## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Task references are a core part of how operators understand issue
relationships across the UI
> - Those references appear both in markdown bodies and in sidebar
relationship panels
> - The rendering had drifted between surfaces, and inline markdown
pills were reading awkwardly inside prose and lists
> - This pull request unifies the underlying issue-reference treatment,
routes issue descriptions through `MarkdownBody`, and switches inline
markdown references to a cleaner text-link presentation
> - The benefit is more consistent issue-reference UX with better
readability in markdown-heavy views
## What Changed
- unified sidebar and markdown issue-reference rendering around the
shared issue-reference components
- routed resting issue descriptions through `MarkdownBody` so
description previews inherit the richer issue-reference treatment
- replaced inline markdown pill chrome with a cleaner inline reference
presentation for prose contexts
- added and updated UI tests for `MarkdownBody` and `InlineEditor`
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/components/InlineEditor.test.tsx`
## Risks
- Moderate UI risk: issue-reference rendering now differs intentionally
between inline markdown and relationship sidebars, so regressions would
show up as styling or hover-preview mismatches
> 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 tool use and code execution
in the Codex CLI 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
- [ ] 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The control plane depends on authenticated routes enforcing company
boundaries and role permissions correctly
> - This branch also touches the issue detail and markdown editing flows
operators use while handling advisory and triage work
> - Partial issue cache seeds and fragile rich-editor parsing could
leave important issue content missing or blank at the moment an operator
needed it
> - Blocked issues becoming actionable again should wake their assignee
automatically instead of silently staying idle
> - This pull request rebases the advisory follow-up branch onto current
`master`, hardens authenticated route authorization, and carries the
issue-detail/editor reliability fixes forward with regression tests
> - The benefit is tighter authz on sensitive routes plus more reliable
issue/advisory editing and wakeup behavior on top of the latest base
## What Changed
- Hardened authenticated route authorization across agent, activity,
approval, access, project, plugin, health, execution-workspace,
portability, and related server paths, with new cross-tenant and
runtime-authz regression coverage.
- Switched issue detail queries from `initialData` to placeholder-based
hydration so list/quicklook seeds still refetch full issue bodies.
- Normalized advisory-style HTML images before mounting the markdown
editor and strengthened fallback behavior when the rich editor silently
fails or rejects the content.
- Woke assigned agents when blocked issues move back to `todo`, with
route coverage for reopen and unblock transitions.
- Rebasing note: this branch now sits cleanly on top of the latest
`master` tip used for the PR base.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/issueDetailQuery.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts`
- Confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not part of the PR diff.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` before publishing.
## Risks
- Broad authz tightening may expose existing flows that were relying on
permissive board or agent access and now need explicit grants.
- Markdown editor fallback changes could affect focus or rendering in
edge-case content that mixes HTML-like advisory markup with normal
markdown.
- This verification was intentionally scoped to touched regressions and
did not run the full repository suite.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent in the Codex CLI environment
with tool use for terminal, git, and GitHub operations. The exact
runtime model identifier is not exposed inside 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, it is behavior-only and does not
need before/after screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes, or no
documentation changes were needed for these internal fixes
- [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>
fixes https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/2336
## Thinking Path
<!--
Required. Trace your reasoning from the top of the project down to this
specific change. Start with what Paperclip is, then narrow through the
subsystem, the problem, and why this PR exists. Use blockquote style.
Aim for 5–8 steps. See CONTRIBUTING.md for full examples.
-->
- Paperclip allows to manage projects
- During the project creation you can optionally enter a description
- In the project overview or configuration you can edit the description
- However, you cannot remove the description
- The user should be able to remove the project description because it's
an optional property
- This pull request fixes the frontend bug that prevented the user to
remove/clear the project description
## What Changed
<!-- Bullet list of concrete changes. One bullet per logical unit. -->
- project description can be cleared in "project configuration" and
"project overview"
## Verification
<!--
How can a reviewer confirm this works? Include test commands, manual
steps, or both. For UI changes, include before/after screenshots.
-->
In project configuration or project overview:
- In the description field remove/clear the text
## Risks
<!--
What could go wrong? Mention migration safety, breaking changes,
behavioral shifts, or "Low risk" if genuinely minor.
-->
- none
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [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
Dotta