## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issue detail page shows a live agent run and accepts follow-up
instructions.
> - A follow-up must stay in a stable queue until the user sends,
reorders, or removes it.
> - Native runners can receive a steering event in the active run.
> - Legacy runners must interrupt the active run and start a follow-up
run.
> - The current UI moved comments between the queue and the transcript
and could show duplicate text or ambiguous chronology.
> - This pull request makes the queue projection durable, keeps each
message in one clear place, and labels when queued input was actually
steered or delivered.
> - The benefit is predictable steering with stable ordering, no
duplicate messages, and visible causal timing.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #11374.
Refs #12591.
**What happened?**
During an active run, a new follow-up could first appear as a transcript
bubble and then move into the steering queue. After a steer or remove
action, it could appear again. Progress text could also repeat the final
response text. Once consumed, a queued bubble displayed only its
original submission time even though it moved to its later causal slot,
and a native run split by steering looked like two unrelated runs.
**Expected behavior**
An active-run follow-up must appear in the queue immediately. A native
steer must move it once into the active run. A legacy interrupt must
move it once into the follow-up run. A removed item must stay removed.
Progress text that is identical to the final response must appear once.
Consumed follow-ups must show both queue and steer/delivery times, and
post-steer native segments must identify themselves as continuations of
the same run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a long-running task.
2. Send two or more follow-up messages while the agent is active.
3. Reorder the messages and remove one message.
4. Send the first queued message as steering.
5. Observe the queue and transcript during and after both runs.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The problem reproduced on commit `da1e40302`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development with the embedded database.
## What Changed
- Project queued comments into the steering well for native and legacy
live runners.
- Send native steering to the active run and use interrupt-and-follow-up
for legacy runners.
- Keep optimistic queue order stable across refreshes and roll back
failed actions.
- Remove discarded comments from the transcript cache and keep them
removed when the queue becomes empty.
- Collapse only the final progress occurrence matching the durable
response, including across steered transcript segments.
- Show `Queued … · Steered …` for same-run input and `Queued … ·
Delivered …` for successor-run input at their causal positions.
- Label settled and live post-steer segments `Continued after steering`
and time them from the steer boundary.
- Add regression tests for queue display, steering, fallback interrupt,
reorder, remove, rollback, duplicate text, causal timestamps, and
live/settled continuation headers.
## Verification
- Ran the final focused steering/chronology UI suite with 233 passing
tests.
- Ran the activity-service regression suite with 5 passing tests.
- Ran the broader queue-focused UI suite with 298 passing tests before
the final chronology refinement.
- Ran `pnpm -r typecheck` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm build` successfully.
- Ran `pnpm check:token-gates` successfully.
- Tested native steering in a real browser with a 90-second baseline
wait and a three-second steering correction.
- Confirmed that the old final response did not appear before the
steered response.
- Tested three queued messages in a real browser.
- Confirmed that reorder changed delivery order and that the removed
message was never sent or shown again.
- Tested a legacy runner in a real browser.
- Confirmed that it used the interrupt fallback and showed the follow-up
once.
- Reloaded a saved mixed-steer/successor-run thread and confirmed the
causal timestamps and continuation header render in the correct
positions.
- The complete macOS suite reaches five unrelated platform assertions in
workspace-runtime tests. Two compare `/var` with `/private/var`. Three
require Linux `/proc` listener data. GitHub Actions provides the
authoritative Linux run.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change is limited to issue-chat queue projection and
transcript presentation.
- The server run-history API adds only a read-only `contextIssueId`
projection; the database schema does not change.
- Optimistic actions restore the prior UI state when a request fails.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, extended reasoning, browser automation, shell
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.
> - The task page is the main place where people guide and review agent
work.
> - Native runner events already project into the existing task chat on
the lower stack.
> - The larger task workspace must support those events without breaking
direct adapters.
> - Legacy questions, final replies, empty transcripts, and classic
controls must keep their behavior.
> - This pull request completes the provider-neutral task workspace
experience.
> - The benefit is one coherent task surface for native and direct
execution paths.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #12639.
Refs #12617.
Refs #12352.
**Subsystem affected**
Task chat, task detail, side panels, interaction forms, and transcript
presentation.
**Problem or motivation**
The task page does not provide one complete workspace for live activity,
plans, questions, queued guidance, files, and documents. Earlier native
UI work also exposed compatibility risks in legacy question and reply
paths.
**Proposed solution**
Add the task workspace components and provider-neutral protocol
presentation. Keep runner-only controls behind runtime facts. Preserve
all direct-adapter composer, transcript, interaction, and finalization
behavior.
**Alternatives considered**
A separate runner page would duplicate task behavior. Replacing legacy
transcript logic would create unnecessary adapter regressions.
**Roadmap alignment**
This work supports the unified task experience and the Cloud and Sandbox
agents milestone.
## Stack
- Base PR: #12639.
- Lower PR: #12638.
- This PR contains only its 119-file UI delta against
`runner/remote-wss-transport`.
- The next stack PR adds administrator and observability controls.
## What Changed
- Added a reusable task workspace side panel for files and documents.
- Added provider-neutral cards for tools, plans, questions, protocol
activity, and progress.
- Added queued guidance and richer composer state.
- Added compact and expanded interaction presentation.
- Added live activity, thinking, usage, recovery, and final reply
presentation.
- Added document annotations and task deep links.
- Added bounded question validation and response handling.
- Preserved native runner event projection from master.
- Preserved legacy channel-less replies and explicit final reply
precedence.
- Preserved direct-adapter and classic-interface controls.
- Did not change server execution selection, Rust code, migrations,
workflows, or `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
## Verification
- GitHub Actions will run UI tests, repository tests, typecheck, build,
browser tests, security, and policy gates.
- Tests cover active, settled, empty-transcript, interaction,
queued-message, plan, question, file, document, and classic-interface
states.
- Compatibility tests cover direct adapters and native runner projection
together.
- Local tests were not run. The requested verification policy uses
GitHub Actions for this series.
- `git diff --check runner/remote-wss-transport...HEAD` passes.
- The delta contains 119 UI-only files.
## Risks
- This is a large task-page change.
- Most files are new focused components and tests.
- Shared transcript code keeps the lower native projection and legacy
direct-adapter fallbacks.
- Runner-only controls use adapter and runtime facts.
- No execution path or rollout flag changes in this PR.
> 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-5.6. The work used high-reasoning agent mode,
repository tools, GitHub tools, and parallel code-audit agents.
## 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
- [ ] 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 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
Dotta