img width="1410" height="1325" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-13 at 12 25 00" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d70dd35b-e72f-4fc6-bb21-be9b0d92b3b1" /> New Add Trigger modal: <img width="1408" height="1321" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-13 at 12 25 07" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0f23a83d-ba2c-47ed-9efa-829e777dcdf5" /> Commit 145a86b5 Properties panel: <img width="1409" height="830" alt="commit-145a86b51265e326160cb8c48e0874cb36d86f37" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f1d42f07-7cd3-4614-8e93-5b585affd4bf" /> ## Verification - `cd ui && npm test -- ScheduleEditor` — new cron parser/describer cases pass. - Full UI test suite + typecheck green locally. - Manual: 1. Open a routine → Triggers tab → verify cards render with enable switch, edit, and delete (confirm dialog). 2. Create a schedule trigger with each preset (every-N-min with window, every-N-hours, hourly@offset, daily multi-time, weekly multi-time, monthly multi-date) → save → reopen → preset + values round-trip intact. 3. Paste `0 9,13,17 * * *` into an existing trigger → editor routes to Custom with the raw cron preserved → save → value unchanged. 4. Try to add a webhook trigger → kind option shows \"— COMING SOON\" and is disabled; edit an existing webhook trigger still works. 5. Toggle the properties panel via header button → state persists across reload. Resize below `md` → tabs render inline. - **Before/after screenshots:** attached in PR description (inline triggers tab → list+modal; raw-cron save hazard → custom preset preservation; bottom-of-page tabs → right-hand PropertiesPanel). ## Risks - **Medium-low.** UI-only change; no API, schema, or migration impact. - `parseCronToPreset` / `describeSchedule` signatures are preserved, but their *behaviour* shifts: more cron strings now resolve to `custom` than before. Any external caller relying on the old (lossy) classification would see different preset tags — none known in-repo. - PropertiesPanel reuse (optional commit) depends on the existing localStorage key behaviour; if two routes ever write conflicting open/close state under the same key, one could clobber the other. Mirrors the established `IssueDetail`/`GoalDetail` pattern, so risk is bounded. Reverting `145a86b5` removes this risk entirely while keeping the fixes. - Webhook kind is disabled in the add dialog only; existing webhook triggers remain editable, so no data is stranded. ## Model Used - **Authoring / PR drafting:** Anthropic Claude — `claude-opus-4-6` (1M context window), via Claude Code CLI. Used for diff review and PR description drafting. Code authored by @aronprins. - **Post-hoc audit:** OpenAI Codex — `gpt-5.4` (high reasoning). Audited the completed work after implementation; found no issues. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path traces from project context to this change - [x] Model used specified with version + capability details - [x] Tests run locally and pass - [x] Added/updated tests (`ScheduleEditor.test.ts`) - [x] Before/after screenshots attached - [ ] Documentation updated — none required (internal UI only) - [x] Risks documented - [x] Will address all Greptile + reviewer comments before merge	2026-05-11 00:53:10 -07:00
Devin Foley	534aee66ae	Add cursor_cloud adapter for Cursor SDK + Cloud Agents API v1 (#5664) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - There are many adapter types, one per agent-runtime product (Claude, Codex, OpenCode, Cursor local CLI, etc.) > - Cursor shipped a public TypeScript SDK on 2026-04-29 that exposes Cursor's full hosted-agent platform (cloud VMs, harness, MCP, skills, hooks) > - Paperclip had no first-class adapter for this — agents that wanted to use Cursor's managed cloud runtime had to fall back to the local CLI adapter, which loses the cloud session, streaming, and durable run model > - This PR adds a new `cursor_cloud` adapter built directly on `@cursor/sdk`, with Paperclip's heartbeat mapped to Cursor's durable-agent + per-run model > - The benefit is that any Paperclip agent can now drive a Cursor cloud agent across heartbeats with native session reuse, streaming, and cancellation, while Paperclip remains the source of truth for issue/task state ## What Changed - New built-in adapter package `packages/adapters/cursor-cloud` (15 files, ~1.7k LOC) backed by `@cursor/sdk` ^1.0.12 - `src/server/execute.ts` — SDK-first lifecycle: `Agent.create` / `Agent.resume` / `Agent.getRun` / `agent.send` / `run.stream` / `run.wait`, with session reuse keyed on the (runtime env type, env name, repo set) tuple - `src/server/session.ts` — codec for `cursorAgentId` + `latestRunId` + repo metadata, persisted in `runtime.sessionParams` - `src/server/test.ts` — environment probe via `Cursor.me()` and optional model validation via `Cursor.models.list()` - `src/ui/parse-stdout.ts` + `src/cli/format-event.ts` — normalize Cursor SDK message types (`status`, `thinking`, `assistant`, `user`, `tool_call`, `tool_result`, `result`) into Paperclip transcript events for the UI and CLI - Registrations: `packages/shared/src/constants.ts`, `packages/adapter-utils/src/session-compaction.ts`, `server/src/adapters/{registry,builtin-adapter-types}.ts`, `ui/src/adapters/{registry,adapter-display-registry}.ts` + `ui/src/adapters/cursor-cloud/index.ts`, `cli/src/adapters/registry.ts`, plus workspace deps in `cli`/`server`/`ui` `package.json` - `ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.tsx` — hide local-Cursor `mode`/thinking-effort field for `cursor_cloud` (different config surface) - 11 vitest tests covering execute paths (fresh create, matching-resume, active-run reattach, non-finished result), session codec round-trip, transcript parsing, and config building ## Verification Reviewer steps: ```bash pnpm install pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-cursor-cloud typecheck # → clean pnpm vitest run packages/adapters/cursor-cloud # → 11/11 passing ``` End-to-end check against a real Cursor cloud agent (requires `CURSOR_API_KEY` and Cursor GitHub-app install on the target repo): 1. Create a `cursor_cloud` agent in Paperclip with `repoUrl` set to the test repo, `repoStartingRef: main`, and `env.CURSOR_API_KEY` set 2. Trigger a heartbeat → adapter calls `Agent.create({ cloud: { env: { type: "cloud" }, repos: [...] } })`, streams events, terminates on `finished` 3. Trigger a second heartbeat → adapter calls `Agent.resume` or `agent.send` follow-up depending on prior-run state, reusing `cursorAgentId` 4. The Paperclip UI/CLI transcript reflects Cursor `status` / `thinking` / `assistant` events as they stream 5. Cancellation from Paperclip maps to `run.cancel()` or Cloud API v1 `cancelRun` for cross-heartbeat cancellation A direct-SDK smoke run against a real repo (devinfoley/my_test_project @ main) confirmed: `Cursor.me()` ok → `Agent.create` → `agent.send` → `run.stream()` (30 events) → terminal status `finished` in ~11s. ## Risks - **New adapter, additive only.** No existing adapter or registry is replaced; current `cursor` local-CLI adapter is untouched. Default behavior of any existing agent is unchanged. - **External dependency on `@cursor/sdk`.** Cursor's SDK is v1.0.x and may evolve. Mocked unit tests cover the public surface used here; if the SDK breaks compatibility we update the adapter independently. - **Cost/budget.** `cursor_cloud` runs on Cursor's billed cloud VMs; operators must understand they are spending money outside Paperclip's budget controls when they enable this adapter. Same shape as other API-billed adapters. - **No webhook support in V1.** The SDK already provides stream/wait/cancel/reattach, so V1 does not require a public callback URL. If a future use case needs out-of-band wakes, we add a Cloud API v1 webhook bridge as a separate change. This is called out in the issue plan document. - **Lockfile.** Per repo policy, `pnpm-lock.yaml` is intentionally not in this PR — CI's lockfile workflow will update it on merge given the manifest changes. ## Model Used - Provider: Anthropic Claude (via Claude Code / Paperclip `claude_local` adapter) - Model: `claude-opus-4-7` (Claude Opus 4.7), knowledge cutoff January 2026 - Mode: standard tool-use with extended reasoning - Context: ~200k token window - Capabilities used: code generation, multi-file edits, shell/test execution, GitHub PR workflow ## 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 run tests locally and they pass (11/11 in `packages/adapters/cursor-cloud`) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (4 new test files, 11 cases) - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (the only UI change is hiding the local-Cursor mode field on the `cursor_cloud` adapter — happy to attach a screenshot if the reviewer wants one) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (issue plan document supersedes the pre-SDK design; tracked in PAPA-203) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-10 17:21:04 -07:00
Devin Foley	eb12c42009	Clarify sandbox provider messaging in company environments (#4902) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Company Environments is the operator-facing seam for choosing where compatible adapters execute work. > - Sandbox provider plugins such as E2B extend that seam, but they are not agent adapters themselves. > - The current Company Environments copy put adapter capability rows and sandbox-provider enablement on the same page without clearly distinguishing the two concepts. > - That made it look like installing the E2B sandbox provider caused a new adapter to appear under adapters. > - This pull request clarifies the UI language so provider plugins are described as backing the Sandbox driver rather than being adapter types. > - The benefit is a more accurate mental model for operators configuring environments and adapters. ## What Changed - Added explicit Company Environments copy stating that installed sandbox providers are not adapter types and instead back the Sandbox driver for compatible adapters. - Renamed the support-matrix column from `Sandbox` to `Sandbox via plugin` to make the provider relationship visible in the table itself. - Extended the existing environments UI test to assert the new clarification text. ## Verification - `pnpm test -- --run ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.test.tsx` Result: could not complete cleanly in this worktree because the checkout is missing its local workspace install links. - Direct Vitest fallback against `ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.test.tsx` Result: failed before test collection on local dependency resolution (`react/jsx-dev-runtime`), so there is no passing automated signal from this checkout. - Manual review Confirm the Company Environments page now says sandbox providers are not adapter types and labels the table column as `Sandbox via plugin`. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a copy-only UI clarification plus a matching test assertion; the main risk is wording drift if the product later decides sandbox providers should be surfaced differently. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via the local `codex_local` Paperclip adapter. This run used tool-assisted code editing and shell execution. The exact backend model ID and context window are not exposed in the Paperclip run context for this session. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-09 23:03:26 -07:00
Dotta	e3af7aa489	Add shared sidebar section controls (#5585) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies. > - The board UI sidebar is one of the main ways operators scan active agents and projects. > - Agents and projects had duplicated section header behavior, which made collapse controls, add actions, and future section menus harder to keep consistent. > - Operators also need lightweight ways to switch between their curated sidebar order and common scan orders like alphabetical or recent activity. > - This pull request introduces a shared sidebar section header and uses it for the Agents and Projects sidebar sections. > - The benefit is a more consistent sidebar surface with reusable header controls and persisted sort modes without losing the existing drag-ordered Top view. ## What Changed - Added a reusable `SidebarSection` component that supports collapsible content, header actions, and section dropdown menus. - Updated the Agents sidebar section to use the shared header and add persisted `Top`, `Alphabetical`, and `Recent` sort modes. - Updated the Projects sidebar section to use the shared header and add persisted `Top`, `Alphabetical`, and `Recent` sort modes. - Added local-storage helpers and cross-tab update events for agent/project sidebar sort preferences. - Added focused component coverage for the shared section behavior and the updated Agents/Projects sidebar ordering paths. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SidebarSection.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarProjects.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx` - 3 test files passed - 18 tests passed ## Risks - Low-to-moderate UI risk: this changes sidebar section header interactions and adds persisted client-side sort preferences. - Drag ordering is intentionally limited to `Top` mode; non-top modes render sorted lists and do not persist drag order changes. - No database migrations or API contract changes. > 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 coding agent, GPT-5-based model, tool-use enabled; exact hosted model build/context-window identifier was not exposed in this session. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-05-09 19:49:59 -05:00
Dotta	778e775c35	Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures.    ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
Devin Foley	0e1a582831	Revert "Add experimental newest-first issue thread" (#5460) ... This is actually bad. Glad it was under experiments.	2026-05-07 16:50:31 -07:00
Devin Foley	a904effb96	Add experimental newest-first issue thread (#5455) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, so issue threads are a core operator surface for reviewing work. > - The issue detail page is the place where humans read agent messages, user comments, and execution context together. > - That thread originally rendered oldest-first, which made recent activity harder to see during active review. > - Reversing the thread order changes navigation expectations, timestamp placement, and the "Jump to latest" affordance, so the UI behavior needed to move as a coherent set. > - Because this is a visible core-product behavior shift, it also needed a safe rollout path instead of becoming the default immediately. > - This pull request adds the newest-first issue thread behavior behind an Experimental setting, updates the thread UI to match that mode, and keeps the legacy oldest-first experience unchanged by default. > - The benefit is that reviewers can opt into a more recent-first issue workflow without forcing a global behavior change on every Paperclip instance. ## What Changed - Reversed issue thread rendering so the newest comments and messages appear first when the experiment is enabled. - Moved the plain comment timestamp into the card header in newest-first mode and kept the legacy timestamp placement for oldest-first mode. - Moved the `Jump to latest` control to the bottom of the thread in newest-first mode while leaving the existing top placement for the legacy mode. - Added the `Enable Newest-First Issue Thread` experimental instance setting and wired issue detail to read that toggle. - Added regression coverage for thread order, timestamp placement, jump-button placement, and the issue-detail experiment toggle behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run` - `pnpm build` - Focused checks that also passed during issue review: - `pnpm vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` in `ui/` - `pnpm vitest run src/__tests__/instance-settings-routes.test.ts` in `server/` - Manual review path: - Enable `Instance Settings > Experimental > Enable Newest-First Issue Thread` - Open an issue with comments/messages and confirm newest activity renders first, timestamps move into the header, and `Jump to latest` sits below the thread - Disable the experiment and confirm the legacy oldest-first behavior returns ## Risks - Low risk: the behavioral change is gated behind an instance-level experimental toggle and defaults off. - The main regression risk is thread navigation drift between the two modes, especially around anchor scrolling and the `Jump to latest` affordance. - There is some UI coupling between issue-detail query state and experimental settings fetches, so future changes in that area should keep both modes covered. - Screenshots are not attached in this PR body; verification is described with automated coverage and manual steps instead. > I checked [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md). This is a scoped issue-thread UX improvement and rollout gate, not a duplicate of a roadmap-level planned core feature. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via the local `codex_local` Paperclip adapter, GPT-5-based coding agent with terminal tool use and local code execution in this repository worktree. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-05-07 16:45:12 -07:00