## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The release channel system publishes a nightly build only after the
release smoke suite passes against the newest canary
> - The scheduled nightly run has failed every night since August 12, so
no nightly, and therefore no beta candidate, has shipped for six days
> - The failures are stale test locators, not a product regression: the
chat-first onboarding rewrite (#11101) changed wizard copy and the
post-launch destination
> - This pull request updates the smoke spec to match the current wizard
> - The benefit is a green nightly lane and an unblocked beta promotion
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The scheduled `Release` nightly run fails in `smoke_nightly / smoke`
every night since 2026-08-12. The failing spec is
`tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts`. Four assertions no
longer match the product after the chat-first onboarding rewrite
(#11101):
- The step-1 heading is now "Name your organization", not "Name your
company".
- The step-4 hire button is now "Connect", not "Give it a heartbeat".
- The seeded first task is now titled "Paperclip onboarding".
- A successful launch navigates to the seeded task's thread
(`/issues/<ref>`), not `/dashboard`.
**Expected behavior**
The smoke suite passes against a canary that contains the current
onboarding wizard, and the nightly lane publishes again.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run `.github/workflows/release-smoke.yml` against `paperclipai@canary`
(any version at or after the rewrite), or dispatch `release.yml` with
`channel: nightly`. Example red runs: 32014452506 (Aug 17), 31938284401
(Aug 16).
**Paperclip version or commit**
`2026.817.0-canary.12`
Related (not duplicates): #11190 updated this same spec for the
mission-first wizard; this PR is the follow-up for the chat-first
rewrite that landed after it.
## What Changed
- Update the step-1 wizard heading locator to "Name your organization".
- Update the step-4 hire button locator to "Connect" and reword the step
comment.
- Update `FIRST_TASK_TITLE` to "Paperclip onboarding" (the wizard's
current `DEFAULT_TASK_TITLE`).
- Assert the post-launch URL is the seeded task's thread (`/issues/`),
not `/dashboard`.
## Verification
- Local run of the exact CI harness: `scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh`
with `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.817.0-canary.12`, then `pnpm run
test:release-smoke` against the container — 1 passed.
- The suite's later API assertions (company, CEO agent, mission goal,
seeded issue assignment, assignment-sourced heartbeat run) all pass
unchanged against the current canary.
## Risks
- Low risk: test-only change; no product code is touched.
- The spec remains copy-coupled to the wizard. If wizard copy churn
continues, a follow-up could add stable `data-testid` hooks to the
wizard so the smoke spec stops breaking on wording changes.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Claude Code)
## Pre-submission 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
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The release subsystem's nightly lane gates every nightly publish on
the release smoke suite, which drives real onboarding in a browser
against the published artifact
> - With the harness fixed (#11187, #11189), the gate reached the
Playwright suite for the first time in CI — and the spec still walks the
old onboarding wizard, so it fails at "Create your first agent" on every
current build
> - The wizard was redesigned to a mission-first five-step flow, and the
spec rotted silently because the suite never ran in CI before
> - This pull request rewrites the spec to drive the current wizard end
to end
> - The benefit is a smoke gate that actually tests today's product,
verified against a real published canary
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Release smoke testing:
`tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts`.
**Problem or motivation**
Nightly run 31431273139 failed in the smoke Playwright suite: the spec
expects the old wizard step "Create your first agent", but current
builds show the redesigned mission-first flow (front door → company →
mission → team lead → connect model → review). The page snapshot in the
run artifact shows the "Define your mission" step where the spec
expected the agent step. Both retries failed identically — this is
deterministic spec drift, not flake.
**Proposed solution**
Rewrite the spec for the current flow: fill the company name, define the
mission directly (confirming creates the company), name the team lead,
hire it through the adapter step — the adapter environment probe reports
unhealthy in the CLI-less smoke container by design and must not block
the hire — then launch to the dashboard. Assert the company, the
ceo-role agent, and the company goal through the API. The first-task and
assignment-run assertions are removed together with the wizard flow that
created them.
## What Changed
- `tests/release-smoke/docker-auth-onboarding.spec.ts`: rewritten for
the mission-first wizard; sign-in and wizard-opening helpers and the
company-name step are unchanged
## Verification
- Full local run against the real nightly candidate: launched the smoke
container for `paperclipai@2026.810.0-canary.3` via
`scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh` (with the #11189 bind fix), then ran
`pnpm run test:release-smoke` against it — 1 passed (4.5s)
- After merge: dispatch `release.yml` with `channel: nightly` to run the
full gate in CI
## Risks
- Low. Test-only change. The spec now asserts less about first-task
creation because the wizard no longer creates a first task; if a
first-run trigger returns to onboarding, the spec should grow that
assertion back
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) in Claude Code, with
extended thinking and full tool use (CI artifact forensics, UI source
tracing, local Docker + Playwright reproduction and verification). All
changes model-authored under human direction.
## 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 (pending — will confirm before
merge)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending — will confirm before merge)
- [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 board UI is the operator surface where users create, assign,
monitor, and review work items.
> - The product language is moving toward "tasks" for user-facing work
items while the internal API and database still use "issues".
> - PR #7543 bundled this copy migration with broader
information-architecture work, which made the branch too large for
Greptile review.
> - This pull request peels the Issue-to-Task copy migration into a
smaller, independently reviewable change.
> - The benefit is clearer user-facing terminology, less agent confusion
via the Paperclip skill note, and a smaller PR that Greptile can review.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #7645
Refs #7543
Refs PAP-10430
This PR was split out of #7543 so the Issue-to-Task copy migration can
be reviewed separately and the remaining IA PR can fall under Greptile's
file limit.
## What Changed
- Preserves Scott Tong's original `PAP-57` copy-only commit, with author
and co-author credit intact, to rename user-facing "Issues" copy to
"Tasks" across the UI while keeping routes/API/internal symbols as
`issue`.
- Updates onboarding and release-smoke browser selectors from `Create &
Open Issue` to `Create & Open Task`.
- Adds a terminology note to `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md` clarifying that
task and issue refer to the same Paperclip work item.
- Resolves the only cherry-pick conflict by keeping current search
artifacts support and changing visible search copy to "tasks".
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` passed.
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/components/Sidebar.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` passed: 4 files, 66 tests.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed.
- Diff is 80 files, below Greptile's 100-file limit.
- Before/after UI copy examples: "Issues" -> "Tasks", "New Issue" ->
"New Task", "Create & Open Issue" -> "Create & Open Task".
## Risks
- Medium copy-risk: this intentionally changes user-facing terminology
broadly while keeping internal issue identifiers and routes unchanged.
- Some docs and APIs still say `issue`; the skill note clarifies this so
agents do not treat task and issue as separate entities.
- Browser-level visual validation is expected from CI because this local
container is missing usable browser dependencies.
> 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
Scott Tong authored the original `PAP-57` copy migration, assisted by
Claude Opus 4.8 and Paperclip agents per the preserved commit metadata.
Codex / GPT-5-class coding agent with shell, GitHub CLI, and repository
access performed the PR split, conflict resolution, skill note, and
verification.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] 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: scotttong <scott.tong@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Devin Foley
Dotta
dotta