## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip's web UI conditionally exposes experimental summary and
built-in-agent capabilities.
> - Summary cards depend on the built-in Summarizer agent, but the two
capabilities have independent feature flags.
> - `SummarySlotCard` and the reusable `BuiltInAgentGate` enabled
built-in-agent lookups without requiring `enableBuiltInAgents`.
> - When built-in agents were disabled, those surfaces called a server
route that was intentionally unavailable and generated avoidable 404s.
> - The client query should obey both server-side feature gates.
> - This pull request adds the missing gate and a cross-flag regression.
> - The benefit is consistent feature-flag behavior and no request loop
against a disabled endpoint.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No exact duplicate found. I searched open PRs for `SummarySlotCard`,
`BuiltInAgentGate`, `enableBuiltInAgents summaries`, and `built-in
agents 404`. Related PR #10116 gates `SidebarAgents`; this PR
deliberately excludes that file and covers the remaining summary/gate
callers.
**What happened?**
`SummarySlotCard` called `builtInAgentsApi.list` whenever summaries were
enabled, and `BuiltInAgentGate` called it whenever a company was
selected. The server rejects that route when `enableBuiltInAgents` is
false, so the disabled configuration produced repeated 404 requests.
**Expected behavior**
Built-in-agent queries should run only when built-in agents are enabled;
the summary-specific query also requires summaries to be enabled.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable summaries.
2. Disable built-in agents.
3. Render a page containing `SummarySlotCard` or `BuiltInAgentGate`.
4. Observe a request to the disabled built-in-agents route.
**Environment**
- Paperclip web UI
- Cross-flag configuration: summaries enabled, built-in agents disabled
- [x] I searched open PRs for the affected component, feature flags, and
404 behavior; no exact duplicate was found.
## What Changed
- Require both `enableSummaries` and `enableBuiltInAgents` in
`SummarySlotCard`.
- Make `BuiltInAgentGate` resolve experimental settings before enabling
its built-in-agent query and fail open when the feature is disabled.
- Add cross-flag regressions for both callers.
- Leave `SidebarAgents` to related PR #10116 rather than duplicating it.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SummarySlotCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/BuiltInAgentGate.test.tsx` — passed as part of a
41-test built-in UI group.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed in combined deployment
staging.
- UI-only local cutover completed with the Paperclip server PID
unchanged.
- The complete UI fix was staged after a summary-only cutover exposed
the remaining reusable-gate caller.
## Risks
- Low risk: this changes only whether one query is enabled under a
feature-flag combination where the server route is unavailable.
- No API, schema, migration, authentication, or persistence changes.
- Rollback is a single commit revert.
> This is a bug fix, not roadmap feature work.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex `gpt-5.6-sol`, with tool use, code execution, repository
inspection, and read-only review-agent evidence.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and described
the search above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have considered documentation; no user-facing documentation
change is required
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: cucurigoo <cucurigoo@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open-source control plane people use to manage AI
agents and their work.
> - The sidebar renders company agents and, when enabled, their built-in
lifecycle state.
> - The built-in-agents API is intentionally unavailable when the
experimental feature is disabled.
> - `SidebarAgents` nevertheless queried that endpoint whenever a
company was selected, producing routine 404s in normal feature-off
installations.
> - The query must be gated by the shared instance setting, including
its unresolved state, without exposing stale cached lifecycle badges.
> - This pull request adds that gate and focused disabled, unresolved,
and enabled regressions.
> - The benefit is a quiet sidebar network path with unchanged behavior
for installations that enable built-in agents.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
### Pre-submission checklist
- [x] I searched existing open and closed issues/PRs and found no exact
duplicate. Related but not duplicate: #4149.
- [x] I reproduced this on current `master`.
- [x] I confirmed the error originates in Paperclip's sidebar query
gating, not an adapter, provider, or local configuration.
### What happened?
With `enableBuiltInAgents: false`, mounting `SidebarAgents` for a
selected company still called `GET
/api/companies/:companyId/built-in-agents`. The server correctly
returned 404 because the experimental feature was disabled.
### Expected behavior
The sidebar must not call the built-in-agent endpoint until the shared
experimental setting resolves to exactly `true`. Cached built-in
lifecycle state must also remain hidden while disabled.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Set `enableBuiltInAgents` to `false`.
2. Open any company so the sidebar agent list mounts.
3. Observe a request to `/api/companies/:companyId/built-in-agents` and
a 404 response.
### Environment
- Paperclip commit: `f2f168f6a10a24c924516808f414baba52b1c080`
- Deployment mode: self-hosted server
- Installation method: built from source
- Adapter: not adapter-specific (core UI bug)
- Database mode: not database-related
- Access context: board (human operator)
- Node.js: `v22.22.3`
- Operating system: Linux
- Relevant config: `{"enableBuiltInAgents": false}`
- Relevant output: redacted HTTP 404 from
`/api/companies/:companyId/built-in-agents`
- Privacy: all instance-local identifiers, paths, and output were
omitted or redacted.
## What Changed
- Read instance experimental settings in `SidebarAgents` through the
shared React Query key.
- Enable the built-in-agent list query only when `enableBuiltInAgents`
is explicitly `true`.
- Ignore cached built-in lifecycle data while the feature is disabled.
- Add regressions for disabled, unresolved, and enabled settings states.
## Verification
- RED before implementation: the disabled-feature regression failed
because `builtInAgentsApi.list` was called once.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/SidebarAgents.test.tsx` — 24 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc -p tsconfig.json --pretty
false` — passed.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- The existing test file emits pre-existing React `act(...)` warnings
while passing.
## Risks
- Low risk: request gating only; no API, schema, migration, or visible
UI contract changes.
- A stale experimental-settings cache could delay enabling the query
until the normal settings invalidation/refetch path runs; this is the
same shared query key already used elsewhere.
- Cached built-in statuses are deliberately hidden whenever the setting
is not literal `true`.
> 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-5.6-sol` was used with reasoning, repository/file
tools, shell command execution, and delegated read-only code review. The
runtime did not expose a context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (no
documentation change needed; this enforces the existing feature flag)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: cucurigoo <cucurigoo@users.noreply.github.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The approval queue is how agents surface decisions that need a
human, so the approval card is often the only thing an operator reads
before approving or rejecting
> - Agents author those payloads in markdown, because markdown is what
they produce everywhere else in the product
> - `ApprovalPayload.tsx` renders the four prose fields of a board
approval as bare text nodes, while `CommentThread` on the same page
renders through `MarkdownBody` — same authors, two different renderers
> - So the operator sees literal `##`, `**bold**`, backticks and
`[link](url)` in the payload, and correctly formatted text in the
comments directly below it
> - This pull request routes those four fields through the existing
`MarkdownBody` component
> - The benefit is that the highest-stakes text in the product becomes
readable, with no new dependency and no schema change
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #4911 — prior art, see the note at the bottom of this description.
No open issue covers this, so per (B) here is the bug report:
**What happened:** On a board approval, the `summary`,
`recommendedAction`, `nextActionOnApproval` and `risks` fields display
raw markdown source. Headings appear as literal `##` mid-paragraph,
inline code keeps its backticks, links show as `[text](url)`, and both
levels of a nested bullet list collapse into one run-on paragraph.
**What was expected:** The same rendering the comment thread further
down the same page already gives, since both are agent-authored
markdown.
**Steps to reproduce:** Open any `request_board_approval` whose
`summary` contains markdown — headings, a nested list, code spans or
links.
**Where:** `ui/src/components/ApprovalPayload.tsx`,
`BoardApprovalPayloadContent`.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/components/ApprovalPayload.tsx`: import `MarkdownBody` and
render `summary`, `recommendedAction`, `nextActionOnApproval` and each
`risks` entry through it instead of `<p>` / `<span>` text nodes.
`MarkdownBody` defaults `softBreaks` to `true`, which is the same
behaviour `CommentThread` opts into explicitly, so paragraph handling
matches the comments.
- `stripLeadingListMarker`: risks already render inside a custom bullet
row, so an authored leading `-` / `*` / `•` would nest a second bullet
inside the first. One leading marker is stripped per entry.
- The risk bullet dot gains `shrink-0` so it keeps its shape next to
block-level markdown content.
- `title` stays plain text — it is a one-liner and markdown there is
noise.
- `proposedComment` stays a verbatim `<pre>` block — it is draft text
intended to be posted elsewhere, so it must not be reinterpreted.
- `ui/src/components/ApprovalPayload.test.tsx`: tests for markdown
rendering in all four fields, the leading-list-marker strip, and that
`title` and `proposedComment` remain verbatim.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run ui/src/components/ApprovalPayload.test.tsx` — 5
passed.
- `npx vitest run ui/src/components/ApprovalPayload.test.tsx
ui/src/components/CommentThread.test.tsx` — 12 passed, confirming the
shared `MarkdownBody` path is not disturbed.
- Manual, measured rather than eyeballed: I ran a patched build in a
throwaway container beside an unpatched one and pointed both at the same
real approval payload, then counted nodes in the rendered DOM.
| | unpatched | patched |
|---|---|---|
| `.paperclip-markdown` nodes | 0 | 3 |
| raw backticks in visible text | yes | no |
| rendered `h2` | 0 | 5 |
| rendered `li` | 0 | 16 |
## Risks
Low, and confined to the board approval card.
- Rendering scope widens from text to markdown on four fields. A payload
that contains markdown-significant punctuation but was authored as prose
could render differently than before. This is the intended change, and
it matches how the same author's text is already rendered in comments on
the same page.
- `stripLeadingListMarker` removes one leading list marker per risk
entry. A risk that genuinely begins with a literal hyphen followed by a
space loses that hyphen. Chosen over the alternative of a visible double
bullet on the common case.
- No schema change, no migration, no new dependency. `MarkdownBody` is
already used elsewhere in the same directory.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), via Claude Code, with extended
thinking and tool use (repository search, file editing, local test
execution, and headless-browser DOM measurement of the before/after
renders).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no
docs describe this rendering behaviour, so there was nothing to update
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — pending first CI run on this PR
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups —
pending first review
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---
### On the prior PR
@alxhrzg opened #4911 for this same bug first, and reached the same
conclusion I did: route the four fields through `MarkdownBody`. Credit
for spotting it and for the diagnosis goes there.
That PR has been conflicting against base and untouched since May.
Rather than let the fix sit, this PR reapplies the idea on current
`master` and adds what #4911 was missing: test coverage, the
nested-bullet fix for `risks`, and the `shrink-0` on the bullet dot. I
could not push to #4911 directly as it is on another contributor's fork.
@alxhrzg, if you would rather finish #4911 yourself, I am happy to close
this and hand over the tests and the two risk-row fixes for you to take
across.
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The UI keeps a selected company in `CompanyProvider` with two
writers: a bootstrap effect that repairs invalid selections, and a
Layout route-sync effect that selects the company the URL prefix names
> - The route-sync matches the URL against the full company list
(archived included), while the bootstrap resolver only accepted
companies from the sidebar-filtered non-archived list
> - On any archived company's URL the two effects overwrite each other's
selection in a synchronous loop until React throws error #185 ("Maximum
update depth exceeded") and unmounts the root to a blank page — armed by
remembered last-visited paths, back/forward navigation, or bookmarks, on
first load and client navigation alike
> - This pull request makes an already-selected company only need to
exist, keeping the sidebar filter for fresh-boot resolution where no
explicit selection exists
> - The benefit is that archived company URLs render instead of blanking
the entire app
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
Opening (or back-navigating to) a URL whose company prefix belongs to an
archived company blanked the whole app with `Minified React error #185`.
Console in dev mode: "Maximum update depth exceeded. This can happen
when a component calls setState inside useEffect…". A workspace whose
first/seeded company was archived hit this on every load of its
remembered URL.
**Expected behavior**
An archived company's URL renders its pages (the company still exists
and its API routes serve data). The sidebar simply does not feature
archived companies, and fresh boots still land on a non-archived
company.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create two companies; archive one (`PATCH /api/companies/:id` with
`status: "archived"`).
2. Navigate to `/{archivedPrefix}/dashboard` — direct load or
client-side back-navigation.
3. Before this fix: React #185 and an unmounted blank page (reproduced
deterministically by the new e2e test).
## What Changed
- `ui/src/context/CompanyContext.tsx`:
`resolveBootstrapCompanySelection` keeps an explicitly selected company
that exists in the full company list; stored-id and default resolution
still prefer sidebar (non-archived) companies.
- `ui/src/context/CompanyContext.test.tsx`: resolver keeps an
archived-but-existing selection; a truly deleted selection is still
replaced.
- `tests/e2e/archived-company-url.spec.ts`: end-to-end regression
driving both field shapes (direct load and back-navigation onto an
archived company URL); it failed with the exact #185 console errors
before the fix and passes after.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/context …` in `ui/` — 122 tests pass (includes
the new resolver cases).
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
archived-company-url` — fails before the fix (captured "Maximum update
depth exceeded" console errors), passes after.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
## Risks
Low risk. The only behavioral change is that a selection naming an
archived-but-existing company survives the bootstrap repair — previously
that state was unreachable without crashing. Boots with no valid
selection behave exactly as before (non-archived preferred), covered by
the existing and new resolver tests.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with extended thinking and tool use (code search, edit, test
execution, Playwright-driven crash reproduction).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue detail view is the main place where people read work and
guide agents.
> - The chat-style task view needs clear messages, controls, properties,
and document feedback.
> - Dense metadata and disconnected controls make active work harder to
scan.
> - This pull request refines the existing chat-style task workflow
across desktop and mobile layouts.
> - The benefit is a clearer issue thread with faster access to the
controls that guide work.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The change improves the chat-style issue detail view that was introduced
in [#10606](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/10606) and
expanded in
[#10707](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/10707).
**Current behavior**
The issue thread spreads task controls across the page. Agent-turn
metadata competes with the message content. Document annotation comments
use inline placement that limits the document reading area. The mobile
composer can overlap the bottom navigation.
**Proposed behavior**
The issue view keeps the thread focused on message content. It moves
supporting controls into the properties area, adds searchable
assignment, restores the sub-task tree, docks document comments in a
side gutter, and keeps the mobile composer clear of navigation.
**Reason and benefit**
People can scan active work faster and find task controls without
leaving the issue. The layout also gives documents and mobile
conversations more usable space.
**Breaking changes**
None. The change updates presentation and interaction behavior in the
existing issue UI.
## What Changed
- Refined task-chat message spacing, metadata, agent bubbles, and
composer alignment.
- Added searchable assignment and restored sub-task navigation in the
properties pane.
- Moved document annotation comments into a right-side gutter.
- Kept the mobile composer above the auto-hiding bottom navigation.
- Added and updated focused component tests for the changed
interactions.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `TZ=UTC pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/InlineEntitySelector.test.tsx
src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- The token gates report 3/3 clean.
- The focused test run passes 124 tests in 5 files.
- Visual snapshot baselines were not updated. This follows the
`doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` entry "Per-change snapshot verification
demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)."
## Risks
- The changes affect several related issue-detail layouts. A browser
review should cover desktop and mobile widths before merge.
- The monitor-row test formats time in the host timezone. The
verification command sets `TZ=UTC` to match CI.
> 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 with GPT-5. The context-window size is not exposed in
this environment. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and GitHub tools.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Environments give agent runs an execution target, and their env vars
can carry secrets, so writes need a company scope for secret bindings
> - `PATCH /environments/:id` resolves that scope from a query param,
existing bindings, or a single-membership actor — and fails closed
otherwise
> - A fresh environment has no bindings yet, so an admin whose
memberships cannot pin one company gets a 422 on the very first env var
save and can never create the first binding
> - #11200 made this reachable from the UI: it opened the envVars-only
edit on the managed sandbox row, but the UI never sends the company it
already knows
> - This pull request sends the page's selected company on environment
updates and adds a server fallback to the instance's only company
> - The benefit is that the first env var save works on fresh
environments, while multi-company ambiguity still fails closed
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11200
**What happened?**
On a fresh platform-managed sandbox environment, the first "Save
environment variables" in the UI fails with HTTP 422: "Environment
secret management requires a companyId context during the
instance-scoped transition." The same failure hits any environment
update that touches `envVars` or `config` when the environment has no
secret bindings yet and the actor's memberships do not name exactly one
company (for example an instance admin provisioned without a membership
row, or a user in two companies).
**Expected behavior**
The save succeeds. The client tells the server which company scopes the
secret bindings, and on a single-company instance the server can resolve
the only possible scope by itself.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Provision a platform-managed sandbox environment (managed-config
`environments` entry) so the row exists with no secret bindings.
2. Sign in as an instance admin whose memberships do not resolve to
exactly one company.
3. Open Environments, edit the managed row, add an env var, and save.
4. The PATCH returns 422 with the companyId-context error.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/api/environments.ts`: `environmentsApi.update` accepts an
optional `companyId` and sends it as the `companyId` query param the
server already reads. Renamed the `customImageCompanyQuery` helper to
`companyIdQuery` since it now serves plain updates and probes too.
- `ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.tsx`: both the managed envVars-only
save and the general environment save pass `selectedCompanyId`.
- `server/src/routes/environments.ts`:
`resolveEnvironmentSecretContextCompanyId` falls back to the instance's
only company when exactly one exists, mirroring the existing fallback in
`resolveCustomImageCompanyId`. Multi-company instances still fail
closed.
- Tests: three new route tests (explicit query context for a
multi-company actor, single-company-instance fallback for a
membership-less admin, fail-closed regression on a multi-company
instance), and updated the SSH-probe and probe-ambiguity tests for the
new fallback.
## Verification
- `cd server && pnpm vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts` — 78 pass.
- `cd ui && pnpm vitest run src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx` — 22
pass.
- Full `server` and `ui` vitest suites and `tsc --noEmit` on both
packages pass locally.
- Manual: on a managed instance, edit the managed sandbox environment,
add an env var, save. Before: 422. After: the save persists and the
PATCH carries `?companyId=`.
## Risks
- Low risk. The explicit query param path already existed on the server;
the UI now uses it.
- Behavioral shift: on single-company instances, environment
secret-context resolution (including `POST /environments/:id/probe`) now
resolves the only company instead of returning no context. That lets
probes resolve secret-backed config where they previously returned a 422
asking for an explicit companyId. Multi-company instances keep the
fail-closed behavior, covered by a regression test.
- Self-hosted single-company instances gain the same first-save fix; no
schema or config changes.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended
thinking, agentic 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The UI registers a service worker (`ui/public/sw.js`) with a
network-first fetch handler whose cache is an offline fallback
> - The fallback hands `event.respondWith` the result of
`caches.match(...)`, which resolves `undefined` on a cache miss — and in
the navigation branch, `caches.match("/") || offlineResponse` never uses
the fallback because `caches.match` returns a promise, which is always
truthy
> - When the network fetch rejects (server restart, deploy, brief
outage) and the cache misses, the browser fails the request with
`Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: Failed to convert value to
'Response'`, so navigation breaks outright instead of degrading to the
offline page
> - This pull request awaits the cache lookups and guarantees a real
`Response` on every path
> - The benefit is that brief server unavailability degrades to the
offline fallback instead of a dead navigation
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
Navigating while the server was briefly unavailable (mid-restart)
produced `The FetchEvent for "…" resulted in a network error response:
the promise was rejected.` and `sw.js:1 Uncaught (in promise) TypeError:
Failed to convert value to 'Response'.` The navigation failed instead of
showing the offline fallback.
**Expected behavior**
A failed navigation serves the cached app shell when present, otherwise
the "Offline" 503 response. A failed asset fetch serves its cache entry
when present, otherwise a proper network-error response. `respondWith`
always receives a real `Response`.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Load the app so `sw.js` is active; ensure `/` is not in the service
worker cache (fresh cache version).
2. Restart or stop the backend.
3. Navigate to any page: the fetch rejects, `caches.match` misses, and
the browser logs the conversion TypeError with a failed navigation.
## What Changed
- `ui/public/sw.js`: the fetch fallback awaits `caches.match(...)` and
returns the "Offline" 503 for navigations and `Response.error()` for
assets when the cache misses.
- `ui/src/lib/sw-offline-fallback.test.ts`: evaluates the real `sw.js`
in a sandboxed scope and covers the three fallback paths; the two
miss-path tests fail against the previous code.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/lib/sw-offline-fallback.test.ts` in `ui/` — 3
tests pass.
- Verified both miss-path tests fail against the unmodified `sw.js`.
## Risks
Low risk. The change only affects the fetch-rejection path; successful
fetches and cache hits behave exactly as before. `Response.error()`
mirrors what the browser would produce for an unhandled failed no-cors
fetch.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with tool use (code search, edit, test 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators use task properties to inspect and change task
relationships.
> - A blocked-by chip linked directly to the blocking task.
> - Its remove control appeared only on hover, so touch users could not
reach it.
> - This pull request opens a small action menu when a user taps the
chip on mobile.
> - The menu lets the user visit the task or start the existing
blocker-removal confirmation.
> - The benefit is that touch users can manage blockers without changing
the fast desktop flow.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
On a phone-width layout, a tap on a blocked-by chip opened the blocking
task immediately. The remove control appeared only on hover, so a touch
user could not remove the blocker.
**Expected behavior**
A tap on a blocked-by chip on mobile opens a menu. The menu offers
`Visit task` and `Remove blocker` actions.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task that has a blocker.
2. Use a viewport below the mobile breakpoint.
3. Open the task properties.
4. Tap the blocked-by chip.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `e5a7fd7038` from `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Built from source with the local development workflow.
## What Changed
- Added a mobile-only action menu to blocked-by chips.
- Kept the direct task link and hover/focus remove control on desktop.
- Reused the existing removal confirmation before the relation update.
- Added focused regression coverage for the mobile visit and remove
choices.
- Added a phone-width Storybook state with the action menu open.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm build-storybook`
- Opened the new Storybook state in Playwright Chromium with a Pixel 5
viewport. Confirmed that both actions are visible and fit in the
viewport.
## Risks
- Low risk. The behavior change is limited to the existing mobile
breakpoint.
- Desktop navigation and blocker removal keep their current behavior.
- The menu uses the shared dropdown and dialog primitives.
> 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-5.6-sol`, xhigh reasoning. The Codex CLI managed the
context window for this run. The model used repository tools, code
execution, tests, and browser automation.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work.
> - Agent adapters connect Paperclip to tools such as the Codex command
line tool.
> - A sandboxed Codex agent may start without a credential.
> - The operator needs a safe sign-in flow that does not expose
credentials to the shared package or the sandbox.
> - This pull request adds a company-scoped device-login flow with a
temporary Daytona sandbox.
> - The flow promotes the credential only after readiness checks pass
and removes the temporary sandbox after use.
> - The result lets an operator sign in to a sandboxed Codex agent from
the agent form.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting (multiple of the above)
**Problem or motivation**
A Codex adapter that runs in a sandbox cannot authenticate when the
company has no pre-provisioned Codex credential.
**Proposed solution**
Add a company-scoped device-login session. Start a temporary sandbox,
run `codex login --device-auth`, stream the code and URL, verify
readiness, promote the credential, and delete the sandbox.
**Alternatives considered**
Pre-provisioning a credential does not support first-time sandbox login.
Keeping the credential in the login sandbox does not provide a durable
company credential.
**Roadmap alignment**
This supports the roadmap item for cloud and sandbox agents.
**Additional context**
The flow uses a five-minute cleanup reaper, compare-and-set status
changes, and a PostgreSQL advisory lock to protect promotion and
cleanup.
## What Changed
- Add the adapter login-session contract, database table, and migration.
- Add company-scoped server routes and a service for sandbox device
login.
- Add credential promotion, readiness checks, and cleanup after login.
- Add restart-safe cleanup for abandoned login sandboxes.
- Add sandbox login controls to the agent creation and edit forms.
- Keep device-login and vendor identifiers out of public shared and
adapter UI symbols.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-codex-local exec vitest run`
passed with 310 tests at the submitted commit.
- The server login route, service, and reaper tests passed with 45 tests
at the submitted commit.
- The agent form render tests passed with 26 tests at the submitted
commit.
- The public-symbol leak check passed at the submitted commit.
- A live Daytona sign-in flow still requires confirmation by a user with
a live sandbox.
## Risks
The migration adds a new company-scoped table. A promotion or cleanup
race could remove a credential or leave a sandbox active, so the service
uses claims, compare-and-set transitions, and an advisory lock. The live
Daytona flow needs operator confirmation because local tests do not
provide a real browser sign-in.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use and code execution, extended reasoning.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Operators create tasks in a dialog that includes the assignee and
project fields.
> - Mobile browsers reduce and offset the visual viewport when the
on-screen keyboard opens.
> - The dialog used layout viewport units, so its upper fields could
move off-screen while the user typed.
> - This pull request makes the dialog follow the live visual viewport
and keeps the focused editor visible.
> - The benefit is that operators can see the task context and the field
they edit on mobile devices.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
On mobile browsers, opening the keyboard in the new-task dialog could
move the assignee and project fields above the visible screen. The
active editor could also become difficult to see.
**Expected behavior**
The full dialog must stay inside the visible browser area. The active
editor and task controls must remain reachable while the on-screen
keyboard is open.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open Paperclip on a mobile browser.
2. Open the new-task dialog.
3. Focus the title or description editor to open the on-screen keyboard.
4. Observe that the upper fields can move outside the visible viewport.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced before commit `838cdbb325` on `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (`pnpm dev`) in a mobile browser viewport.
## What Changed
- Read `window.visualViewport` while the dialog is open.
- Apply token-based dialog geometry when the visual viewport is
constrained.
- Keep the focused editor visible after viewport resize and scroll
events.
- Add unit coverage for visual viewport updates and focus scrolling.
- Add Playwright coverage for mobile, tablet, desktop keyboard, and
unconstrained desktop layouts.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx` — 27
tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed with all gates clean.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook` — passed.
- `pnpm exec playwright test
tests/storybook-visual/new-issue-dialog-viewport.spec.ts --config
tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts` — 4 tests passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. The custom geometry only activates when
`visualViewport.height` is less than `window.innerHeight`.
- Browsers without the Visual Viewport API keep the existing dialog
primitive behavior.
- The browser test checks hit targets and visible bounds at mobile,
tablet, and desktop widths.
> 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. The session used reasoning, repository tools,
shell execution, and browser automation. The service did not expose the
context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The UI dev server proxies `/api` to the backend and injects
`x-forwarded-host`; a unit test asserts that injection with a sample
Host header
> - The sample Host header is a contributor's real machine and tailnet
hostname, committed to the public repository
> - Real personal hostnames do not belong in a public codebase, and this
one also contains the contributor's OS username, so
`scripts/check-forbidden-tokens.mjs` (which forbids the local username)
blocks `npm` publishing from that contributor's machine
> - This pull request replaces the fixture with a fictional
tailnet-style hostname
> - The benefit is no personal identifiers in the test fixtures and a
passing forbidden-token check for every contributor
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
`ui/src/lib/vite-api-proxy.test.ts` uses a real contributor dev-machine
hostname as its `Host` header fixture. `node
scripts/check-forbidden-tokens.mjs` fails on that contributor's machine
because the hostname contains their OS username, blocking the publish
flow. Introduced in #10718.
**Expected behavior**
Test fixtures use fictional hostnames. The forbidden-token check passes
on every contributor machine.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. On a machine whose OS username appears in the fixture hostname, run
`node scripts/check-forbidden-tokens.mjs`.
2. The check reports the two lines in
`ui/src/lib/vite-api-proxy.test.ts` and blocks with exit code 1.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/lib/vite-api-proxy.test.ts`: the `Host` fixture is now
`dev-box.tail1234.ts.net:3101` (fictional). The test only asserts that
whatever host arrives is injected as `x-forwarded-host`, so the value is
arbitrary.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/lib/vite-api-proxy.test.ts` in `ui/` — 5 tests
pass.
- `node scripts/check-forbidden-tokens.mjs` — "No forbidden tokens
found" on the previously affected machine.
- Note: git history retains the old value; this removes it from the
current tree only.
## Risks
None. A test fixture string with no behavioral coupling.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The web UI holds live websocket connections for run events,
coordinates cross-tab polling through a leader-election store, and
renders app chrome (sidebar, providers) around a routed outlet
> - When the backend is still cold-starting (managed hosting wake,
server restart, reverse proxy up before the app), the event websockets
refuse connections and the first SPA load mounts against a dead backend
> - In that state the mount cascade can exceed React's nested update
limit (minified error #185); the crash originates in shell hooks outside
the routed error boundary, so React unmounts the entire root to a blank
page, and the dead page keeps retrying the websocket on a flat 1.5s
timer until the user hard-refreshes
> - This pull request removes the wasted nested commits from the
shared-polling subscription path, adds exponential backoff to the
transcript websocket reconnect, and adds a last-resort app-shell error
boundary
> - The benefit is that a cold or briefly unreachable backend degrades
to a recoverable state instead of a blank page that hammers the server
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
On the first load against a backend that was still starting, the app
showed its loading animation and then a blank page. The console showed
repeated `WebSocket connection to 'wss://…/api/companies/<id>/events/ws'
failed` lines and `Uncaught Error: Minified React error #185` with a
stack through the shared-polling coordinator's `subscribe`. The
websocket retries continued indefinitely on the dead page. A manual
refresh fixed it.
**Expected behavior**
A backend that is briefly unreachable degrades gracefully: websocket
reconnects back off, the UI keeps rendering from cache, and even a
worst-case crash shows a reload prompt instead of a blank page.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Serve the UI while the backend API is still starting (websocket
upgrades and API calls refused).
2. Load any company page with several shared-polling consumers mounted
(dashboard with sidebar).
3. Observe repeated websocket failures; on affected loads the page goes
blank with React error #185.
## What Changed
- `ui/src/hooks/useSharedPolling.ts`: coordinator snapshot notifications
now keep the previous state object when leadership did not change, so
React bails out instead of scheduling a nested re-render. `subscribe`
invokes its listener synchronously from inside the mount effect with a
fresh object each time; before this change every mount and notify burned
nested-update budget even with no value change — the crash frame in the
field report was exactly this `subscribe → setState` call.
- `ui/src/components/transcript/useLiveRunTranscripts.ts`: the live
event websocket reconnect backs off exponentially (1.5s → 15s cap, reset
on successful open), mirroring `LiveUpdatesProvider`, instead of a flat
1.5s retry.
- `ui/src/components/AppErrorBoundary.tsx` (+ wiring in
`ui/src/main.tsx`): a dependency-free boundary above the router and
providers. `RouteErrorBoundary` only guards the routed `<Outlet />`; a
crash in the shell around it had no boundary, so React unmounted the
root to a blank page. The boundary renders a reload prompt with the
error message.
- Tests: `useSharedPollingSnapshot.test.tsx` (mount costs no extra
commit — fails against the previous code; a real leadership change
re-renders exactly once and ticks stay quiet), a backoff test in
`useLiveRunTranscripts.test.tsx` (delays grow 1.5s → 3s → 6s and reset
after a successful open), and `AppErrorBoundary.test.tsx` (render throw,
effect throw, healthy pass-through).
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run` in `ui/` over the touched suites (shared polling,
cross-tab poll, transcripts, boundary): 34 tests pass.
- `pnpm typecheck` in `ui/` — clean.
- The snapshot regression test was verified to fail against the
pre-change hook (extra commit per mount).
- Not reproduced end-to-end: the exact 50-update cascade from the field
crash needs a live cold backend; the change removes the identified
per-mount/per-notify nested commits at the reported crash frame, bounds
the reconnect load, and guarantees the shell can no longer blank the
page.
## Risks
Low risk. The snapshot change only suppresses re-renders whose state is
value-identical; leadership changes propagate exactly as before. The
backoff only lengthens retry delays after consecutive failures and
resets on success. The new boundary renders children untouched unless an
error reaches it; behavior on healthy loads is unchanged. Self-hosted
deployments see the same code paths — the cold-backend window simply
rarely occurs there.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with extended thinking and tool use (code search, edit, test
execution; diagnosis included mapping the production minified stack to
source).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The web UI is a PWA-capable SPA; `ui/index.html` links
`/site.webmanifest` so browsers can read app metadata
> - Browsers fetch `<link rel="manifest">` in "omit credentials" mode
unless the link opts in with `crossorigin="use-credentials"`
> - Self-hosted this is harmless, but when Paperclip runs behind an
authenticating reverse proxy (a managed hosting front door), the
cookie-less manifest request is rejected with 401 on every page load and
logs a console error pair on each navigation
> - This pull request adds `crossorigin="use-credentials"` to the
manifest link so the request carries the same session cookies as every
other same-origin asset request
> - The benefit is a clean console and a servable manifest in proxied
deployments, with self-hosted behavior unchanged
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Description follows the bug template:
**What happened?**
On every page load behind an authenticating reverse proxy, the browser
logs `Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of
401` for `/site.webmanifest`, plus `Manifest fetch from … failed, code
401`. The proxy rejects the request because the browser sends the
manifest fetch without cookies.
**Expected behavior**
The manifest request carries the same session credentials as every other
same-origin asset request, so the proxy can authenticate and serve it.
No console errors.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Serve Paperclip behind a reverse proxy that requires a session cookie
for all app routes.
2. Sign in and load any page.
3. Open the browser console: the manifest fetch fails with 401 while all
other assets load.
## What Changed
- `ui/index.html`: the manifest link now carries
`crossorigin="use-credentials"`.
- `ui/src/lib/pwa-install-mode.test.ts`: a regression test asserts the
attribute stays on the link.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run src/lib/pwa-install-mode.test.ts` in `ui/` — 2 tests
pass.
- Manual check of the rendered link tag in `ui/index.html`.
## Risks
Low risk. The manifest is same-origin, so `use-credentials` only
switches the fetch from "omit" to the include behavior all other
same-origin requests already have. Self-hosted deployments see no
change. Cross-origin manifest hosting is not used in this project.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), via Claude Code
CLI with extended thinking and tool use (code search, edit, test
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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Environments give each agent run an execution target, and sandbox
providers (Daytona, E2B, Novita, exe.dev) run as plugin workers
> - A managed deployment provisions one platform-managed sandbox row
with no credential in config; the provider is documented to fall back to
its process env var (for example `DAYTONA_API_KEY`)
> - Plugin workers spawn with a scrubbed environment, so that fallback
never sees the host env var — probe and lease acquisition fail with
"require an API key in config or DAYTONA_API_KEY" even when the
deployment sets the var
> - Separately, the managed-sandbox-only mode hides local rows from
every list, but the instance Default picker renders a hardcoded
synthetic "Local" option that no filter touches
> - This pull request forwards each bundled provider's documented
credential env var to its own plugin worker, and gates the synthetic
Local option on the flag
> - The benefit is that the documented host-env credential fallback
works for plugin-backed providers, and managed-sandbox-only instances no
longer offer Local anywhere
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Plugin worker environment construction
(`server/src/services/plugin-loader.ts`) and the environments UI
(instance Default picker, agent form inherited-environment label).
**Problem or motivation**
Two follow-ups to the managed-sandbox-only mode (#11200), both found on
a live managed deployment:
1. The deployment sets `DAYTONA_API_KEY` as a server env var and the
managed sandbox row omits `config.apiKey` by contract. "Test Connection"
fails with `Sandbox environment probe failed for provider "daytona".
Daytona sandbox environments require an API key in config or
DAYTONA_API_KEY.` A real agent run fails the same way at lease
acquisition. The cause: sandbox providers run as plugin workers, and
`buildPluginWorkerEnv` passes only model-provider keys and in-cluster
Kubernetes vars. The provider's own documented credential env var never
reaches the worker, so the in-plugin `process.env` fallback reads
nothing. The self-hosted path has the same gap: the Daytona plugin
README documents `DAYTONA_API_KEY` as a host-level fallback, and it does
not work today.
2. With `enableManagedSandboxOnly` on, the instance Default environment
picker still shows "Local". The server filters local *rows* out of the
list, and the client filter mirrors that for cached lists, but this
option is a hardcoded `<option value="">Local</option>` — not a list row
— so no filter removes it. Selecting it writes a null default, which run
selection then rejects fail-closed.
**Proposed solution**
Forward each bundled sandbox provider's documented credential env var
into its plugin worker, keyed by the manifest's declared
`environmentDrivers[].driverKey` so a worker only receives its own
provider's credential (daytona → `DAYTONA_API_KEY`, e2b → `E2B_API_KEY`,
exe-dev → `EXE_API_KEY`, novita → `NOVITA_API_KEY`). Keep the existing
gate: only plugins that declare `environment.drivers.register` receive
any passthrough. In the UI, render the synthetic Local option only when
managed-sandbox-only is off; under the flag show a disabled "Select
environment" placeholder only while no default is stamped yet, and stop
the agent form's inherited label from reading "Local".
**Alternatives considered**
Adding `DAYTONA_API_KEY` to the existing `ADAPTER_ENV_PASSTHROUGH` list
was rejected: that list goes to every environment-driver plugin, so each
provider would receive every other provider's credential. A manifest
schema field for declared credential env vars was rejected as heavier
than needed: the bundled providers are known, and the mapping lives next
to the two existing passthrough lists.
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/plugin-loader.ts`: new
`SANDBOX_PROVIDER_CREDENTIAL_ENV_PASSTHROUGH` map (driverKey →
documented credential env vars). `buildPluginWorkerEnv` reads the
manifest's `environmentDrivers` and forwards only the matching vars,
after the existing `environment.drivers.register` gate. Blank values
stay excluded.
- `server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts`: the daytona worker
receives `DAYTONA_API_KEY` and not another provider's key; a plugin
whose drivers have no mapping (kubernetes) receives no credential var.
- `ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.tsx`: the Default picker's synthetic
Local option renders only when managed-sandbox-only is off. Under the
flag, a disabled "Select environment" placeholder renders only while the
default is unset.
- `ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx`: the Local option is
present by default and absent under the flag; saved non-local
environments stay selectable.
- `ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.tsx`: the inherited-environment
label falls back to "Managed sandbox" instead of "Local" under the flag.
## Verification
- `server`: `npx vitest run src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts -t
buildPluginWorkerEnv` — 5 passed (3 existing, 2 new).
- `ui`: `npx vitest run src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx` — 22
passed (2 new); `npx vitest run
src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx` — 10 passed.
- `tsc --noEmit` clean in `server` and `ui`.
- Live managed deployment: confirmed the tenant service env carries
`DAYTONA_API_KEY` while the probe fails with the exact message above,
which pins the root cause to the worker env, not delivery.
## Risks
- The worker env grows by exactly one var per matching bundled provider,
only when the deployment sets it and only for plugins that declare a
matching environment driver. Plugins without a mapping see no change.
- Self-hosted behavioral shift is the fix itself: a host-level
`DAYTONA_API_KEY` (or E2B/EXE/NOVITA equivalent) now reaches the
provider as its README documents. Deployments that set the var but
expected it to stay inert had no working configuration to preserve — the
provider errored on every keyless probe and run.
- UI change is inert unless `enableManagedSandboxOnly` is on (default
false everywhere).
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code — extended thinking,
tool use, parallel read-only subagents for the two root-cause traces.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents at
work
> - Paperclip stores an `issuePrefix` on each company (e.g. "OPS") used
for issue identifiers (`OPS-1`) and company-prefixed routes
(`/OPS/dashboard`)
> - The create-dialog badges in NewIssueDialog, NewProjectDialog, and
NewGoalDialog were derived from the company display name using
`company.name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` — so "Acme Labs" showed "ACM"
> - This is misleading because the badge visually represents the issue
prefix, but actually shows an unrelated 3-letter slice of the display
name
> - When a company has `issuePrefix = "OPS"` but `name = "Acme Labs"`,
the badge showed "ACM" while issues use "OPS-1"
> - This pull request replaces `name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` with
`company.issuePrefix` in all three dialog badge components
> - The benefit is that the badge now matches the actual prefix used for
issues and routes, eliminating confusion
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Fixes: #8501
## What Changed
- `ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.tsx` (line ~1339): Replaced
`company.name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` with `company.issuePrefix` in
the selected-company header badge
- `ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.tsx`: Replaced
`company.name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` with `company.issuePrefix` in
the company picker list badge
- `ui/src/components/NewProjectDialog.tsx`: Replaced
`selectedCompany.name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` with
`selectedCompany.issuePrefix` in the selected-company header badge
- `ui/src/components/NewGoalDialog.tsx`: Replaced
`selectedCompany.name.slice(0, 3).toUpperCase()` with
`selectedCompany.issuePrefix` in the selected-company header badge
## Verification
1. Create or configure a company whose `issuePrefix` differs from the
first 3 letters of its display name (e.g. name = "Acme Labs",
issuePrefix = "OPS")
2. Open the New Task dialog — the selected-company header badge should
show "OPS", not "ACM"
3. Open the company picker dropdown inside the New Task dialog — each
company list badge should show the actual `issuePrefix`
4. Open the New Project dialog — the selected-company header badge
should show "OPS"
5. Open the New Goal dialog — the selected-company header badge should
show "OPS"
6. Verify that companies whose prefix matches the first 3 letters (e.g.
name="Ops Team", prefix="OPS") still display correctly
**Before/After:**
- Before: Company "Acme Labs" with `issuePrefix = "OPS"` showed badge
"ACM"
- After: Same company shows badge "OPS"
(Screenshots require running the UI locally against a test instance with
the relevant company configuration.)
## Risks
Low risk — this is a purely visual change to 3 React component badge
labels. No API changes, no schema changes, no behavioral changes to
issue creation or routing. The `issuePrefix` field is already loaded on
the company objects used by these components.
## Model Used
- **Provider:** OpenCode
- **Model:** MiMo v2.5 Free
- **Reasoning:** N/A (standard code generation)
## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and found none
targeting the same badge code
- [x] I have linked the existing issue with Fixes: #8501
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change (`fix/issue-8501`)
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The previous pull request added server-side chunked resumable import
transfers; without clients, large imports still ride the single fragile
upload
> - The Import page and the CLI need to slice large packages, upload
parts with retry and progress, resume after interruptions, and preview
before applying
> - Preview is the missing server piece: the browser flow is
preview-then-import, so a completed spool must be previewable without
re-uploading
> - This pull request adds the transfer preview endpoint, switches the
Import page to the chunked path for zips over 48 MB, and teaches the CLI
the same for oversized local imports
> - The benefit is that large imports get progress, per-part retry, and
resume in both clients, while small imports keep the exact single-shot
path they have today
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
With only the server transfer routes in place, users still upload large
company packages as one request from the Import page and the CLI: no
progress indication, no retry below the whole file, and no resume after
a dropped connection or refresh. The preview-then-import flow also
cannot run against an uploaded transfer, forcing a second full upload.
**Expected behavior**
A large package uploads once as verified parts with visible progress;
preview and import both run against the uploaded spool; an interrupted
upload resumes with only the missing parts re-sent; packages at or below
48 MB behave exactly as before.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Select a 500 MB zip on the Import page over an unreliable connection.
2. Watch the single upload fail near the end and restart from zero,
twice — once for preview, once for import.
3. Same story headless via the CLI.
## What Changed
- Server: `POST /import/transfers/:id/preview` runs the existing preview
logic against the completed spool (shared assembly + whole-file
verification helper with apply); preview neither completes the run nor
deletes the spool, so the subsequent apply reuses it. Missing parts
respond with the missing list.
- UI: zips over 48 MB take the chunked path in both preview and import —
the file is sliced into 32 MB parts hashed with WebCrypto (single
ArrayBuffer, no second copy), the transfer is created or resumed (the
create response's missing-parts list drives what uploads), parts upload
sequentially with three attempts each and visible progress, then
transfer preview/apply replace the multipart calls. The existing preview
pane, collision handling, adapter overrides, and async job polling are
unchanged; ≤ 48 MB keeps the single-shot path.
- CLI: oversized local `.zip` or folder imports zip/slice/hash with node
crypto, upload with resume and per-part retry and progress lines, and
use transfer preview/apply. Small packages keep the inline path
byte-identical.
- Failure honesty: adapters/API errors fail open to existing behavior; a
part failing all attempts surfaces a durable error panel with resume
intact.
## Verification
- Server: preview-then-apply on one spool (run stays open, spool intact,
then apply completes), preview with missing parts rejected — added to
the transfer route suite (embedded Postgres).
- UI suite: large file takes the chunked path (manifest shape, part
uploads, progress, apply on a resumed transfer, single-shot endpoints
never called), small file stays single-shot, part failure after three
attempts surfaces the error panel without running preview, resume
re-uploads only the missing part.
- CLI: manifest slicing/hashing, threshold behavior for zip and folder
sources, folder-zip round-trip through the real zip reader, upload
resume/retry/exhaustion/already-completed, full-command chunked and
small-zip inline flows.
- Server, ui, cli typechecks clean. Exact counts in the PR checks.
## Risks
- The 48 MB threshold only routes between two verified paths; behavior
below it is untouched.
- Chunked CLI imports use the board-scoped transfer routes, so oversized
CLI imports need board credentials (agent tokens keep the agent-safe
small-file path). No privilege change — board actors already had the
generic routes — but the two size regimes differ semantically; called
out for review.
- A CLI dry-run over the threshold uploads parts before previewing; the
spool persists (24 h sweep) and a later apply resumes without re-upload
— inherent to preview-against-spool.
Stacked on #11223 — merge that first; this PR then shows only the
preview endpoint and client changes.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code CLI, with extended
thinking and tool use (multi-agent implementation with independent
verification).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The issue detail page is a core operator surface where perceived
latency directly affects task navigation
> - Performance work needs repeatable evidence so later optimizations
can be compared against the same scenarios
> - The page did not expose stable user-timing marks for its header or
first useful content
> - There was also no isolated seeded browser rig that measured warm
navigation, cold deep links, waterfalls, or server time
> - This pull request adds the instrumentation and a one-command
Playwright baseline harness
> - The benefit is that issue-page performance changes can be validated
with reproducible median measurements instead of anecdotes
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: `ui/`, `server/`, and browser performance tooling.
**Problem or motivation**
The issue detail page performs a large client bootstrap and request
fan-out, but the repository lacks stable user-timing boundaries and a
repeatable benchmark. That makes performance changes difficult to
compare and allows regressions to be judged from anecdotes instead of
consistent evidence.
**Proposed solution**
Add stable header/content paint measures, development/QA-only lifecycle
vital reporting, aggregate server timing for the issue endpoint, and a
seeded Playwright command that runs warm/cold scenarios under throttled
and unthrottled profiles with N≥5 median reporting.
**Alternatives considered**
Ad hoc DevTools recordings were rejected because they are not repeatable
or reviewable. Production telemetry was rejected because this baseline
should not change production data collection. A unit-only harness was
rejected because it cannot capture browser bootstrap, rendering, and
network waterfall costs.
**Roadmap alignment**
The roadmap calls for agent performance to be measurable over time. This
change applies that evidence-first principle to a core operator page and
does not duplicate a listed roadmap deliverable.
**Additional context**
The generated report includes warm and cold medians, TTFB/FCP/LCP where
applicable, request and byte totals before first useful content,
JavaScript bytes, and issue endpoint server timing.
## What Changed
- Added `issue-detail:navigate→header-paint` and
`issue-detail:navigate→content-paint` user-timing measures to the issue
detail page.
- Added development/QA-only TTFB, LCP, and INP console reporting without
production telemetry delivery.
- Added `Server-Timing` for `GET /api/issues/:id`.
- Added `pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts`, which seeds an isolated
instance and runs N≥5 warm/cold samples under unthrottled and Fast 4G/4x
CPU profiles.
- Added Markdown, raw JSON, and Chrome-trace outputs with median
baseline tables and waterfall data.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `npx playwright test --config
tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts --list`
- `pnpm exec playwright test --config
tests/perf/issue-detail/playwright.config.ts` — passed 20 samples in 9.4
minutes (5 runs × 2 scenarios × 2 profiles) for the baseline;
post-review integrity reruns also exercised the corrected paths, while
this shared runner intermittently killed Chromium processes, so the rig
now performs one bounded browser-crash retry per sample.
- Baseline medians: warm unthrottled 278/447 ms header/content; cold
unthrottled 646/646 ms; warm throttled 1240/2060 ms; cold throttled
3932/3933 ms.
## Risks
- Low product risk: the new browser measurements are development/QA
tooling and the UI timing work does not change visible layout.
- `Server-Timing` exposes only aggregate handler duration, not query
contents or private identifiers.
- Native INP reporting uses supported browser event timing entries and
silently no-ops where unsupported.
> 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-5.4, tool-assisted coding and browser execution with
reasoning enabled; context-window size is 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The task detail page uses a chat-style thread with a right sidebar;
the sidebar has a Plan tab and an Artifacts tab (#11101 made this UI the
default)
> - The Plan tab only showed the one issue document named `plan`, and
the Artifacts tab only listed formal work products; other agent-authored
documents (for example a `synthesis` doc) and agent-attached files were
invisible in the sidebar
> - Users could see an agent mention a document in the thread but had no
way to find that document in the sidebar, which breaks trust in the task
view as the record of the work
> - This pull request surfaces every non-system issue document in the
Plan tab, composes the Artifacts tab from work products, documents, and
agent-created attachments, and gives thread images a full-screen
lightbox with download
> - The benefit is that anything an agent produces on a task is now
reachable from the sidebar, while user uploads stay with their comments
in the thread
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11101 (chat-style task UI default — this PR extends its sidebar).
**Subsystem affected**
Task detail UI (chat-style thread sidebar): Plan tab, Artifacts tab, and
thread attachment rendering in `ui/src`.
**Current behavior**
The Plan tab renders only the issue document literally named `plan`. The
Artifacts tab renders only formal work products. Agent-authored
documents with any other name, and files agents attach to comments, do
not appear anywhere in the sidebar. Thread images open as bare links.
**Proposed behavior**
The Plan tab lists every non-system issue document, with the `plan`
document first and the others rendered inline below it. The Artifacts
tab composes three sources — work products, issue documents, and
agent-created comment attachments — deduplicated against
attachment-backed work products via `metadata.attachmentId`, and shows
whenever any source is non-empty. Work-product rows without a resolvable
attachment or document fall back to links found in their metadata so
they stay clickable. Images in the thread open a shared full-screen
lightbox with a download action. Files uploaded by users stay
thread-only and are not mixed into the Artifacts tab.
**Reason and benefit**
Agents routinely produce documents that are not named `plan` and attach
files to their comments. Users reading the thread must be able to find
every one of those outputs from the sidebar. Redundant surfacing is
acceptable; an unfindable document is not.
**Breaking changes**
None. This is additive rendering; no schema or API changes.
## What Changed
- `IssuePropertiesPlansTab.tsx`: renders all non-system issue documents,
`plan` primary, others inline below via `MarkdownBody`
- `IssuePropertiesArtifactsTab.tsx`: composes work products + documents
+ agent-created attachments with dedupe; rows without an
attachment/document target fall back to `metadata` links
- `IssueProperties.tsx`: Artifacts tab visibility now derives from the
composed source set
- New `ui/src/lib/issue-artifacts.ts`: pure composition/dedupe logic,
unit-tested
- New `ui/src/components/task-chat/task-chat-attachments.ts`: splits
agent vs user comment attachments, unit-tested
- `TaskChatBubble.tsx`: thread images open the shared full-screen
lightbox with download
- `useIssueDocuments.ts`: hook now exposes the full issue-document list
## Verification
- `pnpm typecheck` — passes across the workspace
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — 3/3 CLEAN
- `cd ui && pnpm vitest run src/lib/issue-artifacts.test.ts
src/components/task-chat/task-chat-attachments.test.ts
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` — 74 tests pass
- Manual: open a task whose agent created a document not named `plan`
(for example `synthesis`); confirm it appears in the Plan tab below the
plan and in the Artifacts tab; confirm an image the agent attached
appears under Artifacts; confirm a user-uploaded image stays only in the
thread and opens full screen with a download button
Snapshot baselines are intentionally not updated for this visual change,
per the `doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` entry "Per-change snapshot
verification demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)".
## Risks
- Low risk: rendering-only change scoped to the task sidebar and thread
bubbles; composition logic is pure and unit-tested
- Dedupe relies on `metadata.attachmentId` linkage; a work product with
malformed metadata would render as a duplicate row (cosmetic only)
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5`, extended thinking
enabled, agentic tool use via Claude Agent SDK (Claude Code harness)
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Environments give each agent run an execution target: the local
host, SSH, or a sandbox provider
> - A managed deployment can provision one platform-managed sandbox
environment through the `PAPERCLIP_MANAGED_CONFIG` `environments`
section
> - That row is fully locked today. A tenant cannot add environment
variables for their agents. There is also no way to hide local execution
— run selection falls back to the local row
> - A platform that manages the sandbox for its tenants needs both: the
tenant adds env vars (and nothing else), and local execution is neither
visible nor reachable
> - This pull request opens exactly one tenant edit (env vars) on the
managed sandbox row, and adds an `enableManagedSandboxOnly` mode that
hides local and makes run selection fail closed
> - The benefit is a complete managed-sandbox experience with no change
for self-hosted instances
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Environments (managed sandbox provisioning, environment routes, run
environment selection) and the environments UI.
**Problem or motivation**
Platform-provisioned sandbox environments
(`metadata.managedByPaperclip`) reject every write on cloud-managed
instances. Agents often need environment variables inside their sandbox.
The tenant has no way to set them on the managed row. Separately, an
operator cannot remove local execution: the environment list always
shows the local row, and run selection falls back to it when no default
is set.
**Proposed solution**
Allow an envVars-only PATCH on the managed sandbox row, and echo those
env vars back for editing. Add a managed-tier feature
(`enableManagedSandboxOnly`) that hides the local environment from all
read surfaces and redirects local-landing run selection to the managed
sandbox environment, failing closed when it is unavailable.
**Alternatives considered**
UI-only hiding of the local row. This was rejected: it does not stop a
run from resolving to local, so it is presentation without enforcement.
Full unlock of the managed row was also rejected: name, driver, and
config stay platform-owned so boot reconciliation cannot fight tenant
edits.
## What Changed
- `server/src/routes/environments.ts`: the platform-provisioned write
floor admits an envVars-only PATCH on the generalized managed sandbox
row (sandbox driver, `managedByPaperclip`, not legacy kubernetes-marker
rows). Name, driver, config, status, metadata, and DELETE stay rejected.
The read floor stops blanking env vars on that row; credential-shaped
config keys stay redacted for every actor. Legacy kubernetes-marker rows
keep the full floor.
- Same file: under `enableManagedSandboxOnly`, the environments list and
the by-id read omit the local row for every actor, including instance
admins.
- `server/src/services/execution-workspace-policy.ts`:
`resolveExecutionWorkspaceEnvironmentId` gains the managed-sandbox-only
inputs. A selection that lands on the local environment is redirected to
the managed sandbox environment. With no active managed row it throws
`ManagedSandboxUnavailableError` — never local. Non-local selections
(ssh, user-created sandboxes) are untouched.
- `server/src/services/heartbeat.ts`: the run path reads the flag, looks
up the managed row (`findManagedSandboxEnvironment`, new read-only
finder in `environments.ts`), and passes both to the resolver. Mirrors
the forced-kubernetes precedent, which keeps precedence when both
regimes are on.
- `server/src/services/managed-environments.ts`: after a successful
reconcile, the instance default environment moves to the managed sandbox
row when the current default is unset, local, or dangling. A
tenant-chosen custom environment is never overridden.
- `packages/shared`: new `enableManagedSandboxOnly` key (schema default
false, catalog tier `managed`, cloudDefault false, selfHostedDefault
false) and the matching interface field.
- UI: managed rows show a "Managed by Paperclip" lock badge; editing one
opens a dedicated env-vars-only editor that sends the one PATCH shape
the server admits (the old full form failed with a 403 on save). New
`ui/src/lib/managed-sandbox-environment.ts` mirrors the local filter for
cached lists (applied in the project picker; the agent picker already
excluded local). The experimental settings page gains the toggle at its
alphabetical card position. `environmentsApi.update` now declares the
`envVars` field it already sent.
- Tests: environment route floor coverage (envVars-only accepted, mixed
bodies rejected, legacy rows still blanked and locked, local hidden and
404 under the flag, self-hosted unchanged), an embedded-postgres service
test pinning that boot reconciliation never touches tenant env vars,
resolver redirect/fail-closed cases, managed-environments
default-stamping cases, and UI lib/settings tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/environment-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts
src/services/managed-environments.test.ts` — all pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec vitest run` — 425 pass
(catalog/schema default parity is pinned by an existing test).
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit` and the affected UI
suites (CompanyEnvironments, InstanceExperimentalSettings incl.
card-order test, new lib test) — all pass.
- Full workspace `pnpm test`: 3,414 passed. 17 files report failures on
this machine; the identical 17 fail on a clean `origin/master` worktree
in the same environment (git-worktree/skills/embedded-postgres
environment dependencies and plugin-SDK zero-test collections). One
additional file (`issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts`) failed one
timing-sensitive test in one of two full-suite runs and passes 7/7 in
isolation on this branch — a flake in a domain this diff does not touch.
The branch introduces no new failures.
- Self-hosted zero-delta: every new behavior is gated on the
cloud-managed instance check or the new flag, which defaults to false in
schema and catalog; pinned by the "does not floor platform-marked rows
on self-hosted instances" and flag-off tests.
## Risks
- Behavior is opt-in twice over: the write-floor exception applies only
to rows the managed-config provisioner stamps, and the hiding/forcing
applies only when `enableManagedSandboxOnly` is on (default false
everywhere). Self-hosted instances see no change.
- The env-vars echo is scoped to the generalized managed sandbox row;
legacy kubernetes-marker rows keep the blanket floor because
pre-generalization builds may have written platform values there.
- Fail-closed run selection means a managed instance with the flag on
and an archived managed row (provider plugin down) refuses runs with a
precise error instead of running locally. That is the intended posture.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), extended thinking, agentic tool use
via Claude Code CLI.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Decisions desk shows work that needs an operator response.
> - It also exposed decision-training actions and a separate training
library.
> - Paperclip does not plan to use these training surfaces now.
> - Keeping inactive controls makes the Decisions workflow harder to
scan.
> - This pull request removes the training UI and keeps the backend
snapshot contract unchanged.
> - The benefit is a smaller and clearer Decisions workflow without a
data migration.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Decisions desk currently exposes training controls, training state,
and a separate training library route.
**Subsystem affected**
`ui/` — React and Vite board UI.
**Current behavior**
Operators can open a training library from the Decisions toolbar. They
can also mark a decision for training from rows and inspect the result
in a drawer.
**Proposed behavior**
Remove the training controls, badges, drawer, library pages, and routes
from the Decisions UI. Keep the server APIs and stored training examples
unchanged.
**Reason and benefit**
The product does not plan to use decision training now. Removing the
unused surfaces reduces Decisions UI noise and avoids presenting a
workflow that operators should not use.
**Breaking changes**
The `/decisions/training` UI routes are no longer registered. Existing
server endpoints and stored decision-training data remain compatible.
## What Changed
- Removed decision-training controls and state from Decisions toolbars,
rows, queue pages, and shelves.
- Removed the training drawer, library, inspector, API client, helpers,
query keys, and routes.
- Added route and row regressions that assert training UI does not
return.
- Updated the Decisions Storybook description to match the available
controls.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/App.test.tsx
ui/src/components/AttentionQueueRow.test.tsx` — 32 tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — all gates clean.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — server and UI partitions passed. The CLI partition
had one environment-only failure because this agent runtime injects
static AWS credentials. The exact CLI file passed all 8 tests when those
credential variables were unset.
- Searched `ui/src` and `ui/storybook` for the removed training routes,
drawer, library, badges, and actions. Only negative regression
assertions remain.
## Risks
- Low implementation risk. This change deletes UI-only entry points and
does not change the database or server APIs.
- Saved training-page URLs no longer render a board route. This is the
intended 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, model `gpt-5.6-sol`, with `xhigh` reasoning. The runtime
did not expose the context-window size. The agent used repository tools,
shell execution, and automated tests.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps operators supervise AI-agent work.
> - The Mine inbox keeps tasks that need an operator's attention in one
place.
> - Operators can archive a task from its detail page after they finish
triage.
> - That action is easy to select accidentally and did not offer
immediate recovery.
> - This pull request adds Undo to the archive success toast and keeps
inbox caches consistent.
> - The benefit is fast recovery without searching for or reopening the
task.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Archiving a task from the Mine inbox removed it and showed a success
toast with no recovery action.
**Expected behavior**
The success toast should offer Undo. Selecting Undo should restore the
task through the existing unarchive API while preserving a consistent
inbox view.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task from the Mine inbox.
2. Select the archive action.
3. Observe that the task leaves the inbox and the success toast has no
Undo action.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on `master` before this change.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev, built from source.
Related prior work: #9931 and #10668.
## What Changed
- Add an Undo action to the successful inbox archive toast.
- Optimistically restore the task in captured inbox query caches before
the unarchive request completes.
- Cancel in-flight inbox fetches and clear the local archive guard so
stale responses cannot hide the restored task.
- Reapply the archive guard and remove the cached task if the unarchive
request fails.
- Add regression tests for successful Undo, the in-flight cache race,
and failed Undo rollback behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/inboxArchiveCache.test.ts` — 51 tests passed on the final
head.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — the general server and UI groups passed. One CLI
doctor assertion detected injected host AWS credentials and passed all 8
tests with those unrelated variables unset. A task-watchdog scheduler
test also passed all 18 tests in isolation after one full-suite timing
failure.
## Risks
Low risk. The change uses the existing unarchive endpoint and inbox
cache helpers. Undo failure returns the task to its archived state,
shows an error toast, and invalidates the inbox queries for server
reconciliation.
> 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, model ID GPT-5. The service manages the context window.
Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps operators manage AI-agent companies.
> - Operators create tasks and comments through shared rich-text
editors.
> - These editors show slash-command and mention matches in a floating
menu.
> - Modal dialogs treat that body-level menu as outside content and
cancel its wheel and touch movement.
> - This pull request keeps scroll events inside the floating menu and
preserves native scrolling.
> - The benefit is that operators can reach every match with a mouse
wheel, a trackpad, or a touch screen.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this bug.
**What happened?**
Slash-command and mention menus could contain more matches than their
visible height. When an editor was inside a modal dialog, the modal
scroll lock canceled wheel and touch movement on the body-level menu
portal. Operators could not scroll to later matches.
**Expected behavior**
The autocomplete menu must scroll with a mouse wheel, a two-finger
trackpad gesture, and a vertical touch gesture. Keyboard selection and
normal editor behavior must stay unchanged.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task or comment editor inside a modal dialog.
2. Enter a slash command or mention query that has more matches than the
menu can show.
3. Try to scroll the menu with a wheel, trackpad, or touch gesture.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`7ea2068ef8` on `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development UI built from source.
## What Changed
- Keep wheel and touch movement inside the shared autocomplete menu
portal.
- Add vertical overscroll containment while preserving native momentum
scrolling.
- Add a regression test that mounts the real dialog and verifies that
wheel and touch movement stay uncanceled.
## Verification
- `pnpm --dir ui exec vitest run src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm test:run`
- `pnpm build`
The two AWS variables are omitted from the full test command because
this agent runtime injects static AWS credentials. One unrelated CLI
doctor test correctly warns when those credentials are present. The CI
environment does not inject them.
## Risks
- Low risk. Event propagation stops only on the open autocomplete menu
portal.
- Ancestor listeners no longer receive wheel or touch movement from that
menu. Native menu scrolling and option-level touch handling still
receive the events.
> 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 with model ID `gpt-5`. The deployment suffix and
context-window size are not exposed to the agent. The model used agentic
reasoning, repository tools, GitHub tools, and local code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task comments can contain references to files in project and
execution workspaces.
> - Paperclip detected path-shaped inline code and showed it as an
actionable file chip.
> - The UI did not first confirm that the current board session could
open the file.
> - Missing, denied, ambiguous, remote, and unsupported files therefore
looked actionable and failed after a click.
> - This pull request adds an issue-scoped availability check and
promotes only confirmed files to chips.
> - The benefit is that the task thread shows a file action only when
that action can succeed.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Task comments promoted path-shaped inline code to file chips before
Paperclip checked the file. A chip could point to a missing, denied,
ambiguous, remote, or non-previewable file. The action then failed after
the user selected it.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip must show a file chip only after the server confirms that the
current board session can open the exact file reference. All other
path-shaped text must stay ordinary inline code.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Add a task comment that contains inline code with a missing or
inaccessible workspace path.
2. Open the task thread as a board user.
3. Observe that the path looks like an actionable file chip.
4. Select the chip and observe that the file cannot open.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`19be4cf927` and earlier.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev and self-hosted server.
**Access context**
Board user.
## What Changed
- Added shared request, response, and validation contracts for batched
workspace-file availability checks.
- Added an issue-scoped server endpoint that resolves file references
with company, issue, workspace, and preview-access checks.
- Added bounded batch concurrency and tests for missing, denied,
ambiguous, remote, unsupported, and available files.
- Added an issue-scoped UI availability registry that deduplicates,
batches, caches, and invalidates file checks.
- Changed task-comment markdown rendering so only confirmed files get
chip styling and file-viewer behavior.
- Bound each chip to the exact workspace target that passed the
availability check.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/workspace-file-resource.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/file-resources.test.ts
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceFileMarkdownBody.availability.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/remark-workspace-file-refs.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workspace-file-availability.test.ts` — 93 passed, 35 skipped.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — clean.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — all server and UI groups passed. One unchanged CLI
test saw the run-injected static AWS credentials and expected only its
local `AWS_PROFILE`. The same test passed, 8 of 8, after removing only
`AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID` and `AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY` from its process
environment.
## Risks
- File chips now appear after an asynchronous availability check, so
path-shaped text can briefly render as inline code.
- Availability results use the existing 30-second file-resource cache
window. File-resource invalidation forces a new check.
- The endpoint limits each request to 100 references and the client
chunks larger sets.
> 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 with GPT-5. The service did not expose a more specific
model ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode,
repository tools, command execution, and test 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip helps operators manage agent skills across a company.
> - The installed skills view groups project-backed skills into folders.
> - The view showed two folder creation controls and only offered a
global project scan.
> - Operators need one clear folder action and a refresh action for the
selected project.
> - This pull request keeps folder creation in the folder rail and adds
a scoped project refresh.
> - The benefit is a calmer skills view and faster, more precise project
skill updates.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this focused UI bug.
**What happened?**
The installed skills view repeated the folder creation action in the
toolbar. A selected project folder also had no way to refresh only its
own project skills.
**Expected behavior**
The folder rail must own folder creation. A selected project-backed
folder must offer a refresh action that scans only that project and
refreshes the skill and folder queries.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the installed skills view for a company with project-backed
skill folders.
2. Select a project folder.
3. Observe the duplicate folder action and the absence of a
project-scoped refresh action.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced before this two-commit fix on `master`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with `pnpm dev`.
## What Changed
- Removed the duplicate toolbar folder creation button when the folder
rail exists.
- Preserved the toolbar folder action when no folder rail exists.
- Added a refresh action beside the breadcrumb for a selected
project-backed folder.
- Passed the selected project ID to the project scan API.
- Refreshed both the installed skill list and skill folder data after
scans.
- Added component tests for compact folder creation, the empty-folder
fallback, and scoped project refresh.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.test.tsx` — 20 tests
passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed with all three gates clean.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — the server and UI stages passed 7,475 tests. The CLI
stage then found one environment-sensitive AWS doctor assertion because
this agent runtime injects static AWS credentials.
- `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest
run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts --project paperclipai` — all 8
tests passed.
- GitHub CI — all latest-head checks passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. The scoped refresh depends on the existing `project:<id>`
folder system key.
- The global scan path is unchanged.
- There are no schema, migration, API contract, dependency, workflow, or
documentation 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 family. The runtime did not expose a more specific
model ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip gives operators a summary for each workspace.
> - An execution workspace detail page used the parent project-workspace
summary slot.
> - Two execution workspaces under one project workspace could therefore
show the same summary.
> - This pull request gives each execution workspace its own summary
scope.
> - It also limits the summary snapshot and generated issue to that
execution workspace.
> - The benefit is that a new or parallel execution workspace cannot
inherit unrelated status.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
An execution workspace detail page read and refreshed the summary slot
for its parent project workspace. Parallel execution workspaces could
show the same status and include issues from each other.
**Expected behavior**
Each execution workspace must have one isolated summary slot. Its
generated snapshot must include only issues assigned to that execution
workspace.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create two execution workspaces under one project workspace.
2. Add different issues to each execution workspace.
3. Generate the summary in the first execution workspace.
4. Open the second execution workspace.
5. Observe that the old implementation could reuse the first summary.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem exists on `master` before this pull request.
**Deployment mode**
The issue affects both local trusted and authenticated deployments.
## What Changed
- Added `execution_workspace` to the shared summary-slot scope contract.
- Validated execution-workspace ownership and stored generated summary
issues on the correct execution workspace.
- Limited execution-workspace snapshots to issues with the matching
execution workspace ID.
- Updated the execution workspace page to use its own summary slot.
- Updated Summarizer instructions, routine options, catalog metadata,
documentation, and regression tests.
## Verification
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/summary-slot.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/summary-slots.test.ts
ui/src/pages/ExecutionWorkspaceDetail.test.tsx` — 30 focused tests
passed; the embedded-Postgres server tests were run outside the
process-restricted sandbox.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog validate` — passed with 17
catalog skills.
- [Latest-head GitHub
Actions](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/31491475405)
— all 22 jobs passed on `beea14cbaf`, including typecheck, build,
server/workspace tests, serialized suites, e2e, canary, and aggregate
verification. One unrelated adapter cleanup test initially hit an
`ENOTEMPTY` temp-directory race; its single permitted rerun passed.
- Greptile — 5/5 confidence on `beea14cbaf`, 12 files reviewed, zero
comments added, and zero unresolved threads.
## Risks
- Low risk. The new scope is additive.
- Existing project and project-workspace summary slots keep their
current keys and behavior.
- A summary generated for an execution workspace now excludes sibling
workspace issues by design.
> 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 with GPT-5. The deployment does not expose a more
specific model ID or context-window value. It used agentic reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, and GitHub tooling.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The inbox helps operators scan parent tasks and their sub-tasks
> - Operators can fold a parent task to hide its sub-tasks
> - The inbox previously forgot that fold state after a page refresh
> - This pull request stores the fold state for each company and
restores it when the inbox loads
> - The benefit is that the inbox keeps the operator's chosen task
layout across page refreshes
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The inbox reset every folded parent task after a page refresh. This made
all nested sub-tasks visible again.
**Expected behavior**
The inbox must keep each folded or unfolded parent state after a page
refresh. The state must remain separate for each company.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the inbox with parent and child tasks.
2. Fold one parent task.
3. Refresh the page.
4. Observe that the child task is visible again without this fix.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Current `master` before this pull request.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev and built-from-source deployments.
## What Changed
- Added company-scoped local storage helpers for collapsed inbox parent
IDs.
- Restored the stored parent fold state when the inbox mounts or the
selected company changes.
- Saved both direct toggle changes and explicit collapse changes.
- Added helper tests and an inbox remount regression test for both
folded and unfolded states.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` — 77 tests passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — all gates passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — 3,521 tests passed and four skipped. One unrelated
server test on the current base fails because it reads
`heartbeat.scheduling_suppressed` instead of `issue_commented`; the same
test fails alone and this pull request changes only inbox UI files.
## Risks
- Low risk. The state is local to the browser and scoped by company ID.
- Old parent IDs can remain in local storage after tasks are deleted,
but they do not affect visible tasks.
> 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, exact model ID `gpt-5.6-sol`, with reasoning, tool use,
and code execution. The runtime does not expose its context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Company import lets an operator bring a package of agents into an
instance, and each agent declares which adapter runs it (Claude Code,
Codex, and so on)
> - The export and the server importer preserve each agent's adapter
faithfully, but the Import page seeds an adapter override for every
agent with the destination CEO's adapter before the user touches
anything
> - Every imported agent therefore arrives as the CEO's adapter (usually
Claude Code) even when the source package holds a mix, and the picker
shows the coerced value as if it were the source's, so nothing looks
wrong
> - This pull request makes the manifest adapter the default, sends
overrides only for agents the user actually changed, and replaces the
silent coercion with an explicit per-agent fallback warning when the
destination truly lacks the source adapter
> - The benefit is that a mixed Claude/Codex team imports as a mixed
Claude/Codex team, and any real adapter gap is visible instead of silent
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A user imported a company package whose agents were a mix of Claude Code
and Codex on the source instance. After the import, every agent was
configured as Claude Code. The import preview showed no sign that
anything had been changed. Cause: the Import page initializes its
adapter-override map by assigning every agent the destination CEO's
adapter type and sends that override for every agent, overriding the
manifest's per-agent adapter server-side. For imports into a new
company, the "CEO adapter" is read from whichever unrelated company is
currently selected.
**Expected behavior**
Imported agents keep the adapter declared in the package. An override is
sent only when the operator explicitly picks a different adapter, or
when the source adapter is not installed on the destination — and in
that case the page must say so per agent, not silently substitute.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. On a source instance, create a company with one Claude Code agent and
one Codex agent, and export it.
2. Import the package on another instance whose CEO uses Claude Code,
changing nothing in the import dialog.
3. Both agents arrive configured as Claude Code; the Codex identity is
gone.
## What Changed
- The preview no longer seeds adapter overrides; the override map starts
empty, and the picker displays each agent's manifest adapter
(`ui/src/pages/CompanyImport.tsx`).
- `buildFinalAdapterOverrides` sends an entry only when the effective
adapter differs from the manifest or the agent's adapter config was
edited — untouched agents flow through with no override.
- The page fetches the destination's installed adapters (existing
`adaptersApi.list()` client). When a manifest adapter is missing or
disabled on the destination, only that agent defaults to the CEO's
adapter, with a visible amber warning naming both adapters. If the
adapters request fails, the page fails open: manifest adapters are kept
and no coercion happens.
- Tests: untouched mixed-adapter import sends no overrides; a
user-changed agent sends exactly one; a missing destination adapter
produces the fallback plus rendered warning for that agent only; an
adapters-endpoint failure produces no coercion.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyImport.test.tsx` — 19 passed (15
pre-existing + 4 new).
- `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` (`tsc -b`) — clean.
## Risks
- Behavior change: users who previously relied on the silent conversion
(importing packages that reference adapters they don't have) now get an
explicit per-agent fallback with a warning — same outcome, visible. The
server's hard rejection of unknown adapter types remains the backstop
for API callers.
- UI-only change; no server or schema impact.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code CLI, with extended
thinking and tool use (multi-agent implementation with independent
verification).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Company import/export lets an operator move a full company package
between instances, with the Import page uploading the package as one
compressed `.zip`
> - The server caps that upload at 128 MB, and real company packages
with attachments now exceed it — imports fail at the preview step
> - The failure message tells the user to use the CLI folder import, but
that path posts inline JSON capped at 64 MB, so the advice is a dead end
for exactly these packages
> - This pull request raises the zip upload cap to a 1 GB default, makes
it operator-configurable through an environment variable, scales the
decompression-bomb guards from the cap in effect, and replaces the
misleading hint
> - The benefit is that large real-world company packages import
successfully, and operators with unusual needs can tune the cap without
a code change
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A company import fails at the preview step with `Preview failed: Import
package exceeds 134217728 bytes`. The package is a valid Paperclip
export. Its compressed size is larger than the 128 MB server cap (one
reported package is 257 MB). The error panel suggests the CLI folder
import, but that path sends the package as one inline JSON body capped
at 64 MB, so it also fails.
**Expected behavior**
A valid company package of realistic size imports successfully through
the Import page. If a package is too large, the error must state the
limit clearly and suggest a step that can work.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Export a company with enough attachments to make the compressed
package larger than 128 MB.
2. Open the Import page and upload the `.zip`.
3. Click "Preview import".
4. The preview fails with `Import package exceeds 134217728 bytes`.
**Deployment mode**
Reported from a managed deployment; the limit applies to all deployment
modes.
## What Changed
- Raise `PORTABLE_ZIP_UPLOAD_LIMIT_BYTES` from 128 MB to a 1 GB default
(`server/src/http/body-limits.ts`).
- Add the `PAPERCLIP_IMPORT_ZIP_MAX_BYTES` environment override. Invalid
or non-positive values fall back to the default.
- Scale the zip decompression-bomb guard from the configured cap at the
import route: the aggregate inflated ceiling is 4x the cap. The
per-entry ceiling stays at 512 MB because V8's string length limit
applies to an entry regardless (`server/src/routes/companies.ts`,
`packages/shared/src/portability-zip.ts`).
- Report the 422 limit error in MB instead of raw bytes.
- Replace the "use the CLI folder import for very large packages" hint
on preview failure with advice that works: re-export the package without
large attachments (`ui/src/pages/CompanyImport.tsx`).
- Update the stale comment in `ui/src/lib/import-preflight.ts` that made
the same CLI claim.
- Add tests for the new default, the env override, and the
invalid-override fallback.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/body-limits.test.ts
packages/shared/src/portability-zip.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability-import-batching.test.ts` — all
pass.
- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyImport.test.tsx` — passes,
including the updated failure-panel copy assertion.
- `pnpm typecheck` — clean across the workspace.
- Manual: upload a `.zip` larger than the configured cap; the preview
fails with `Import package exceeds the 1024 MB upload limit` and the new
hint. A package between 128 MB and 1 GB now previews and imports.
## Risks
- Peak per-import memory rises with the cap: the upload is buffered in
memory and unzipped in one pass. A 1 GB compressed package can use
several GB transiently. Imports are instance-admin actions, so the
exposure is a deliberate operator action, not anonymous traffic.
Operators on small hosts can lower the cap with
`PAPERCLIP_IMPORT_ZIP_MAX_BYTES`.
- The aggregate bomb guard moves from a fixed 512 MB to 4x the
configured cap. It still bounds expansion far below what a decompression
bomb needs.
- No migration and no API shape change. The 422 message text changes; no
code matches on the old text.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code CLI, with extended
thinking and tool use (file edits, local test runs, live-instance
inspection).
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The agent detail page has a Costs section. That section renders a
data table of per-run spend.
> - The table has a header row, but its `<th>` elements carry no `scope`
attribute.
> - A screen reader uses `scope="col"` to bind each data cell to its
column header. Without it, the reader announces a number without telling
the user which column it belongs to.
> - A table of costs is exactly the case where that hurts. Every cell is
a bare figure.
> - This pull request adds `scope="col"` to the five header cells in
that table.
> - The benefit is that assistive technology announces the cost table
correctly. The change is markup only, so sighted users see no
difference.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue covers this. The problem is described in-PR,
following the enhancement template.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Costs table rendered by `CostsSection` in
`ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`.
**Subsystem affected**
ui/ — React + Vite board UI
**Current behavior**
The table renders five header cells: Date, Run, Input, Output, and Cost.
None of them set `scope`. A screen reader must guess the header-to-cell
relationship, so a user hears a value with no column name attached to
it.
**Proposed behavior**
Each header cell sets `scope="col"`. A screen reader then announces the
column name together with each cell, so a cost figure is read as part of
the Cost column.
**Reason and benefit**
`scope` is the standard way to associate header cells with data cells in
an HTML table. The attribute has no visual effect, so the fix carries no
design cost and makes the table usable with a screen reader.
**Breaking changes**
None. `scope` is a presentational-neutral HTML attribute. No component
API, no styling, and no test changes.
**Related pull requests**
- #2215 proposed the same attribute for the Routines table. It is
closed, because that table no longer exists on master.
- #1524 and #1522 applied `scope="col"` to other tables. Both are
closed.
## What Changed
- Added `scope="col"` to the five `<th>` elements in the `CostsSection`
table in `ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`.
- Rebased the branch onto current master.
- Dropped the original `ui/src/pages/Routines.tsx` hunks. Master rebuilt
the Routines page around folder-grouped rows, so the table those hunks
targeted no longer exists.
- Dropped the original `HintIcon` opacity change. It altered a visible
colour, which is out of scope for a markup-only accessibility fix.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/ui build`. This is a markup-only change, so a clean
type-check and build is the relevant automated signal.
- Open an agent detail page and go to the Costs section. Inspect the
header row. Each `<th>` now carries `scope="col"`.
- Navigate the same table with a screen reader, cell by cell. Each cell
is announced with its column name.
- Compare the rendered page before and after. It is unchanged, because
`scope` has no styling effect.
## Risks
Low risk. The change adds one standard HTML attribute to five header
cells in a single table. It introduces no code path, changes no
component API, and has no visual effect. The worst case is that the
attribute is redundant for a reader that already infers the column,
which is harmless.
## Model Used
Anthropic Claude Opus 5, exact model ID `claude-opus-5`. It ran with
extended thinking and repository read/write tools, inside a
maintainer-operated triage agent. The model rebased the branch, dropped
the two out-of-scope hunks, and wrote this description. The original
change was authored by @bluzername, and the model used for that work is
not recorded here.
## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` references)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — not run. This is a
markup-only change and the package has no test covering this table.
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable — no test added,
which is why this PR is titled `refactor:`.
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — no
documentation describes this markup.
- [ ] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work — not checked by the maintainer who rebased this.
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green — CI re-runs on this push.
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups —
Greptile re-reviews on this push.
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Paperclip posts system comments when automatic run recovery cannot
continue
> - These comments currently mix the main event with recovery
identifiers and routing details
> - The task chat shell also renders these comments as large raw text
blocks
> - Operators need a short explanation first and inspectable evidence on
demand
> - This pull request emits structured recovery notices and renders them
as compact humanized rows
> - The benefit is a quieter task thread that keeps the full recovery
evidence available
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related prior extraction source: #11070. This pull request replaces only
its structured recovery notice slice with a focused branch based on
current master.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Paperclip recovery escalations and the experimental task chat
system-comment renderer.
**Current behavior**
Recovery escalation comments put action identifiers, owner details, run
details, and failure codes into the visible markdown body. The task chat
shell renders the complete system comment as a large text block.
**Proposed behavior**
The server emits a short system notice with typed metadata sections. The
task chat shell classifies known recovery families and renders one
compact row. An operator can expand the row to inspect the full body and
metadata.
**Reason and benefit**
The main thread stays readable during repeated recovery activity. Typed
links and evidence remain available without exposing raw failure text in
the default view.
**Breaking changes**
The visible recovery comment body is shorter. Recovery action
deduplication now reads the structured metadata and still recognizes
legacy body markers. No API schema or database migration changes.
## What Changed
- Emit stranded recovery escalations with `system_notice` presentation
and typed recovery, owner, run, and failure-code metadata.
- Share bounded metadata row builders across recovery notice producers
and preserve legacy deduplication compatibility.
- Humanize known recovery notice families and render compact expandable
task-chat rows.
- Route system-authored comments ahead of derived agent authorship so
recovery notices do not appear as agent bubbles.
- Add focused server and UI regression coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — 3/3 clean.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared exec vitest run
src/validators/issue.test.ts` — 32 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/recovery/stranded-notice.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-recovery-actions.test.ts` — 57 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/services/recovery/successful-run-handoff.test.ts
src/services/recovery/stranded-notice.test.ts` — 39 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t 'escalates an
exhausted failed successful-run handoff without using generic
continuation recovery first|escalates an exhausted successful handoff
run that still leaves no disposition'` — 2 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts -t 'blocks assigned
todo work after the one automatic dispatch recovery was already used'` —
passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/lib/system-notice-humanizer.test.ts
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatSystemNotice.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/task-chat-adapter.test.ts` — 15 tests passed.
- Storybook visual baselines were not updated because this chat-shell
path has no affected snapshot baseline. Focused rendering tests and
token gates cover this change.
## Risks
- Consumers that parse recovery action identifiers from comment markdown
must move to structured metadata. Server deduplication remains backward
compatible with legacy comments.
- The humanizer uses stable recovery-family phrases. Unknown notices use
a generic truncated first-sentence fallback.
- The UI changes only the experimental task chat presentation. The
stored comment body and expanded metadata remain available.
> 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 with GPT-5, reasoning mode, repository tools, shell
execution, and GitHub integration. The runtime did not expose a
context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People send task instructions through the board task chat.
> - A page refresh or task switch can discard an unfinished message in
the redesigned composer.
> - The existing task chat already supplies a task-specific draft key.
> - The redesigned composer must use that key without changing
attachment or send behavior.
> - This pull request restores, saves, and clears text drafts in the
redesigned composer.
> - The benefit is that users can return to unfinished task messages
without losing their text.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Related prior work: #11070. This pull request extracts only the final
composer draft behavior from that larger draft.
**Subsystem affected**
ui/ — React + Vite board UI.
**Problem or motivation**
The redesigned task chat composer does not use the draft key that the
task thread already provides. A refresh, navigation, or unmount can lose
an unfinished message.
**Proposed solution**
Persist text drafts by task key in local storage. Restore a draft when
the composer mounts. Save changes after a short delay and flush pending
text during unload or unmount. Clear the draft only after a successful
send.
**Alternatives considered**
The composer could save on every keystroke. A short delay avoids
unnecessary synchronous storage writes. The feature could also stay in
the larger predecessor PR, but a focused PR is easier to review and
verify.
**Roadmap alignment**
This is a focused usability improvement for the task conversation
surface. It does not add or duplicate a roadmap capability.
## What Changed
- Added safe draft storage helpers for load, save, and clear operations.
- Connected the task-specific draft key to the redesigned task chat
composer.
- Preserved drafts across debounce windows, unmounts, page unloads,
failed sends, and React Strict Mode probes.
- Cleared drafts after successful sends without changing current
attachment safeguards.
- Added focused composer and thread integration tests.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatComposer.test.tsx
src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx`
## Risks
- Local storage can be unavailable or full. The helpers catch storage
errors and keep the composer usable.
- Only text is persisted. Attachments, work mode, and assignee
selections remain session state.
- Draft keys remain task-scoped, so text does not cross task boundaries.
> 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 with model `gpt-5`. The context-window size is not exposed
in this environment. The model used agentic reasoning, tool use, code
execution, and test 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Humans oversee those agents in teams, so each team needs its own
spend controls
> - The BudgetPolicyCard component shows how much of a budget is
consumed
> - The utilization bar in that card is a styled div with no ARIA role,
value, or label
> - A screen reader user therefore cannot hear how much budget is used
> - This pull request adds role="progressbar" and the matching ARIA
value attributes
> - The benefit is that assistive technology announces budget
utilization the same way sighted users see it
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. Related pull requests: #1869 and #1878 add the same
progressbar
semantics to ProviderQuotaCard and QuotaBar. They touch different files.
The problem follows the bug report template:
**What happened?**
The budget utilization bar in `BudgetPolicyCard` renders as a plain
`div`. It has no
`role`, no `aria-valuenow`, and no accessible name. A screen reader
announces nothing
for it. The user can read the "Remaining" amount, but not the
utilization percentage.
**Expected behavior**
The bar is announced as a progress bar. It reports the current
utilization percentage,
with its minimum and maximum.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a project or agent page that shows the budget card.
2. Start VoiceOver (Cmd+F5 on macOS).
3. Move the cursor to the budget utilization bar.
4. VoiceOver announces nothing.
**Paperclip version or commit**
master, `ui/src/components/BudgetPolicyCard.tsx`.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (pnpm dev).
## What Changed
- Added `role="progressbar"` to the inner bar element.
- Added `aria-valuenow` with the rounded utilization percentage.
- Added `aria-valuemin={0}` and `aria-valuemax={100}`.
- Added `aria-label` in the form `Budget utilization: 73% used`.
`aria-valuenow` and `aria-label` use the same `progress` value. That
value is already
capped at 100 by `Math.min(100, summary.utilizationPercent)`, so the
reported value
stays inside the min/max range when a scope is over budget.
An earlier revision also changed the budget amount `Input` to
`type="number"`. That
change is removed. It changed input behavior and was not an
accessibility fix.
See "Risks".
## Verification
1. Open a page that shows the budget card.
2. Start VoiceOver (Cmd+F5 on macOS) and move to the utilization bar.
3. VoiceOver announces "Budget utilization: X% used, progress
indicator".
4. Inspect the element. `aria-valuenow` equals the displayed percentage,
and it stays
at 100 when utilization is above 100%.
The change adds attributes only. There is no visual change.
## Risks
Low risk. The change adds ARIA attributes to one element in one
component. It changes
no logic, no styling, and no layout.
The `type="number"` change is removed on purpose. With `type="number"`,
a browser
reports an empty string for text it cannot parse. `parseDollarInput("")`
then returns
`0` instead of `null`, so the existing "Enter a valid non-negative
dollar amount."
error never appears and unparseable input silently becomes a $0.00
budget. The
`inputMode="decimal"` input keeps that validation path working.
## Model Used
Original implementation by @bluzername. The author did not state a
model.
Scope reduction, branch update, and this description: Claude Opus 5 (1M
context,
extended thinking, tool use), prepared under maintainer review.
## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
This reverts commit 11e56654f8.
#10786 ported the onboarding flow from a standalone prototype and
repointed `/onboarding` at the new `CloudOnboardingFlow`, deleting the
existing `OnboardingWizard.tsx` in the process. The ported flow is not
ready to be the shipping onboarding experience: it landed as a single
large port rather than an incremental migration, it pulled `motion`,
`three` and `@types/three` onto the UI dependency list for prototype
visuals, and it deleted the wizard that four in-flight pull requests
(#9900, #9501, #8982 and one more) were building on — those went
CONFLICTING the moment the file disappeared.
Rather than keep the half-migrated state on master while that is sorted
out, back the port out whole and re-land it incrementally. This restores
`OnboardingWizard.tsx` and the previous versions of the four e2e specs,
drops the `onboarding-preview.html` Vite entry, the DesignGuide
onboarding section and the `data-viz-misc` storybook story, and removes
the three prototype dependencies from `ui/package.json`.
This is an exact mechanical inverse of the squash commit — 41 files,
+2089/-3647, no hand edits. Reverting this commit restores all 41 files
byte for byte, so the port is recoverable in full when it is ready.
`pnpm-lock.yaml` is deliberately not touched. #10786 never updated it;
bot commit 4683f26c9 (#11036) added the `motion`/`three` entries
afterwards, so the lockfile is now ahead of the manifest. CI owns
lockfile updates (`.github/workflows/pr.yml`) and the policy job
regenerates it from the changed manifest.
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps subsystem connects company tools through governed provider
connections.
> - A company can need more than one account for the same provider.
> - The current database constraint and Apps flow assume one named
connection per company.
> - New quarantined actions also need an explicit review decision before
activation.
> - This pull request supports multiple provider connections and
complete action review decisions.
> - The benefit is safer access control and a clear multi-account Apps
workflow.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #11040
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. This change affects the Apps UI, the tool access API, the
shared request contract, and the database schema.
**Problem or motivation**
The connection name constraint prevents a company from keeping more than
one connection for a provider. The Apps UI also reuses an existing OAuth
connection when a user asks to connect another account. Action review
can enable selected entries without recording a decision for every
quarantined action.
**Proposed solution**
Remove the company and connection name uniqueness constraint. Let users
open, count, edit, and create multiple provider connections. Require the
finish request to cover every quarantined action exactly once before the
server activates reviewed entries.
**Alternatives considered**
The UI could generate unique internal names and keep the database
constraint. This would preserve a one-connection assumption in the data
model and would make display names part of identity. The server could
also infer review decisions from enabled actions. This would not
distinguish a reviewed disabled action from an action that the user did
not review.
**Roadmap alignment**
This change extends the completed MCP Tool Gateway and Apps milestone.
It also supports the Connected Apps roadmap item. It follows the
navigation and connection management work in #11040.
## What Changed
- Remove the company-scoped connection name uniqueness index with an
ordered and idempotent migration.
- Add a reviewed action list to the finish-app contract and reject
incomplete or duplicate review decisions.
- Activate reviewed entries and keep unreviewed quarantined entries
blocked.
- Enable a completed connection and preserve the company and connection
scope in all updates.
- Show provider connection counts and open the provider setup page from
Browse.
- Let users edit existing connections or connect another account without
reusing an active OAuth connection.
- Update focused server and UI coverage for multiple connections and
action review.
## Verification
- Ran the focused Apps UI suite. All 116 tests passed in 11 files.
- Ran the focused server and CLI suite. All 276 tests passed in 3 files.
- Ran `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`. The migration
safety check passed.
- Ran `pnpm -r typecheck`. All projects passed.
- Ran `pnpm build`. All projects built successfully.
- Ran `pnpm test:run`. It passed 3,735 tests and skipped 4 tests. One
worktree-safety assertion failed because the execution workspace reloads
its worktree marker. The same test passed with an isolated non-worktree
marker.
- Ran `pnpm check:token-gates`. It reports 12 existing violations in the
unchanged `PaperclipOrbit3D.tsx` file from the target branch.
- Started the six affected Playwright specifications. Chromium could not
start because the host does not provide `libatk-1.0.so.0`. The GitHub
e2e jobs will verify these specifications.
- GitHub Actions passed every final-head CI gate, including all three
e2e shards and the aggregate `e2e` and `verify` jobs.
- Greptile reviewed final commit `9af9200426` at 5/5 with zero review
threads.
## Risks
- Removing the name uniqueness index permits duplicate display names.
Stable connection IDs and UIDs remain unique within a company.
- The finish-app endpoint accepts the new review field as optional for
backward compatibility. When clients send it, the server requires a
complete decision for all quarantined actions.
- Multiple OAuth connections depend on the explicit new-connection route
flag. Focused tests cover active and draft connection reuse.
- The migration is ordered after migration 0210. Its `DROP INDEX IF
EXISTS` statement is safe to repeat.
> 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 with the `gpt-5.6-sol` model assisted this change. The
agent used repository tools, code execution, test execution, and agentic
reasoning. The Codex runtime manages the context window.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Apps UI manages app discovery and app connections.
> - The managed worktree runtime starts agent work in repository
worktrees.
> - The Apps routes do not match the main discovery flow, and the
connections view lacks a delete action.
> - Legacy managed worktrees can also start before their pending seed
operation runs.
> - This pull request makes app discovery the main Apps route and makes
connection management explicit.
> - It also seeds legacy managed worktrees before runtime startup and
makes the CLI read the repository-local config.
> - The benefit is a clearer Apps workflow and a safer managed-worktree
startup path.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This improves the Apps navigation, app connection management, managed
git-worktree startup, and CLI worktree selection.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting. The change affects `ui/`, `server/`, `cli/`, and
development documentation.
**Current behavior**
The `/apps` route opens the connections list while discovery uses a
nested route. The connections list has no delete action. Some legacy
managed worktrees can start runtime work before their pending seed
operation runs. The CLI can also read an ambient Paperclip config
instead of the repository-local config.
**Proposed behavior**
The `/apps` route opens Browse, and `/apps/connections` opens the
connection list. Users can delete a connection after confirmation.
Runtime startup seeds legacy managed worktrees when required. The CLI
resolves the current worktree from the repository-local
`.paperclip/config.json` file.
**Reason and benefit**
Users can discover apps from the canonical Apps route and can manage
existing connections from a dedicated route. Legacy worktrees receive
their required repository content before agent runtime starts. CLI
worktree selection stays scoped to the current repository.
**Breaking changes**
The `/apps` and `/apps/browse` route behavior changes. Old Browse links
redirect to `/apps`. The change does not modify an API schema or
database schema.
## What Changed
- Make Browse the canonical `/apps` page and move the connection list to
`/apps/connections`.
- Align Apps navigation, redirects, attention links, empty states, and
connection actions with the new routes.
- Add connection deletion with confirmation and clear failure feedback.
- Seed legacy managed git worktrees before runtime startup when their
seed status is pending.
- Read the CLI worktree selection from the repository-local Paperclip
config.
- Update focused UI, server, CLI, and development documentation
coverage.
## Verification
- Ran 202 focused UI, server, and CLI tests. All tests passed.
- Ran `pnpm -r typecheck`. All projects passed.
- Ran `pnpm build`. All projects built successfully.
- Ran `pnpm test:run`. The server and UI stages passed 7,168 tests. The
CLI stage found one environment-sensitive secrets test because this
workspace injects static AWS credentials. The isolated CLI file passed
all 8 tests after those injected variables were unset.
- Ran `pnpm check:token-gates`. It reports 12 existing color-token
violations in the unchanged `PaperclipOrbit3D.tsx` file from the target
branch. This pull request does not modify that file.
- Ran focused regression coverage for repository-root CLI config
resolution and connection deletion state. All tests and affected package
typechecks passed.
- Collected all 27 tests in the six changed Playwright specifications
successfully.
- GitHub Actions passed every latest-head CI gate, including all three
e2e shards and the aggregate `e2e` and `verify` jobs.
- Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5 with zero unresolved
threads.
## Risks
- Existing bookmarks for `/apps/browse` redirect to `/apps`.
- Connection deletion changes visible connection state and requires user
confirmation.
- The legacy seed path runs only for managed git worktrees with pending
seed state. Tests cover the startup condition.
- The rebase preserves the target branch's direct OAuth policy for the
Notion connection flow.
> 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 with the GPT-5 model family assisted this change. The agent
used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and test execution.
The runtime does not expose the exact model snapshot or context-window
size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task list and the chat views show a Live badge and a Working
shimmer for an issue that has an active run.
> - A finished task kept the Live badge and the Working shimmer after
the run ended and the sandbox stopped.
> - The user interface reads run liveness from the
`heartbeat_runs.status` row. The run finalizer writes the terminal
status in a step that is separate from the agent `status=done` update.
When the sandbox or the run process stops between the two steps,
`heartbeat_runs.status` stays `running` forever.
> - A run row that stays `running` makes a finished task look
perpetually Live, and the user interface has no guard for an issue that
already reached a terminal status.
> - This pull request closes the invariant "environment lease released
implies the run is terminal" on the server, and adds a user interface
guard that suppresses live state for a terminal issue.
> - The benefit is that a finished task stops showing Live and Working,
both at the source (the run row) and at the surface (the badge and the
shimmer).
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Bug description**
- A completed task kept the Live badge and the Working shimmer after its
run ended and the sandbox was torn down.
**Steps to reproduce**
- Run an agent task to completion. Let the sandbox tear down while the
run finalizer is between the `status=done` update and the terminal
run-status write.
- Open the task list or the chat view for the finished task.
**Expected behavior**
- A finished task shows no Live badge and no Working shimmer.
**Actual behavior (before this change)**
- The finished task showed the Live badge and the Working shimmer
because its `heartbeat_runs.status` row stayed `running`.
This pull request supersedes the two separate pull requests #10954
(frontend) and #10955 (backend). It carries all of their changes for the
same race.
## What Changed
Server:
- Run teardown terminalizes a still-running or still-queued run before
it releases the environment lease. It writes `succeeded` when the issue
already reached `done`, `cancelled` when the issue is `cancelled`, and
`interrupted` otherwise. It never overwrites a status that another path
already made terminal.
- The recovery stale-lock sweep terminalizes an orphaned running run to
`interrupted` after it confirms the process and the sandbox are both
gone. It requires recorded process metadata, so it never terminalizes a
live run, a queued run, or a scheduled retry.
- Each terminal transition writes a run event.
- The stale-lock sweep continues and clears the lock when the audit
write fails. It logs the failure loudly.
- New server tests cover both invariants.
User interface:
- A shared guard suppresses the Live badge and the Working shimmer when
the issue status is terminal.
- The guard keeps non-terminal `queued` and `running` issues live.
- The guard prefers the newest issue live-status snapshot.
- New user interface tests cover the guard and the snapshot preference.
## Verification
Server:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk ensure-build-deps && tsc
--noEmit` in `server/` — 0 errors.
- `pnpm --filter server test
heartbeat-run-lease-release-terminalization.test.ts
recovery-stale-issue-lock-sweep.test.ts` — 12 tests pass.
User interface:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — 0 errors.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/liveIssueIds.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts` — 40 tests pass.
## Risks
- Low risk. The server change only forces a still-live run row to a
terminal status when the lease releases or when the recovery sweep
confirms the process is dead. It never overwrites an existing terminal
status, and it guards the recovery path with process metadata to avoid
terminalizing a live run.
- The user interface change is additive. The guard only suppresses live
state for a terminal issue and keeps queued and running issues live.
- No database migration. No change to any external endpoint.
## Model Used
- Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`), extended thinking, tool use, and
code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` /
`Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the
relevant issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - First-run onboarding is the subsystem that turns a brand-new install
into a working company: it creates the company, its goal, a lead agent,
and that agent's first task
> - The existing `OnboardingWizard` carried all of that wiring
correctly, but its UI had drifted from the current design direction, and
a separate design prototype (`paperclip-onboard`) existed as a
standalone visual mock with no backend
> - Porting the prototype's *logic* would have thrown away working,
well-tested backend orchestration; leaving the two apart meant the
design never shipped
> - Separately, cloud and local (self-hosted) installs need meaningfully
different first runs — local has no sign-in and must let the user pick a
locally-installed CLI adapter — so a single linear wizard could not
serve both
> - This pull request rebuilds the presentational layer from the
prototype on top of the existing backend orchestration, and splits it
into two thin flow containers over a shared core
> - The benefit is that the shipped onboarding matches the intended
design, cloud and local can diverge without duplicating logic, and each
can later ship to a different app version while sharing one set of step
components
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue — describing inline (feature request).
**What problem does this solve?**
Onboarding is the first thing a new user sees, and the shipped wizard
had drifted from the current design. In parallel, cloud and local
installs need different first-run paths: local has no hosted sign-in,
and its agent runs on a CLI adapter installed on the user's machine,
which the cloud path never has to ask about. There was no way to express
that difference without either forking the whole wizard or bolting
conditionals onto a single linear flow.
**Proposed solution**
Extract the onboarding step views and shell into a shared core, then
compose two thin flow containers (cloud and local) over it. Keep all
backend orchestration in the existing `useOnboardingFlow` hook so no
working logic is rewritten.
**Alternatives considered**
- *Single flow with a `variant` prop* — most DRY, but the two flows are
intended to ship on different app versions, and a shared file would have
to be split later anyway.
- *Two fully independent copies* — simplest per-flow, but every shared
refinement (spacing, motion, copy) would have to be made twice and would
drift.
## What Changed
- **Shared core** under `ui/src/components/onboarding/`:
`OnboardingScaffold` owns the full-screen shell and the single
`AnimatePresence` step crossfade, so both flows transition identically;
step views (Start / Company / Agent / Task), `FooterNav`, `AgentPreview`
and the motion constants are extracted for reuse.
- **`CloudOnboardingFlow`** — `start → company → agent → task`; mounted
in the real app via `OnboardingWizardVariant`. Behaviour matches the
retired wizard, including `previewMock` and the existing-company ("add
an agent") entry point.
- **`LocalOnboardingFlow`** — skips sign-in and adds an optional email
ask (with a privacy assurance), a local model/adapter step that hires
with `requireEnvProbe: true`, and a "star us on GitHub" interstitial
before completing. **Harness-only for now** — the real app still mounts
the cloud flow.
- **Deleted `OnboardingWizard.tsx`** (1,786 lines); updated its
Storybook stories and the `OnboardingWizardVariant` test to the new
components.
- **Orbiting 3D paperclip backdrop** behind the auth and welcome screens
(`three`), code-split so it only downloads on those screens; honours
`prefers-reduced-motion` and disposes its GL context on unmount.
- **`motion`** added for step transitions and the agent-capsule
choreography.
- Visual values routed through design tokens per `DESIGN.md`; `Stepper`
generalized to take a step total (backward compatible); `/design-guide`
page and the component index updated.
- **Standalone preview harness** (`ui/onboarding-preview.html`) with
`?flow=` and `?step=` for backend-free review, wired as a second Vite
rollup input.
- **Adapter env probe bound to the adapter it ran against.**
`hireLeadAgent` reused `adapterEnvResult` for any adapter, so when a
hire failed and the user picked a *different* local adapter and retried,
the previous adapter's verdict satisfied the `requireEnvProbe` guard
while the hire posted the new adapter's config — hiring it unprobed. The
cache is now keyed on the adapter type plus the exact config posted to
the test endpoint, the config is built once and shared by probe and
hire, a failed probe clears the cache, and `clearAdapterEnvResult()`
(called on adapter change) stops the step displaying a stale verdict.
Cloud is unaffected — it hires with `requireEnvProbe: false`. Reported
by Greptile.
- **E2E specs re-pointed at the new flow.** Four specs still drove the
deleted wizard (`onboarding`, `conference-room-typing-intro`,
`planning-mode-visual-verification`, `nux-phase4-screenshots`) and
failed with `element(s) not found` on `"Name your company"` /
`input[placeholder="Acme Corp"]`. Rather than repeat the new drive
sequence four times, `tests/e2e/onboarding-flow.ts` adds one driver per
step (`startCloudOnboarding`, `completeCompanyStep`,
`completeAgentStep`, `completeTaskStep`, `completeCloudOnboarding`) and
the specs import it, so the next flow change touches a single file. Two
now-dead `**/test-environment` route stubs went with it — the cloud flow
hires with `requireEnvProbe: false`, so that probe never fires.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean.
- `npx vitest run` over the onboarding suites
(`OnboardingWizardVariant`, `AgentCapsule`, `onboarding-launch`,
`onboarding-goal`, `onboarding-route`, `onboarding-adapter-config`) — 33
tests pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — succeeds; the three.js chunk
splits out separately (522 kB raw / 133 kB gzip) rather than entering
the main bundle.
- Both flows driven end-to-end in the preview harness in `previewMock`
(no database writes), plus the cloud flow rendered in the real
authenticated app at `/onboarding` to confirm the mount swap.
- The four re-pointed e2e specs pass locally against the new flow.
- New `ui/src/hooks/useOnboardingFlow.test.tsx` — 4 cases pinning the
adapter-probe cache (switch-adapter retry, cold path, explicit clear,
and the cloud flow's `requireEnvProbe: false`). Verified non-vacuous:
the switch-adapter case fails against the pre-fix code.
- Rebased onto current `master`; `pnpm-lock.yaml` is deliberately
**not** committed — `.github/workflows/pr.yml` regenerates it when a
manifest changes and shares it with downstream jobs as the `pr-lockfile`
artifact.
## Risks
- **Deleting `OnboardingWizard.tsx` is the one change that alters
existing app behaviour.** The cloud flow is intended to be
behaviour-equivalent, and its entry points are covered by the updated
`OnboardingWizardVariant` test, but this is the area to review most
closely.
- **Conflict risk with open PRs that touch the old wizard**: #9900,
#9501, #8982 and #6636 all modify
`ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.tsx`, which this PR removes.
Whichever lands second will need its change re-applied to the new step
components. Flagging so ordering can be decided deliberately.
- **New dependencies**: `motion` and `three` (+ `@types/three`). `three`
is large, so it is lazily imported and code-split — it does not affect
the main bundle. Both are MIT.
- The **local flow is not reachable in the app** yet (harness/canary
only), so it carries no runtime risk today; wiring it up is a follow-up.
- The auth screens remain **presentational only** — they are not wired
to real auth, unchanged from before this PR.
- **Pre-existing, not introduced here:** `OnboardingWizardVariant`
renders outside `<Routes>` in `App.tsx`, so its `useParams()` never
resolves `:companyPrefix` and `/{prefix}/onboarding` opens the welcome
screen instead of jumping to the agent step. `master` has the identical
structure, so this PR faithfully ports existing behaviour; the working
"add an agent" entry is the launcher card behind the overlay, which is
what the screenshot spec drives. Worth a separate fix.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`) via Claude Code, with extended thinking
and tool use (repo search/edit, local test + build execution, and
browser-driven visual verification of the rendered flows). Portions of
the session also ran on `claude-opus-4-8` and `claude-fable-5`.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The agent detail page has a Dashboard tab. The Dashboard tab shows a
"Live Run" section for the agent's current heartbeat.
> - The "Live Run" section has two clickable pieces: the section heading
and the running row. Both pieces linked to the same run detail page.
> - Two controls that go to the same place waste a navigation affordance
and hide the task the agent runs.
> - This pull request splits the two destinations. The heading goes to
the run. The running row goes to the task.
> - The benefit is that a user reaches the run internals from the label
and the work item from the row, in one click each.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. The description follows
the enhancement issue template.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The "Live Run" section on the agent detail page, Dashboard tab (the
`LatestRunCard` component in `ui/src/pages/AgentDetail.tsx`).
**Current behavior**
The "Live Run" heading and the running row both link to the run detail
page (`/agents/:agentId/runs/:runId`). The row shows the run code and an
invocation-source chip. There is a separate "View details →" link that
also goes to the run detail page. A user cannot reach the task the run
works on from this section.
**Proposed behavior**
The heading becomes a link to the run detail page and appends the short
run code, shown as `Live Run · <run code>`. The redundant "View details
→" link is removed. The running row links to the task detail page when
the run's context snapshot resolves to a known issue, and the row then
shows the task status glyph, the task slug, and the task title. A pure
timer heartbeat with no resolvable task keeps the previous behavior: run
code plus source chip, linking to the run detail page.
**Reason and benefit**
The heading and the row now go to distinct, intuitive destinations. A
user reaches the run internals from the label and the work item from the
row, each in a single click. The fallback keeps heartbeats with no task
readable and avoids a blank or broken row.
## What Changed
- Made the "Live Run" / "Latest Run" heading a `Link` to the run detail
page and appended the short run code (`run.id.slice(0, 8)`) in a mono
span, formatted `Live Run · <run code>`. Kept the pulsing live dot.
- Removed the redundant "View details →" link.
- Changed the running row `Link` target to the task detail page
(`/issues/:identifier`) when a task resolves, falling back to the run
detail page otherwise.
- Resolved the task from the run context snapshot
(`contextSnapshot.issueId`, falling back to `contextSnapshot.taskId`)
against a `Map` of the agent's assigned issues threaded in from
`AgentOverview`.
- When a task resolves, replaced the run code and source chip in the row
with the task status glyph (`StatusGlyph`), the task slug, and the task
title. Kept the running spinner, the run status badge, and the
timestamp.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` → 3/3 gates clean.
- `pnpm --filter ui typecheck` → passes.
- `pnpm --filter ui exec vitest run
src/pages/AgentDetail.progress.test.ts
src/pages/AgentDetail.instructions.test.tsx` → 10/10 pass.
- Manual (needs a reviewer with a browser): open an agent detail page →
Dashboard tab.
- For a live issue-execution run: the heading reads `Live Run · <run
code>` and opens the run detail page; the row shows the task status
icon, slug, and title and opens the task detail page.
- For a pure timer heartbeat with no task: the row falls back to run
code + source chip and opens the run detail page. No blank row.
- Confirm both states in light and dark mode.
## Risks
Low risk. The change is presentational and scoped to one component. The
task lookup is defensive: it reads the context snapshot with a fallback
key and only renders the task row when the issue is present in the
already-loaded assigned-issue set, so an unknown or missing issue
degrades to the previous run-detail behavior rather than breaking.
## Model Used
- Provider: Anthropic (Claude).
- Model: claude-opus-4-8 (Opus 4.8).
- Context window: 200K.
- Reasoning mode: extended thinking, 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents can select company skills and synchronize them to adapter
runtimes
> - The skill sync API replaced the complete selection without an
explicit destructive choice
> - Company package import also replaced conflicting skills by default
> - These defaults could remove operator edits during setup and import
reruns
> - This pull request adds explicit assignment merge modes and safe
package conflict handling
> - The benefit is that reruns preserve operator work unless the caller
explicitly requests replacement
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
This change improves agent skill synchronization and company package
import.
**Subsystem affected**
This is a cross-cutting change across the shared contracts, server, CLI,
and UI.
**Current behavior**
Agent skill synchronization replaces the full desired skill set from a
modeless request. Package import replaces a conflicting skill when the
caller does not select a conflict mode.
**Proposed behavior**
Agent skill synchronization requires `add`, `remove`, or `replace`.
Package import skips conflicts by default. Each imported skill reports
whether it was created, renamed, replaced, or skipped.
**Reason and benefit**
Setup and import reruns must preserve operator edits by default.
Explicit destructive modes make data loss less likely and make each
outcome inspectable.
**Breaking changes**
Callers of the agent skill sync API must now send `mode`. Callers that
need the former behavior must send `replace`. Package import now uses
`skip` when `onConflict` is absent.
## What Changed
- Added required `add`, `remove`, and `replace` modes to the shared
agent skill sync contract.
- Added actionable `422` validation for missing or invalid modes.
- Updated first-party UI and CLI callers with explicit modes.
- Changed package skill conflict handling to use `skip` by default.
- Kept plugin-owned and built-in stock skill imports on explicit
`replace`.
- Added created, renamed, replaced, and skipped results to company
imports.
- Added regression coverage for merge modes and package conflict
outcomes.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test:run:serialized` (128 suites passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog test` (20 tests passed)
- Focused agent skill route, company skill service, portability, CLI,
and UI tests passed.
- GitHub CI passed build, typecheck, canary, all general and serialized
test shards, all browser shards, policy, security, and final
verification on commit `2cfbb3e4c5`.
- Greptile reviewed the latest commit at 5/5 with zero unresolved
threads.
## Risks
- This change intentionally rejects modeless agent skill sync requests.
- The safe package default can leave an existing skill unchanged where
the old default overwrote it.
- All first-party callers now select a mode. Regression tests cover each
outcome.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI `gpt-5.6-sol` through Codex. The runtime used agentic
reasoning, tool use, code execution, and repository editing. The runtime
did not expose the context window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps give agents governed access to external tools.
> - The Apps gallery lists Notion, but the server required manually
configured OAuth credentials.
> - Notion's hosted MCP server supports OAuth discovery and dynamic
client registration.
> - Notion also requires HTTPS or a loopback HTTP redirect URI.
> - This pull request adds a direct Notion MCP OAuth path with PKCE and
reusable dynamic clients.
> - It also adds the current Apps UI states for connect and
reauthorization.
> - The benefit is a secure Notion connection with no manual client
credential setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The Apps gallery, Apps connect route, OAuth token lifecycle, and managed
MCP gateway.
**Subsystem affected**
`server/`, `packages/shared/`, `scripts/`, and `ui/`.
**Current behavior**
The Notion gallery cards are disabled. The server uses the classic
Notion OAuth endpoints and requires operator-supplied client
credentials. It does not register an OAuth client from provider
metadata. Concurrent refreshes can also replay a rotating refresh token.
**Proposed behavior**
Enable the Notion Apps flow. Discover OAuth metadata from
`https://mcp.notion.com/mcp`. Register and reuse a public RFC 7591
client with PKCE. Require HTTPS or loopback HTTP callbacks. Serialize
refreshes, store each rotated refresh token before the new access token
can be used, and show a reconnect state for `invalid_grant`.
**Reason and benefit**
Operators can connect the built-in Notion MCP app without creating or
copying OAuth credentials. Paperclip keeps dynamic clients and rotating
tokens in the company secret store.
**Breaking changes**
None. Explicit environment client credentials still take priority.
Existing Slack and Linear OAuth endpoint hints remain unchanged. Other
OAuth apps remain disabled unless they are allowlisted.
**Additional context**
PR #10910 is a related, broader Connections v3 wizard replacement. This
PR is the focused current Apps flow. The MCP Tool Gateway and Connected
Apps items in `ROADMAP.md` cover this planned capability.
## What Changed
- Classify all 20 reviewed Notion MCP tools with provider-scoped read
and write defaults.
- Require approval for selected Notion mutations, including move,
duplicate, and convert actions that generic verb matching missed.
- Preserve company-scoped connection and catalog resolution for Notion
profiles and policies.
- Add RFC 7591 dynamic client registration with
`token_endpoint_auth_method=none` and mandatory PKCE.
- Store the dynamic client ID on the connection and store any returned
client secret in the company secret store.
- Reuse the registered client for later connects and keep explicit
environment credentials as the first choice.
- Discover protected-resource and authorization-server metadata from the
Notion MCP endpoint.
- Add `redirectConstraints: "https-or-loopback-http"` to the generated
Notion app definition and shared contract.
- Reject non-loopback plain HTTP callbacks before network access with a
TLS setup error.
- Serialize client registration and token refresh operations within the
server process.
- Store a rotated refresh token before publishing the refreshed access
token.
- Treat `invalid_grant` as terminal and move the connection to a clear
reauthorization state.
- Add focused coverage for registration reuse, callback constraints,
refresh rotation, and terminal grants.
- Enable the Notion Apps route and add connect, redirect, success,
error, and reconnect UI states.
- Keep non-allowlisted OAuth apps blocked and cover the UI policy with
regression tests.
## Verification
- The focused Notion policy integration test passed with embedded
PostgreSQL.
- The focused 20-tool classification test passed.
- The server typecheck passed on the governance head.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the rebased head.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed after the
security follow-up.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
-t \u0027DCR|refresh tokens|invalid_grant|abandoned lease\u0027` passed
10 focused security tests.
- `pnpm build` passed on the rebased head.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts
-t 'OAuth|oauth'` passed 14 tests.
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts`
passed 5 tests.
- The complete server group passed 3,686 tests with 4 skipped.
- The complete UI group passed 3,656 tests.
- The full local runner found one environment-only CLI failure because
this agent runtime injects static AWS credentials into a test that
expects `AWS_PROFILE` only. `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u
AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest run
cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts` passed all 8 tests.
- The prior UI verification passed 55 focused tests, `pnpm
check:token-gates`, the Storybook build, and review of six 1440 x 1000
screenshots.
- OAuth request sequence: protected-resource metadata `GET
https://mcp.notion.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource/mcp`;
authorization metadata `GET
https://mcp.notion.com/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server`; dynamic
registration `POST https://mcp.notion.com/register`; authorization `GET
https://mcp.notion.com/authorize`; token exchange and refresh `POST
https://mcp.notion.com/token`; MCP traffic `POST
https://mcp.notion.com/mcp`.
- The live metadata and registration probe confirmed that Notion accepts
HTTPS and loopback HTTP redirects. It rejects a plain HTTP private
hostname.
- A later QA task owns the full browser consent and managed gateway
tool-list dry run against a configured HTTPS deployment.
## Risks
- Notion can add tools. Unrecognized names use the generic classifier,
and new or changed risky tools stay quarantined after connection
activation.
- A deployment that uses a private non-loopback hostname must configure
HTTPS before it can connect Notion.
- Dynamic registration creates a provider-side client. Paperclip reuses
it because registration does not provide a standard delete operation.
- Refresh coordination uses a database CAS lease across service
instances. An unclean crash leaves an uncertain lease and requires
reconnect instead of risking refresh-token replay.
- The current Apps surface overlaps with PR #10910. Merge order can
require a small conflict resolution if that PR lands first.
> 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 on a GPT-5 runtime. The exact deployment ID and context
window are not exposed. The runtime used reasoning, repository tools,
code execution, and network tools.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task view shows a threaded conversation between the user and the
agent, with agent replies rendered as bubbles that carry a "✓ Worked · N
tools" summary line.
> - The conference-room chat already offers per-message copy and
thumbs-up / thumbs-down feedback, but the redesigned task thread dropped
these controls from the agent bubble footer.
> - Users lose a quick way to copy an agent reply or send feedback on
it, and the redesign silently ignored the feedback-vote props it was
already given.
> - This pull request prepends a copy · thumbs-up · thumbs-down cluster
to the bubble summary line and wires the existing feedback-vote props
through.
> - The benefit is a consistent feedback surface across both chat views,
with no new API.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change; the underlying issue is
described inline below following the feature template
(`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml`).
#### Problem or motivation
The redesigned task thread renders each agent reply with a "✓ Worked · N
tools · <timestamp>" summary line, but it dropped the copy and thumbs-up
/ thumbs-down controls that the conference-room chat still shows. Users
can no longer copy an agent reply or vote feedback from the task thread.
The redesign component already received `feedbackVotes` and `onVote`
props but ignored them.
#### Proposed solution
Prepend a copy · 👍 · 👎 cluster to the summary line, leading the
always-visible timestamp, reusing the shared `IssueChatFeedbackButtons`
so both chat views speak the same feedback language. Anchor the cluster
to the turn's summary row (a sibling of the expandable tool-history
fold) so it stays on the summary line whether the tool history is
collapsed or expanded.
#### Alternatives considered
Placing the cluster inside the expandable fold — rejected because
expanding the tool history then re-centered the actions to the middle of
the tall fold.
#### Roadmap alignment
UI polish to the task thread; no core-roadmap overlap.
## What Changed
- Add `TaskChatBubbleActions`: a copy · thumbs-up · thumbs-down cluster
built on the shared `IssueChatFeedbackButtons`.
- Render the cluster on the agent bubble's "✓ Worked · …" summary line,
leading the timestamp; runless agent replies get the same cluster with
the timestamp trailing. Human and system bubbles are unchanged.
- Add a `leading` slot to `TaskChatTurn` so the actions sit on the
summary row, a sibling of the tool-history fold, and stay anchored when
the fold expands.
- Wire the redesign to the `feedbackVotes` / `onVote` props it already
received.
- Add a demo binding in the `TaskChatLab` dev harness.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — 3/3 gates CLEAN.
- `pnpm typecheck` — clean across all packages.
- `cd ui && pnpm vitest run
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatTurn.test.tsx` — 31/31 pass.
- Manual: open a task thread, confirm the copy / 👍 / 👎 cluster shows on
the agent bubble summary line before the timestamp, copy works, votes
toggle, and the cluster stays on the summary line when the tool history
is expanded.
Visual change: snapshot baselines are intentionally not updated, per the
`doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` entry "Per-change snapshot verification
demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)".
## Risks
Low risk. UI-only change scoped to the redesigned task-chat bubble
footer. It reuses an existing shared feedback component and existing
vote props; no API, schema, or server change. Human and system bubbles
are untouched.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-4-8`, extended
thinking enabled, 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks and issues carry a `priority` field that renders across many
product surfaces: the detail header, the Triage properties panel, Kanban
and thread cards, the New Task composer, list Sort/Group/Filter menus,
search filters, and the dashboard chart.
> - Product feedback found the priority level adds visual noise and
decision cost without clear value in day-to-day task flow.
> - We want to remove priority from the interface, but keep the data
model, API, validation, and search DSL fully intact so the choice is
reversible with no migration.
> - This pull request hides every priority indicator and control behind
one compile-time flag, `SHOW_TASK_PRIORITY_UI`, set to `false`.
> - The benefit is a calmer, simpler UI now, with a single-boolean
revive path and zero data loss.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
<!-- No public GitHub issue exists. Describing in-PR per the feature
template. -->
**Subsystem affected**
The web UI (`ui/src`): issue detail, properties panel, Kanban/thread
cards, New Task dialog, issues list Sort/Group/Filter menus, search
filter bar/sheet, dashboard charts, and the design-guide showcase.
**Problem or motivation**
The task/issue priority level appears across many surfaces and adds
visual clutter and decision overhead without pulling its weight in
normal task flow. We want it gone from the interface without discarding
the underlying data or breaking anything that depends on it.
**Proposed solution**
Add a single compile-time UI flag, `SHOW_TASK_PRIORITY_UI` (default
`false`), and gate every priority indicator and control behind it. Leave
the data model, API params, Zod validation (including the `"medium"`
default), and the search filter DSL untouched. Reviving priority is a
one-line flip of the flag back to `true`.
**Alternatives considered**
Deleting the priority code and schema outright. Rejected: it is
irreversible, needs a data migration, and throws away a field the API
and search still support. A gated flag keeps the change reversible and
low risk.
**Roadmap alignment**
UI simplification. This is a presentation-only change; it does not alter
core agent or data behavior.
## What Changed
- Added `ui/src/lib/ui-flags.ts` exporting `SHOW_TASK_PRIORITY_UI:
boolean = false` (typed `boolean` so gated branches are not flagged as
dead code).
- Gated the priority row in the Triage properties panel and the editable
priority control in the issue detail header (plus its skeleton seed).
- Gated the per-card priority icon in `KanbanBoard` and in
`IssueThreadInteractionCard`.
- Hid the priority chip and the mobile "more" menu priority section in
the New Task dialog. The submit path still sends the `"medium"` default.
- Removed the Priority options from the issues list Sort and Group-by
menus; the comparator and grouping logic stay dormant.
- Hid the Priority sections in the issue filters popover and in the
search filter bar and sheet. The `priority:` search DSL and filter state
stay functional at the data layer.
- Suppressed active-filter priority pills for consistency.
- Gated the "Tasks by Priority" dashboard chart and the design-guide
priority showcase subsection.
- Left activity-feed "changed priority" history text intact as a
historical record.
- Updated call-site tests to assert priority UI is absent while the flag
is off, added focused hidden-surface tests, and added a test that proves
creating a task still persists `priority: "medium"`.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — all 3 gates clean.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run` on the touched
surfaces (IssueProperties, IssueFiltersPopover, IssuesList,
NewIssueDialog, IssueDetail, PriorityIcon and its interaction test) —
all green under `TZ=UTC`.
- Manual: with the flag off, priority does not appear in the detail
header, Triage panel, New Task composer, Sort/Group/Filter menus, or the
dashboard chart. Creating a task still persists `priority: "medium"`,
and the `priority:` search token still filters at the data layer.
## Risks
Low risk. The change is presentation-only and additive: no data model,
API, validation, or search-DSL changes. The priority code paths remain
compiled and tested; flipping `SHOW_TASK_PRIORITY_UI` to `true` restores
the full UI. Visual snapshot baselines are intentionally not updated per
the `doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` entry "Per-change snapshot
verification demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)".
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-4-8`, extended
thinking enabled, with tool use / code execution in an agentic coding
harness.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip can run as a self-hosted app or as a Cloud-managed tenant.
> - These modes need different sign-out sequences because Cloud owns
three sessions.
> - Several visible controls implemented sign-out separately and could
choose different paths.
> - This pull request adds one Cloud-aware sign-out action and moves
every visible control to it.
> - The benefit is one safe sign-out path in Cloud and unchanged local
sign-out in self-hosted deployments.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #2073. That older PR adds a separate company-settings sign-out
surface. This change centralizes the existing account, company, and
instance-settings surfaces and preserves the self-hosted behavior
described there.
**What happened?**
Visible sign-out controls used separate implementations. A Cloud-managed
control could call the app-local sign-out endpoint and open the local
auth page. That path did not enter the Cloud-owned logout sequence for
the tenant, Cloud, and identity sessions.
**Expected behavior**
Every visible sign-out control must use one action. Cloud-managed
instances must navigate the top-level window to the same-origin
`/cloud/logout` route without a local sign-out call first. Authenticated
self-hosted instances must keep the local sign-out API and cache
invalidation behavior.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a Cloud-managed tenant.
2. Use the account menu, company menu, or instance-settings sign-out
control.
3. Observe that independently implemented controls can enter different
sign-out paths.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem reproduces at `656ecfa585b31938e2685ffab3db22e794474803`.
**Deployment mode**
Cloud-managed tenant built from source. The regression tests also cover
authenticated self-hosted mode.
## What Changed
- Added `useSignOut` as the shared Cloud-aware sign-out action.
- Navigated Cloud-managed sessions to `/cloud/logout` exactly once
without calling local auth first.
- Preserved local API sign-out and cache invalidation for authenticated
self-hosted sessions.
- Migrated the account menu, company menu, and instance general settings
to the shared action.
- Added focused tests for mode selection, menu closure, pending state,
failure state, and settings behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/hooks/useSignOut.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarAccountMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/InstanceGeneralSettings.test.tsx` — 26 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` — passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change centralizes existing behavior and adds no schema,
API, telemetry, or style-token changes.
- Cloud mode depends on the existing health decision. Tests pin both
mode branches.
- The change does not alter Fetch Metadata, CSRF, cookie, prefetch, or
return-URL protections owned by the Cloud logout route.
> 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. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
ID or context-window size. The agent used high-reasoning mode, shell
tools, and API tools.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The task chat thread renders issue comments, system notices, and run
transcripts
> - The server routes comment payloads through the run-secret redaction
walker before it sends them
> - The walker rebuilds each object with `Object.entries`, and this
collapses `Date` instances to `{}`
> - The chat renderer then calls `.toISOString()` on an invalid date and
throws, and the thread falls back to the error banner
> - This pull request keeps `Date` instances intact in redacted
responses and makes the renderer safe against bad timestamps
> - The benefit is that task threads with system notices render
correctly again
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened**
Task threads that contain a system notice showed the banner "Chat
renderer hit an internal state error." in place of the conversation.
This occurred on many tasks.
**Expected behavior**
The thread renders all comments and system notices with correct
timestamps.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task that has at least one system notice comment (for example
a "Workspace ready" notice).
2. `GET /api/issues/{id}/comments` returns `createdAt: {}` for every
comment because the secret-redaction walker collapses `Date` objects.
3. The system-notice row calls `new Date({}).toISOString()`. This throws
`RangeError: Invalid time value` and trips the thread error boundary.
**Version / deployment**
Regression from #9934 (`e43f187ca`). It applies to all deployments that
include that commit.
## What Changed
- `server/src/services/run-secret-redaction.ts`:
`redactRegisteredSecretValues` now returns `Date` instances as-is. Dates
hold no redactable text, and the `Object.entries` rebuild turned them
into `{}`.
- `ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.tsx`: the system-notice row formats
its timestamp with a new `toValidIsoString` helper. A value that does
not parse as a date now degrades to "no timestamp" instead of a render
crash.
- Regression tests at three layers:
- Walker unit tests: `Date` values survive with and without registered
secret values.
- Route test: `GET /issues/:id/comments` serializes `createdAt` /
`updatedAt` as ISO strings.
- Render test: a system notice with a malformed `createdAt` renders
without the error boundary.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run --root server
src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts` — 5 passed.
- `npx vitest run --root server
src/__tests__/issue-comment-redaction.test.ts` — 4 passed (embedded
Postgres route test).
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/components/IssueChatThreadSystemNotice.test.tsx
src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts` — 121 passed.
- Each new test was run against the unfixed code and failed there, which
confirms it guards the regression.
- A local sweep rendered 47 real issue threads through
`IssueChatThread`: 7 tripped the boundary before the fix, 0 after.
## Risks
- Low risk. The server change only preserves `Date` objects that the
walker destroyed before. String redaction behavior does not change, and
the registry-key stripping does not change.
- The UI change only affects the timestamp of system-notice rows and
omits it when the value is invalid.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), Anthropic. Agentic coding session
with tool use (file edits, shell, Vitest). No extended-context or
special 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task detail view shows the conversation as chat bubbles. The
requester's own messages sit in a solid accent-colored bubble.
> - The bubble container sets `text-white`, but the message body renders
through `MarkdownBody`. Tailwind prose tokens (`--tw-prose-body`) win
over the inherited container color.
> - `prose-invert` only lightens the prose text in dark mode. In light
mode the prose body stayed its default dark color, so the text read as
near-black on the blue bubble and was hard to read.
> - This pull request maps the human bubble's prose tokens to the
inherited text color in both themes.
> - The benefit is that the requester's chat text is readable
white-on-blue in light mode, and dark mode stays exactly as it was.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
<!-- No public GitHub issue exists; described in-PR per the bug report
template. -->
**What happened?**
In light mode, the text inside the user's own chat bubbles in the task
detail view rendered as dark (near-black) on the solid blue accent
background. This made the requester's messages hard to read.
**Expected behavior**
The text inside the user's accent-colored chat bubbles should be white
in light mode, matching the bubble's `text-white` intent. Dark mode
already rendered correctly and should not change.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a chat-style task detail view in light mode.
2. Post a message as the requester (human) so it renders in the solid
blue accent bubble.
3. Observe the body text renders dark on blue instead of white.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduces on `master` (branched from `814cb3367`).
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core UI bug).
## What Changed
- Add the existing `paperclip-markdown-on-accent` class to the
human-branch `MarkdownBody` in `TaskChatBubble.tsx`. This class (already
used by `IssueChatThread` for the same accent bubble) maps prose
body/heading tokens to `currentColor`, so the text follows the bubble's
`text-white` in both themes.
- Apply the same class to the human-branch `MarkdownBody` in
`TaskChatDescriptionBubble.tsx` (the description-as-first-bubble
surface) for consistency.
- Add unit tests covering that the human accent bubble carries the
on-accent class and the agent/neutral bubbles do not.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` → 3/3 CLEAN.
- `pnpm --filter ./ui vitest run
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatBubble.test.tsx` → 9/9 passing.
- Manual: in light mode, the requester's chat bubble text renders white
on blue; agent/neutral bubbles unchanged; dark mode unchanged.
This is a visual change. Snapshot baselines are intentionally not
updated, per `doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` → "Per-change snapshot
verification demoted to dormant (Jul 13 2026)".
## Risks
Low risk. The change is scoped to the human-branch `MarkdownBody`
className on two chat-bubble components and only remaps prose color
tokens to the inherited text color. Agent and neutral bubbles are
untouched, and dark mode behavior is unchanged.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-4-8`, ~200K context
window, extended thinking mode, with tool use / code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issues use `in_review` to request a final decision from an
authorized writer
> - The server rejected an assignee agent that tried to close its own
review, even when the issue had no independent-review rule
> - This rejection stopped the default agent workflow and did not
represent the configured execution-stage rules
> - Paperclip needs an open default and explicit issue-level constraints
for teams that require an independent or human verdict
> - This pull request removes the unconditional rejection and adds
`anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only` review policies
> - The benefit is a working default path with opt-in, authenticated
verdict controls
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #10635, #4429, and #10671.
The related public work covers execution-stage independence,
self-approval fallback behavior, and durable review paths. This change
is distinct. It controls who can resolve an issue review verdict. It
keeps configured execution stages active.
## What Changed
- Added a nullable `review_policy` issue column. Null has the same
meaning as `anyone`. The migration does not backfill existing issues.
- Added shared create, update, response, and compact issue contracts for
`anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`.
- Removed the unconditional agent self-approval rejection for
`in_review` issues.
- Added one reusable verdict-actor check for terminal status changes and
pending interaction accept or reject actions.
- Used the authenticated principal type for `human_only`. Agent keys and
run tokens remain agent principals.
- Used the latest transition into `in_review` to identify the requester
for `not_creator`.
- Added actionable 403 responses that name the policy, the allowed
actor, and the next step.
- Kept the configured execution-stage transition and signoff behavior.
- Added focused contract, helper, status-route, interaction-route, and
execution-stage regression tests.
- Updated the implementation specification for the new issue field.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-review-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-stalled-review-decision-routes.test.ts
--reporter=dot` passed: 42 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passed, including migration
numbering and safety checks.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps` passed across server, CLI, plugin
SDK/examples, plugin wiki, and UI.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed.
- SecurityEngineer review approved the authenticated-principal checks
and accepted policy-relaxation tradeoff with no required changes.
- Greptile reviewed the latest head at 5/5 with zero inline comments or
follow-ups.
- The latest-head GitHub rollup passed build, typecheck,
server/workspace tests, serialized suites, canary, e2e, and external
security checks.
## Risks
- The migration adds one nullable text column. It has no default and no
backfill.
- `not_creator` reads the latest recorded transition into `in_review`.
It denies the verdict when it cannot identify the requester.
- Agents can change or relax `reviewPolicy` when they have issue write
access. This is intentional for this issue-level control.
- Null and `anyone` do not add a database query to the verdict path.
- Configured execution-stage checks still run after the issue-level
policy check.
> This work aligns with the completed "Agent Reviews and Approvals" and
"Enforced Outcomes" roadmap items. It does not add a new roadmap
capability.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window size
are not exposed to the agent. The run used reasoning, repository tools,
code execution, and GitHub CLI access.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents ask humans for decisions through interaction blocks: plan
confirmations, structured questions, suggested tasks, and checkbox
prompts
> - Each agent writes these decision prompts in its own style, so
operators can get long or unclear text at the exact moment they must
decide
> - There is no instance-level control that makes agents use a
controlled language for these decision points only
> - This pull request adds an experimental setting that tells agents to
write all user-interaction content in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical
English, with the context the user needs and the effect of each choice
> - The benefit is faster, clearer human decisions, with agent thinking
and normal responses unchanged
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #10410 (optional `/simplified-english` skill in the skills catalog;
this PR adds the instance-level toggle for interactions).
**Problem or motivation**
Agent-posted user interactions (plan confirmations, structured
questions, suggested-task proposals, checkbox prompts) are written in
each agent's default style. Operators who want fast, unambiguous
decisions have no way to ask agents to use a controlled language for
exactly those decision points.
**Proposed solution**
Add an experimental instance setting,
`enableSimplifiedEnglishInteractions` ("Simplified English
Interactions"). When it is on, the server sets
`simplifiedEnglishInteractions: true` in the heartbeat wake payload. The
shared wake-prompt renderer, used by every adapter, then emits a
directive: write all user-interaction content in ASD-STE100 Simplified
Technical English, state what information the user needs to decide, and
state what happens for each choice. The directive applies to interaction
content only. Thinking, comments, documents, and other responses keep
their usual style.
**Alternatives considered**
Per-agent instructions work today, but someone must maintain them on
every agent. An instance-level toggle applies uniformly and turns off in
one place. Server-side rewriting of interaction payloads was rejected:
post-hoc translation is lossy and cannot add the decision context that
only the agent has.
**Roadmap alignment**
Extends the experimental settings surface with another opt-in
agent-behavior refinement, consistent with existing prompt-side flags.
## What Changed
- Added `enableSimplifiedEnglishInteractions` to the experimental
instance-settings zod schema, mirror type, and feature catalog (default
off, tier preference) in `packages/shared`.
- Server `instance-settings.ts` normalizes the flag on both read
branches; `heartbeat.ts` reads it once and passes
`simplifiedEnglishInteractions` into `buildPaperclipWakePayload`.
- Shared adapter renderer
(`packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.ts`): added the field to
`PaperclipWakePayload`, normalization, and an `- interaction language
(experimental): ...` directive emitted in both fresh and resume prompt
lanes, so one injection point covers all adapters.
- UI: new experimental settings card "Simplified English Interactions"
in `ui/src/pages/InstanceExperimentalSettings.tsx`, in alphabetical card
order; fixtures updated.
- Tests: renderer coverage for flag on/off in both lanes, plus
schema/catalog/UI fixture updates.
## Verification
- From the repo root: `node_modules/.bin/vitest run
packages/adapter-utils` (88/88), `packages/shared` validators (25/25),
server instance-settings + heartbeat suites (47/47 and 70/70 consumer
tests), `ui` settings tests (32/32).
- Typecheck is clean in all four touched packages.
- Manual check: turn the flag on in Settings → Experimental, wake an
agent, and confirm the wake prompt contains the interaction-language
directive; turn it off and confirm the directive is absent.
## Risks
- Low risk: the flag defaults to off, and the only behavior change is
one extra directive line in the wake prompt when an operator turns it
on.
- The directive is advisory to the agent; models can still deviate from
STE. No data or API shape changes; no migration.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking, agentic tool use via Claude Agent SDK.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane people use to manage AI-agent
companies.
> - Agents can encounter credentials during work.
> - Directly creating live secrets or bindings would bypass human
governance.
> - Proposal records must remain inert and separate from live secret
resolution until an authorized human approves them.
> - Approval must reuse the existing secret-create and protected
agent-config write paths.
> - This pull request adds the propose, review, approve, and reject
lifecycle.
> - The benefit is that agents can safely hand credentials into
Paperclip without exposing plaintext or gaining authority to activate
them.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Follow-on to #9921, which established run-bound agent secret access.
**Problem / motivation:**
Agents can receive credentials during work. There is no governed way for
them to propose a credential or binding without exposing plaintext in
work artifacts or immediately creating live access.
**Proposed solution:**
Store agent-authored proposals outside live secret tables. Encrypt each
proposed value and register exact-value redaction when Paperclip
receives it. Require an authorized human to approve or reject each
proposal. Approval executes through the normal write paths as the human
approver. Binding proposals can target only the proposer or its downward
reporting chain under the restrictive V1 policy.
**Alternatives considered:**
We rejected live secrets with a `proposed` status. That design would put
untrusted rows in resolver, list, and sync paths. It would also allow
uniqueness squatting. We rejected direct agent binding writes because a
binding is an agent-config write and must keep the existing human
permission gate.
**Roadmap alignment:**
This change extends the run-bound agent secret-access foundation in
#9921 with a governed proposal workflow.
## Security Verdict
Q0 SecEng verdict: **PASS-with-required-changes**. The review accepted
the separate proposal-table design and required the implementation to:
- fail closed unless both encryption and exact-value run redaction
registration succeed;
- scrub ciphertext idempotently on reject, withdraw, and expiry, with
audit-visible state;
- treat agent justification as hostile input and foreground action,
target, provenance, and approver permissions;
- snapshot and re-check the target agent plus reports-to chain at
approval to prevent org-chart laundering;
- make cascade approval atomic and fail closed if either secret creation
or binding authorization fails;
- deny low-trust, `skill_test`, `task_bridge`, and non-run-bound sources
consistently; and
- execute approval through the normal human secret/config write paths,
including protected-change gates.
Those requirements are implemented and covered by focused service,
route, and UI tests. Residual V1 risk remains the accepted 14-day
encrypted retention window. Proposal-time redaction also cannot clean a
value that leaked before the propose call.
## What Changed
- Added `company_secret_proposals`, migration `0207`, shared proposal
contracts, and a state-machine service for create, approve, reject,
withdraw, cascade, expiry, and ciphertext scrubbing.
- Added run-bound agent proposal routes and board review routes. The
routes derive provenance from authentication and enforce source
restrictions, company isolation, chain-of-command checks,
approval-as-approver, wake-on-resolution, and dual audit trails.
- Added durable per-run exact-value redaction registration so proposal
values remain redacted on later read surfaces.
- Added the Secrets **Proposals** tab and agent configuration **Proposed
access** rows. The UI shows fingerprint and length only. It also frames
agent justification as untrusted input, runs permission preflight,
supports approve and reject actions, and confirms cascades.
- Updated OpenAPI, agent skill guidance, API reference documentation,
and focused server and UI regression coverage.
- Rebased the branch onto current `master` and renumbered the proposal
migration after `0206`.
## QA Acceptance Results
Q5 QA verdict: **PASS — 9/9 acceptance criteria met**, with one Minor
non-blocking follow-up.
- **AC1:** proposed values never echo, never appear in live
lists/resolvers, and expose only fingerprint + length to board
reviewers.
- **AC2:** restrictive `self_and_reports` matrix passes: self/downward
allowed; upward/lateral denied.
- **AC3:** secret approval uses the normal create path, honors rename
overrides, records proposer/approver provenance, and scrubs ciphertext.
- **AC4:** approved bindings materialize and resolve through the target
agent's runtime list/fetch routes.
- **AC5:** pending-secret bindings require cascade; cascade succeeds
atomically and permission failures leave nothing applied.
- **AC6:** reject, withdraw, dependent rejection, and expiry paths scrub
ciphertext and preserve reasons/audit state.
- **AC7:** token/source and approver denial matrix passes through live
checks plus focused route tests.
- **AC8:** proposal lifecycle events and reused
`secret.created`/config-write events form the required dual audit trail;
origin-issue notification and wake are queued.
- **AC9:** both review surfaces render and execute correctly; UI
approval materializes the binding.
QA also confirmed zero plaintext occurrences for all exercised proposal
values in server logs. The single finding is that the company-level
`bindingTargetPolicy` toggle is not wired yet. V1 is hardcoded to the
restrictive `self_and_reports` policy. The matrix is correct and the
follow-up is tracked separately, so QA classified it as non-blocking.
## Verification
- Focused server proposal and redaction suite: 83 tests pass.
- Focused proposal review UI suite: 54 tests pass.
- Embedded-Postgres migration reapply test: 1 test passes with the
documented 30-second timeout.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passes, including migration
numbering and safety checks.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes with all gates clean.
- Q5 exercised the complete propose, review, approve, bind, and
runtime-resolve flow over real HTTP, JWT, and database paths. It
verified 9/9 acceptance criteria.
## Risks
- Proposal ciphertext is retained encrypted for up to 14 days while
pending. Terminal-state and expiry scrub paths reduce but do not remove
server-compromise risk during that window.
- The V1 target policy is restrictive but not yet company-configurable.
A separate follow-up owns that change.
- A new migration can require another renumber if another migration
lands before maintainers merge this pull request.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex coding agent. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed. The agent used reasoning,
repository editing, terminal execution, Paperclip API, and GitHub CLI
capabilities. Q3 UI work also records Claude Opus 4.8 assistance in its
commit trailers.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Chat-style tasks show an agent's plan in a dedicated "Plan" pane,
and a plan confirmation lets the user accept or request changes to that
plan
> - When an agent asked for confirmation but never actually published
the plan document (it only wrote the plan in a comment or a question),
the Plan pane rendered empty, and the confirmation call-to-action that
used to sit pinned at the bottom of the pane had disappeared
> - A user asked to confirm a plan they cannot see, with no visible CTA,
is stuck — the feature silently fails
> - This pull request closes the gap on both sides: it prevents plan
confirmations that don't point at a real, latest plan revision, it
teaches agents to publish the plan document before confirming, and it
restores the sticky confirmation action bar and an explanatory empty
state so the pane never goes silently blank
> - The benefit is that when a plan is expected, it reliably shows up in
the right pane with reachable accept/revise actions
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
<!-- No public GitHub issue exists; describing in-PR per the bug
template. -->
**Bug report**
- **What happened:** A task in planning mode could present a plan
confirmation while the Plan pane stayed empty (no plan document
rendered), and the plan-card confirmation CTAs that were previously
pinned to the bottom of the Plan pane no longer appeared.
- **Expected behavior:** When a plan is expected, the plan document
appears in the Plan pane; when a plan is genuinely missing, the pane
explains why rather than showing nothing; and the accept/request-changes
CTAs stay visible and reachable while the plan scrolls.
- **Steps to reproduce:** Put a task in planning mode with the
chat-style task view enabled, have an agent create a plan confirmation
without first publishing the `plan` document, and open the Plan tab —
the pane is blank and the confirmation actions are missing.
- **Deployment mode:** Local dev and self-hosted; UI + server.
Related PR (not a duplicate): #9609 "Pin pending confirmations by
composer" pins confirmations in a different surface (the composer); this
PR restores the Plans-pane action bar and the server/agent guarantees
behind it.
## What Changed
- **Server:** Reject a `request_confirmation` whose target is a plan
document unless a plan document exists and the target points at its
*latest* revision, so a confirmation can never reference a plan the pane
cannot render (`readPlanTarget` is now exported for reuse).
- **Agent instructions:** The CEO and default agent instruction bundles
now spell out a plan-publish contract — publish the `plan` document,
re-`GET` it and capture `latestRevisionId`, then create the confirmation
targeting that revision; never present a plan only in a thread comment
or via `ask_user_questions`.
- **UI — sticky CTAs:** Restore the plan confirmation action bar pinned
to the bottom of the Plans tab so accept/revise stay reachable while the
plan scrolls.
- **UI — diagnostics:** Keep the Plan tab visible whenever an issue is
in planning mode (even before a plan document exists) and show an empty
state explaining why the pane is empty instead of rendering nothing.
- **UI — annotations:** Add a `panelPlacement="inline"` mode so the
plan-document annotation panel renders in document flow instead of as a
floating side panel when hosted in the narrow task properties pane.
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` → 3/3 CLEAN
- `pnpm typecheck` → clean (all packages)
- UI: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run
src/components/issue-properties/IssuePlanConfirmationActionBar.test.tsx
src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx` → 69 passed
- Server: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/agent-skills-routes.test.ts` → 60 passed
- Manual: with a planning-mode task, the Plan tab stays visible, shows
the plan document (or a diagnostic empty state), and the confirmation
CTAs stay pinned at the bottom.
Visual note: snapshot baselines are intentionally not updated — per
`doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md` "Per-change snapshot verification demoted
to dormant (Jul 13 2026)". The `storybook-visual` label is intentionally
not added.
## Risks
Low-to-moderate. The server change adds a validation gate on
plan-document confirmations: an interaction that targets a stale or
nonexistent plan revision is now rejected with a 422 instead of being
created. This is the intended guarantee, but any caller that relied on
creating such confirmations will now need to publish the plan document
first (which the updated agent instructions cover). UI changes are
additive to the Plans tab and gated by the existing chat-style-task
experimental flag.
## Model Used
Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic), model id `claude-opus-4-8`, extended
thinking enabled, with tool use (file editing, shell, test 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Constantine
Dirk
Devin Foley
scotttong
Dotta
Nicky Leach
Hardik Dholariya
Evyatar Bluzer
Tonio