forked from farhoodlabs/paperclip
bfe6369ef58cce7bbfa2dcbd09414d4809fe7bf7
1163 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 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 |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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>
|
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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>
|
||
|
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 |
||
|
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>
|
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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>
|
||
|
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 |
||
|
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> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
0e1a582831 |
Revert "Add experimental newest-first issue thread" (#5460)
This is actually bad. Glad it was under experiments. |
||
|
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 |
||
|
Dotta
|
824298f414 |
Route sidebar search icon directly to search (#5440)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Operators use the sidebar as their primary board navigation surface > - The board now has a dedicated search page, so the header search icon should behave as normal navigation instead of only dispatching a command-palette shortcut > - The Work nav also had a separate Search row, which duplicated the always-visible header search affordance > - This pull request keeps search one click away while making it a direct `/search` link and reducing sidebar nav noise > - The benefit is a smaller, clearer sidebar with search still accessible from the top-level chrome ## What Changed - Changed the sidebar header search icon into a direct `NavLink` to `/search`. - Removed the duplicate `Search` row from the Work navigation section. - Added focused Sidebar coverage that asserts the header search link target and confirms Search is not rendered in the Work nav. - Refactored the Sidebar test setup helper to avoid repeating the React Query wrapper across tests. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` in the PR worktree so workspace package symlinks existed for test execution. This completed with existing plugin SDK bin warnings for missing built artifacts. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx` — 3 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. ## Risks - Low: this changes a sidebar navigation affordance only. Users who previously clicked the header icon now land on the full search page instead of opening the command-palette shortcut path. - Low: removing the Work nav Search row could affect users who expected Search in that section, but the icon remains in the fixed sidebar header and is covered by a targeted DOM test. > 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-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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 or equivalent focused UI 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
e400315cbf |
Guard assigned backlog liveness (#5428)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The issue graph and liveness recovery system decide whether assigned work is executable or parked > - Assigned issues created without an explicit status could silently land in backlog, making parents look blocked with no productive wake path > - The server, shared validators, recovery analysis, and UI all need to agree on that execution semantic > - This pull request makes assigned issue creation default to `todo`, flags assigned backlog blockers, and surfaces the state in the board > - The benefit is that parked assigned work becomes intentional and visible instead of creating silent liveness stalls ## What Changed - Adds contract tests for assigned issue creation defaults. - Defaults assigned issue creation to `todo` when status is omitted while preserving explicit `backlog` parking. - Exposes `resolveCreateIssueStatusDefault` through shared validators. - Teaches liveness/blocker attention paths to distinguish assigned backlog blockers. - Adds UI notices, row/header badges, and issue detail safeguards for assigned backlog blockers. - Adds Storybook fixtures and execution-semantics documentation for the assigned-backlog behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-assigned-backlog-contract-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-liveness.test.ts server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueAssignedBacklogNotice.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx` — 50 passed, 23 skipped. - Skipped tests were embedded Postgres suites on this host with the repo skip message: `Postgres init script exited with code null. Please check the logs for extra info. The data directory might already exist.` - Pairwise merge check against the issue-controls PR branch completed without conflicts via `git merge --no-commit --no-ff` in a temporary worktree. - Screenshots for assigned-backlog UI states: [light](docs/pr-screenshots/pr-5428/assigned-backlog-light.png), [dark](docs/pr-screenshots/pr-5428/assigned-backlog-dark.png). - Follow-up checks: `pnpm --filter /ui typecheck`; `pnpm --filter /mcp-server build`; `pnpm --filter /mcp-server test`; `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts`; focused UI component tests. - Remote PR checks on head `6300b3c`: policy, verify, serialized server shards 1/4-4/4, Canary Dry Run, e2e, Greptile Review, and Snyk all passed. ## Risks - Medium: changes status defaulting for assigned issue creation when the caller omits status. Explicit `backlog` remains supported, and server/shared tests cover both paths. - Medium: liveness classification changes can affect blocker attention labels; focused service and UI tests cover the new assigned-backlog state. > 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-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
6f30003421 |
Polish operator UI task controls (#5427)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Operators spend most of their day scanning skills, routines, inbox groups, and activity cards > - Several small UI rough edges made those surfaces harder to scan or easier to crash on real API payloads > - These fixes are grouped together because they are low-risk operator quality-of-life improvements rather than separate control-plane contracts > - This pull request polishes skills metadata, routine run-now access, grouped issue creation defaults, monitor activity rendering, and activity row identity layout > - The benefit is a smoother board workflow with fewer small interruptions while keeping the change set compact ## What Changed - Improves company skill source display and the used-by agent list. - Truncates long skill source paths and adds a copy affordance. - Adds a row-level run-now button to the routines table. - Adds grouped issue creation defaults for inbox issue groups and aligns grouped add buttons to the right. - Fixes `IssueMonitorActivityCard` when `monitorNextCheckAt` arrives as an ISO string. - Polishes activity row actor avatar/name layout by using the shared avatar primitive. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueMonitorActivityCard.test.tsx` — 91 passed. - The routines test emitted the pre-existing Radix warning about missing `DialogTitle`/description in dialog content; tests still passed. - Pairwise merge checks against the other two PR branches reported no textual conflicts. ## Risks - Low: changes are UI-focused and covered by targeted component/lib tests. - Low-to-medium: activity row layout changes could affect dense feed scanability; the implementation uses the shared avatar component and keeps truncation 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 coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
772fc92619 |
Add issue controls and retry-now recovery (#5426)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Issue operators need clear controls for execution settings, model overrides, and recovery retries > - Existing issue properties hid useful adapter override state and did not expose a board-triggered retry for scheduled heartbeat recovery > - Scheduled retries also need to respect the same safety gates as normal execution instead of bypassing budget, review, pause, dependency, or terminal-state checks > - This pull request adds the issue property controls and retry-now surfaces together because they share the issue details/properties UI > - The benefit is that operators can inspect and adjust issue execution settings and safely trigger pending scheduled recovery without hidden control-plane behavior ## What Changed - Adds editable issue assignee model override controls in `IssueProperties`, with focused coverage. - Removes the stale workspace tasks link from issue properties. - Adds a scheduled retry `retry-now` backend path and shared response types. - Adds main-pane and properties-pane scheduled retry UI, backed by a shared `useRetryNowMutation` hook. - Adds suppression coverage for budget hard stops, review participant changes, subtree pause holds, unresolved blockers, terminal issues, and company scoping. - Updates the `IssueProperties` test harness with toast actions required by the retry-now hook. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueScheduledRetryCard.test.tsx` — 31 passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-scheduled-retry-routes.test.ts` — exited 0, but this host skipped the embedded Postgres route tests with: `Postgres init script exited with code null. Please check the logs for extra info. The data directory might already exist.` - Pairwise merge check against the assigned-backlog PR branch completed without conflicts via `git merge --no-commit --no-ff` in a temporary worktree. ### Visual verification screenshots Storybook story: `Product/Issue Scheduled retry surfaces / ScheduledRetrySurfaces`.   ## Risks - Medium: this touches issue execution/retry behavior, so CI should run the embedded Postgres route tests on a host that can initialize Postgres. - Low-to-medium UI risk around duplicated retry-now entry points; both surfaces share one mutation hook to keep behavior consistent. > 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-enabled Paperclip heartbeat environment. Context window and internal reasoning mode are 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
d0e9cc76f2 |
Show workspace changes and stale notices in issue threads (#5356)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The issue thread is the operator's durable audit trail for what changed and why > - Workspace changes and stale disposition notices need to be visible in that same timeline without noisy or misleading rendering > - The local branch already contained backend activity details, timeline conversion, and UI rendering work for those events > - This pull request isolates the issue-thread activity work into a standalone branch against `origin/master` > - The benefit is a focused audit-trail PR that can merge independently of the sidebar/operator UI polish branch ## What Changed - Adds readable workspace-change activity details to issue update activity events. - Surfaces workspace-change events in issue chat/timeline rendering. - Makes the existing issue comment migration idempotent. - Folds and renders stale disposition notices inline so they match activity-log styling and spacing. - Adds focused route, timeline, and issue-thread system notice coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-activity-events-routes.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-timeline-events.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueChatThreadSystemNotice.test.tsx` — 3 files passed, 22 tests passed. - Confirmed the PR changes 9 files and does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-closed-workspace-routes.test.ts` — 1 file passed, 4 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-activity-events-routes.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-timeline-events.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueChatThreadSystemNotice.test.tsx server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts` — 5 files passed, 54 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` after adding the Storybook screenshot fixture. - Captured Storybook screenshots for the new UI rendering paths: - Collapsed stale notice + workspace-change row: `docs/pr-screenshots/pr-5356/issue-thread-notices-collapsed.png` - Expanded stale notice details: `docs/pr-screenshots/pr-5356/issue-thread-notices-expanded.png` ### Screenshots Collapsed stale notice with workspace-change row:  Expanded stale notice details:  ## Risks - Moderate risk: this touches issue activity serialization and issue-thread rendering, both of which are central operator surfaces. - Migration risk is low: the only migration change makes an existing migration idempotent. - No new migrations are introduced, so there is no cross-PR migration ordering requirement. > 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, shell/tool-use enabled, used to split the existing branch, verify the isolated PR branch, and create this PR. ## 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
4103978578 |
Polish operator sidebar and issue property controls (#5355)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Operators use the board sidebar and issue properties panel to move between companies and understand task metadata > - Small UI regressions in these controls make repeated board operation slower and less predictable > - The local branch already contained targeted fixes for company ordering, issue date display, and sidebar rail sizing > - This pull request isolates those operator UI quality-of-life fixes into a standalone branch against `origin/master` > - The benefit is a focused, reviewable PR that can merge independently of the issue-thread activity work ## What Changed - Shows issue property timestamps with time, not just dates. - Adds edit-mode support for ordering companies in the sidebar company menu. - Fixes a workspace switcher rail regression and keeps the account menu aligned with the rail width. - Includes focused component coverage for the touched controls. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx` — 4 files passed, 29 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter /ui typecheck` - PR checks on `a4030f7a` are green: policy, verify, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, e2e, Canary Dry Run, Greptile Review, and Snyk. - Captured a local Storybook screenshot of `Product/Navigation & Layout` after the sidebar polish: `/tmp/pap-3659-screenshots/navigation-layout-after.png`. - Confirmed the PR changes 8 files and does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`. ## Risks - Low to moderate UI risk: this touches shared sidebar components and issue metadata rendering. - The company ordering behavior depends on existing query/cache behavior, so stale cache bugs would show up as ordering inconsistencies. - No database, API, workflow, or lockfile 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, shell/tool-use enabled, used to split the existing branch, verify the isolated PR branch, and create this PR. ## 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
68f69975a4 |
Harden control-plane safety and issue identifiers (#5292)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip relies on issue identifiers, execution policies, and agent heartbeat rules to keep autonomous work auditable. > - Safety checks need to reject ambiguous agent handoffs, and identifier parsing needs to support Cloud tenant prefixes. > - Agent instructions also need to make final-disposition rules explicit so work does not stall in vague states. > - This pull request isolates backend correctness and governance hardening from the UI and recovery-system-notice branches. > - The benefit is safer in-review transitions, better identifier compatibility, and clearer agent operating contracts. ## What Changed - Fixed run-aware confirmation ordering and interrupted-run state cleanup. - Added Cloud tenant identity bootstrap and alphanumeric issue identifier support across shared parsing and server routes. - Guarded agent-authored `in_review` updates unless a real review path exists. - Tightened heartbeat disposition instructions in adapter utilities/default AGENTS/Paperclip skill. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/issue-references.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-identifier-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` initially had the first execution-policy test hit Vitest's 5s timeout under the parallel bundle while the rest passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts --testTimeout=20000` passed with 10/10 tests. - Follow-up: `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` passed. - Follow-up: `pnpm vitest run ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-reference.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-timeline-events.test.ts` passed. ## Risks - Medium control-plane risk: in-review update validation changes agent behavior. The error message is explicit and tests cover allowed review paths. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
a1b30c9f35 |
Add planning mode for issue work (#5353)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies. > - Issues are the core unit of work, and issue comments are how board users and agents coordinate execution. > - Some issue conversations need to produce plans and approvals instead of immediate implementation work. > - The existing issue contract did not distinguish standard execution comments from planning-oriented issue work. > - This pull request adds an issue work-mode contract and board UI affordances for standard vs planning mode. > - The benefit is that planning-mode issues can be created, displayed, discussed, and carried through agent heartbeat context without losing the normal issue workflow. ## What Changed - Added `standard` / `planning` issue work-mode contracts across DB, shared validators/types, server issue flows, plugin protocol, and adapter heartbeat payloads. - Added an idempotent `0081_optimal_dormammu` migration for `issues.work_mode`, ordered after current `public-gh/master` migrations. - Updated heartbeat/context summaries and issue-thread interaction behavior so planning work mode is preserved when creating suggested follow-up issues. - Added UI support for planning-mode issue creation, issue rows, detail composer styling, and composer work-mode toggles. - Added focused server/shared/UI tests plus a Playwright visual verification spec for planning-mode surfaces. - Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` and added durable planning-mode screenshots under `doc/assets/pap-3368/`. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/shared packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-goal-context-routes.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts` - `PAPERCLIP_E2E_SKIP_LLM=true npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts` ## Screenshots Desktop planning detail:  Desktop planning row:  Desktop staged standard toggle:  Mobile planning detail:  Mobile planning row:  ## Risks - Medium migration risk: this adds a non-null issue column. The migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` so installations that applied an older branch-local migration number can still apply the final numbered migration safely. - Medium contract risk: issue payloads, plugin payloads, and adapter heartbeat payloads now include work mode; compatibility is handled by defaulting missing values to `standard`. - UI risk is moderate because composer controls changed; focused component tests and visual e2e coverage exercise standard vs planning display and toggle 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 a local Paperclip worktree, with shell/tool use. Exact context-window size 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 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
320fd5d23b |
Add full company search page (#5293)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators need to find work, documents, agents, projects, comments, and activity across a company without jumping through separate surfaces. > - The existing Command-K flow was useful for fast navigation but not enough for deeper company-wide discovery. > - Search also needs company-scoped backend contracts, query cost controls, and indexed document matching so it stays safe as company data grows. > - This pull request adds a full company search API and a dedicated board search page that Command-K can hand off to. > - The benefit is a single searchable control-plane surface with richer result context, recents, highlights, and test coverage across server and UI behavior. ## What Changed - Added a company-scoped search endpoint/service with query validation, rate limiting, text matching, fuzzy title matching, and result typing shared through `@paperclipai/shared`. - Added idempotent search migrations for document search indexes and fuzzy matching support. - Added the full `/companies/:companyKey/search` UI, search result row components, highlighted snippets, recent searches, and sidebar/Command-K handoff. - Added Storybook coverage for search surfaces and Vitest coverage for server search behavior, rate limiting, route generation, Command-K behavior, and the search page. - Addressed Greptile findings by renaming the no-match SQL helper, applying search pagination after cross-type merge sorting, and lazy-initializing the default search service so unrelated route-test mocks do not need to know about it. - Merged current `public-gh/master` and renumbered the search migrations behind upstream `0078_white_darwin`: search indexes are now `0079_company_search_document_indexes` and fuzzy matching is `0080_company_search_fuzzystrmatch`. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git diff --check public-gh/master...HEAD` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | rg '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` produced no output before opening the PR. - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-search-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-rate-limit-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/Search.test.tsx ui/src/components/CommandPalette.test.tsx ui/src/lib/company-routes.test.ts` passed: 5 files, 25 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-search-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-rate-limit-routes.test.ts && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed after Greptile pagination fixes. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-rate-limit-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-service.test.ts && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed after the CI mock fix. - After resolving the migration conflict with current `public-gh/master`: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-search-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-search-rate-limit-routes.test.ts && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - DB migration numbering check passed as part of `@paperclipai/db` typecheck. - UI states are covered by the added Storybook stories in `ui/storybook/stories/search.stories.tsx`. - GitHub reports the PR merge state as `CLEAN` on head `18e54fa8`. - GitHub PR checks are green on head `18e54fa8`: policy, verify, serialized server shards 1/4 through 4/4, e2e, canary dry run, Snyk, and Greptile Review. ## Risks - Search ranking and snippets are new user-facing behavior, so reviewers should check whether result ordering feels right on real company data. - Search touches broad company data, so company scoping and query cost/rate-limit behavior should be reviewed carefully. - The migrations add search indexes/extensions; they are idempotent with `IF NOT EXISTS` for users who may have applied an earlier branch migration number. > ROADMAP.md checked. This PR adds a focused board search surface and does not duplicate an open roadmap item. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled shell/git/GitHub CLI session with medium reasoning effort. Existing branch commits were produced across prior agent sessions; this packaging pass verified, opened the PR, addressed Greptile findings, resolved migration conflicts after upstream PRs landed, and got PR checks green. ## 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dotta
|
424e81d087 |
Improve operator workflow QoL (#5291)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane operators use repeatedly to supervise agent companies. > - Common operator workflows depend on fast scanning of inboxes, issue sidebars, workspaces, cost totals, and runtime services. > - Several small UI and service gaps made those workflows slower or less clear. > - This pull request groups the operator-facing QoL changes that can stand alone from recovery and adapter work. > - The benefit is a denser, clearer board experience for issue triage and workspace operation. ## What Changed - Added inbox assignee/project grouping and issue list token/runtime totals. - Improved issue properties with removable blocker chips and workspace task links. - Improved execution workspace layout, runtime controls, issues tab default, and stopped-port reuse behavior. - Added mobile markdown/routine dialog fixes, page title company names, sidebar polish, and dashboard run task label cleanup. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts` ## Risks - Medium UI risk because this touches several operator surfaces. The branch is intentionally grouped around workflow/QoL files and keeps the file count below the Greptile limit. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
11ffd6f2c5 |
Improve ACPX adapter configuration (#5290)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents across several adapter implementations. > - ACPX is a local adapter path that can proxy Claude and Codex-style execution. > - Its configuration needed stronger schema defaults, provider-aware model handling, and better UI support. > - Plugin authors also need clear docs for managed resources. > - This pull request improves ACPX adapter configuration and documents plugin-managed resources. > - The benefit is a more predictable adapter setup path without changing unrelated control-plane behavior. ## What Changed - Improved ACPX config schema, execution config handling, UI build config, and route coverage. - Added ACPX model filtering support and tests. - Updated the agent config form and storybook coverage for ACPX model/provider behavior. - Expanded plugin authoring documentation for managed resources. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/acpx-local-execute.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-routes.test.ts ui/src/lib/acpx-model-filter.test.ts` ## Risks - Low-to-medium risk: adapter configuration behavior changes can affect ACPX users, but the change is isolated to ACPX/plugin-doc surfaces and covered by targeted adapter tests. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
454edfe81e |
Add recovery handoff system notices (#5289)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Agent runs can end productively while the source issue still lacks a durable final disposition. > - That leaves the control plane unsure whether to resume, escalate, or close the work. > - Issue comments also need a presentation contract so system-authored recovery notices can render as first-class thread messages without overloading normal comments. > - This pull request adds successful-run handoff recovery, comment presentation metadata, and system notice rendering. > - The benefit is stricter task liveness with clearer operator-facing recovery state. ## What Changed - Added successful-run handoff decisions, wake payloads, escalation behavior, and recovery tests. - Added issue comment presentation metadata with migration `0078_white_darwin.sql` and shared/server/company portability support. - Rendered recovery/system notices in issue chat with dedicated UI components, fixtures, tests, and storybook/lab coverage. - Included the current recovery model-profile hint patch so automatic recovery follow-ups use the cheap profile. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts ui/src/components/SystemNotice.test.tsx ui/src/lib/system-notice-comment.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueChatThreadSystemNotice.test.tsx` ## Risks - Migration-bearing PR: merge this before any other branch that might later add a migration. - The branch touches both recovery services and issue-thread rendering, so review should pay attention to recovery wake idempotency and comment metadata compatibility. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with shell/git/GitHub 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
83e7ecc58e |
Preserve scope on manual heartbeat invokes (#5323)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The agent live-run route lets operators trigger a manual heartbeat invocation so an agent can pick up a specific issue or step out of band > - The current route flow drops the caller's scope (issue/run context) when forwarding the manual invoke into the heartbeat service, so the resulting run loses the targeting the operator specified > - This pull request threads the operator-supplied scope through the manual invoke path on both the server route and the UI client, with a regression test that confirms the scope round-trips > - The benefit is manual heartbeat invokes from the live-run UI actually pick up the scoped issue/run instead of falling through to the agent's default routine ## What Changed - `server/src/routes/agents.ts`: forward the operator-supplied scope into the manual invoke heartbeat service call - `server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts`: new test verifying the manual invoke path preserves scope - `ui/src/api/agents.ts`: pass scope through the live-run client API ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run --no-coverage server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts` - `pnpm typecheck` clean ## Risks Low. The change is purely additive on the route surface — handlers that did not previously pass scope continue to work; handlers that did pass it now have it preserved instead of dropped. ## Model Used Claude Opus 4.7 (1M 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 — new test covers the preserved-scope path - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — N/A (internal API change, no visible UI shift) - [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
|
d6d7a7cea6 |
Add routine revision history and restore flow (#5285)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies. > - Routines are the scheduled/recurring work surface that keeps a company operating without manual kicks. > - Operators need routine edits to be auditable and recoverable, especially when routines control assignments, prompts, triggers, and webhook secrets. > - Documents already have revision-style safety, but routines did not have equivalent history or restore semantics. > - This pull request adds append-only routine revisions across the database, shared contracts, server routes, and board UI. > - The benefit is safer routine iteration: users can inspect history, compare changes, restore older definitions, and avoid overwriting newer edits. ## What Changed - Added `routine_revisions` storage, latest revision pointers on routines, shared types, validators, and API docs for routine revision history. - Added server service/route support for listing routine revisions, conflict-aware routine saves, and append-only restore operations. - Added a History tab on routine detail with revision preview, structured change summaries, description line diffs, dirty-edit blocking, restore confirmation, and restored webhook secret surfacing. - Extracted the line diff helper from `DocumentDiffModal` into `ui/src/lib/line-diff.ts` for reuse. - Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` and renumbered the routine revision migration to `0077_unusual_karnak` after upstream `0076_useful_elektra`. - Made the `0077` routine revision migration idempotent so installs that already applied the branch-local `0076_unusual_karnak` can safely advance. - Updated the plugin SDK test harness routine fixture with the new revision fields required by the shared `Routine` contract. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/shared packages/shared/src/validators/routine.test.ts` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui ui/src/lib/line-diff.test.ts ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx ui/src/lib/workspace-routines.test.ts ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts --pool=forks --poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk typecheck` passed after updating the SDK test harness fixture. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` passed; this refreshed local generated SDK output needed by plugin example typechecks. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. ## Risks - Medium migration risk: this adds routine revision storage and backfills existing routines. The migration is ordered after upstream `0076` and uses `IF NOT EXISTS` / duplicate-object guards to tolerate earlier branch-local migration application. - Restore behavior intentionally appends a new revision instead of mutating history; callers expecting an in-place rollback need to follow the new latest revision pointer. - Restoring webhook triggers recreates webhook secret material, so users must copy newly surfaced secrets after restore. - Conflict-aware saves now reject stale routine edits when the client sends an older `baseRevisionId`. > 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/tool use in a local git worktree. Exact context-window size 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 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 Screenshots: not attached in this draft PR; the new UI flow is covered by component tests listed above. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
3c73ed26b5 |
Expand plugin host surface (#5205)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - The plugin system is the extension boundary for optional product capabilities > - Rich plugins need more than a worker entrypoint: they need scoped database storage, local project folders, managed agents/routines, host navigation, and reusable UI components > - The LLM Wiki work exposed those missing host surfaces while keeping plugin code outside the core control plane > - This pull request expands the core plugin host, SDK, server APIs, and UI bridge so plugins can declare and use those surfaces > - The benefit is that future plugins can integrate with Paperclip through documented, validated contracts instead of bespoke server or UI imports ## What Changed - Added plugin-managed database namespaces and migration tracking, including Drizzle schema/migration files and SQL validation for namespace isolation. - Added server support for plugin local folders, managed agents, managed routines, scoped plugin APIs, and plugin operation visibility. - Expanded shared plugin manifest/types/validators and SDK host/testing/UI exports for richer plugin surfaces. - Added reusable UI pieces for file trees, managed routines, resizable sidebars, route sidebars, and plugin bridge initialization. - Updated plugin docs and example plugins to use the expanded host and SDK surface. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-local-folders.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-managed-agents.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-managed-routines.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts ui/src/api/plugins.test.ts ui/src/components/FileTree.test.tsx ui/src/components/ResizableSidebarPane.test.tsx ui/src/pages/PluginPage.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts` passed: 11 files, 67 tests. - Confirmed this PR changes 89 files and does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`. ## Risks - Medium: this expands plugin host contracts across db/shared/server/ui and includes a new core migration (`0076_useful_elektra.sql`). - The plugin database namespace validator is intentionally restrictive; plugin authors may need follow-up affordances for SQL patterns that remain blocked. - Merge this before the LLM Wiki plugin PR so the plugin can resolve the new SDK and host APIs. > 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 shell/git/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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
d6bee62f02 |
Fix Cloud tenant issue identifier routes (#5196)
## Summary - Allow Cloud tenant issue identifiers with alphanumeric prefixes, such as `PC1897-1`, to normalize as issue references. - Resolve those identifiers through issue detail/update routes, active run/live run polling, activity, costs, and `issueService.getById`. - Keep UI issue-link parsing aligned so tenant links normalize back to `/issues/<IDENTIFIER>`. ## Root Cause Cloud tenant issue prefixes include digits from the stack-id hash. The app-side route normalization still accepted only all-letter prefixes, so `/api/issues/PC1897-1` skipped identifier lookup and fell through as a non-UUID id. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/issue-references.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-reference.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-identifier-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/activity-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-live-run-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `git diff --check` Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
