## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - A company is the top-level container, and the company General page
holds its settings
> - Two of those settings did almost nothing: the brand color only
tinted the generated company icon, and the attachment size limit sat
under the deployment-level `PAPERCLIP_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES` cap that
already bounded every upload
> - A setting that changes one icon hue, and a setting that can only
lower a limit the operator already set, are not worth the page space or
the code that carries them
> - This pull request deletes both settings from the UI, the validators,
the API contract, the server, and the database
> - With the deployment cap as the only limit left, the message a person
sees when an upload is rejected has to name that limit in terms they can
act on, so the raw byte count becomes a human-readable size
> - The benefit is a shorter company General page for every deployment,
one attachment limit instead of two, and less code between an upload and
its ceiling
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing issue. The description below follows
`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/enhancement.yml`.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The company General page (`/company/settings`), the `PATCH
/api/companies/{companyId}` and `PATCH
/api/companies/{companyId}/branding` request contracts, and the
attachment upload limit on task, case, and company-import uploads.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting: `ui/`, `server/`, `packages/shared`, `packages/db`.
**Current behavior**
The company General page shows an "Appearance" section with three
controls: Logo, Brand color, and Attachment size limit. The brand color
is a hex value that feeds one thing — the hue of the generated company
pattern icon. Companies that never set one already get a hue derived
from the company name. The attachment size limit is a per-company byte
count stored on `companies.attachment_max_bytes`. Every upload path
clamps it against the deployment-level `PAPERCLIP_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES`
cap, so the per-company value can only lower a limit the operator
already chose.
**Proposed behavior**
The Appearance section keeps the Logo control only. The company pattern
icon always derives its hue from the company name. Every attachment path
reads the deployment cap directly, so `PAPERCLIP_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES`
is the single limit. An upload rejected by that limit says so in human
units — "File is larger than the 10 MB limit" rather than a raw byte
count. The `companies.brand_color` and `companies.attachment_max_bytes`
columns are dropped, and both fields leave the company API contract.
**Reason and benefit**
Both settings ask an operator to make a decision that changes almost
nothing. The brand color moves one icon hue on a page that also lets you
upload a real logo, which overrides the icon entirely. The attachment
limit reads as a real control but cannot raise anything, so it is a
second place to look when an upload is rejected. Removing both shortens
the page every deployment sees, removes a company-scoped read from the
task attachment upload path, and leaves one attachment limit to reason
about instead of two.
**Breaking changes**
The company API responses no longer include `brandColor` or
`attachmentMaxBytes`, and `GET /api/invites/{token}` no longer includes
`companyBrandColor`. `PATCH /api/companies/{companyId}/branding` is
strict, so a request that sends `brandColor` now returns 400; the
non-strict `PATCH /api/companies/{companyId}` schema strips it. Company
packages exported by older versions still import: the portability
company manifest schema is non-strict, so the retired keys are stripped
and ignored rather than rejected. Companies that stored a brand color
lose it — their icon reverts to the name-derived hue that every company
without a color already used.
## What Changed
- Removed the "Brand color" and "Attachment size limit" fields from the
company General page, along with their state, dirty checks, save
payload, and Save-button gating.
- Removed `brandColor` and `attachmentMaxBytes` from
`createCompanySchema`, `updateCompanySchema`, and
`updateCompanyBrandingSchema`, and deleted the now-orphaned
`DEFAULT_COMPANY_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES` and
`MAX_COMPANY_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES` constants.
- Removed both fields from the `Company` type, the portability manifest
type and schema, and the `companiesApi.update` payload allowlist.
- Dropped `brandColor` from `CompanyPatternIcon` and its callers, so the
icon hue always comes from the company name. Deleted the now-unused
`hexToHue` helper and the now-unused `pickTextColorForSolidBg` export.
- Stopped emitting `brandColor` from the company service selection and
from the invite-summary and invite-branding payloads in
`server/src/routes/access.ts`.
- Replaced `normalizeIssueAttachmentMaxBytes` with the deployment cap:
task attachments, case attachments, and company import now use
`MAX_ATTACHMENT_BYTES` directly. The helper is deleted.
- Added `formatAttachmentSize()` next to `MAX_ATTACHMENT_BYTES` and
routed every over-limit message through it, so a rejected upload names
the limit in human units instead of raw bytes: `Image exceeds 10485760
bytes` becomes `Image is larger than the 10 MB limit`. Enforcement is
unchanged — the same single cap, the same multer limits, the same status
codes and response shapes.
- Added migration
`0229_drop_company_brand_color_and_attachment_max_bytes.sql` and removed
both columns from the Drizzle `companies` schema.
- Kept legacy imports working: the portability company manifest schema
is non-strict, so older packages carrying the retired keys still import
with the keys ignored.
- Updated the skill API reference and the implementation spec, and
pruned the token-extraction allowlist entries that the removed code made
stale.
## Verification
Commands run from the repository root:
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — pass
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` — pass (includes
`check:migrations`, which validates the new migration number and journal
entry)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — pass
- server typecheck via `node_modules/.bin/tsc --noEmit` in `server/` —
pass. `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` could not run
locally because it builds the Rust runner first and `cargo` is not
installed on this machine; the TypeScript step it wraps is the command
above.
- `npx vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/company.test.ts` — 6
passed
- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` — 90
passed
- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/attachment-types.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/assets.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/cases-routes.test.ts` — 165 passed (the
human-readable limit messages)
- `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-branding-route.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/invite-summary-route.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/companies-route-cross-company-authz.test.ts` — all
passed
- `npx vitest run cli/src/__tests__/company.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/company-delete.test.ts` — 27 passed
- `npx vitest run` in `ui/` — 4425 passed, 1 pre-existing failure
unrelated to this change (`OnboardingWizard.test.tsx` "renders instead
of throwing when the browser denies storage access", which also fails on
`master`)
- `npx vitest run` in `server/` — see the note below
- `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` — no new violations; the only
reported violations are the pre-existing `PillGuy.tsx` ones present on
`master`
New tests added:
- `packages/shared/src/validators/company.test.ts` — the create and
update schemas strip the retired keys, the strict branding schema
rejects `brandColor`, and the portability manifest schema accepts a
legacy entry carrying both keys and drops them.
- `server/src/__tests__/company-branding-route.test.ts` — `PATCH
/api/companies/{companyId}/branding` returns 400 for `brandColor` and
does not call the company service.
- `server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` — a legacy package
that declares `brandColor` and `attachmentMaxBytes` imports
successfully, and neither key reaches `companies.create`.
- `server/src/__tests__/issue-attachment-routes.test.ts` — the effective
task attachment limit is the deployment cap, and the route no longer
loads the company to size an upload.
- `server/src/__tests__/attachment-types.test.ts` —
`formatAttachmentSize()` renders the default cap as `10 MB`, keeps one
decimal place for fractional sizes and drops a trailing `.0`, falls back
to KB and bytes for small caps, steps up to GB, and never emits `NaN`
for a degenerate input.
- `server/src/__tests__/assets.test.ts` — the asset-image and
company-logo routes both return the human-readable limit message on an
over-cap upload.
## Merge with master
`master` moved while this was open, and the merge needed two
resolutions:
- **`ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.tsx`.** #12243 reworded the
user-facing
copy from "company" to "organization", and that rewording landed inside
the "Brand color" and "Attachment size limit" hints — the two fields
this change deletes. Both fields are removed, so the conflicted block is
dropped whole. The Logo field and every other copy change from #12243
are
kept.
- **Migration renumbered 0228 -> 0229.** #12307 landed
`0228_nasty_grim_reaper`, so this migration is now
`0229_drop_company_brand_color_and_attachment_max_bytes`. Its snapshot
is
rebuilt from master's `0228_snapshot.json` with only the two `companies`
columns removed, and `meta/_journal.json` is master's journal plus a
single `idx: 229` entry. `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db
check:migrations`
passes.
The snapshot was rebuilt by hand rather than taken from `drizzle-kit
generate`, because master's `0228_snapshot.json` has drifted from
master's
own schema: `issue_question_response_deliveries.error_count` is created
by
master's 0228 SQL but missing from its snapshot, and the snapshot still
carries `decision_archive_notification_outbox.error_count`. Regenerating
folds both into this migration, and the resulting `ADD COLUMN
error_count`
would fail on a fresh database where master's 0228 already created that
column. Rebuilding from master's snapshot leaves that drift exactly
where
it is and keeps this migration to the two column drops. The drift is
pre-existing on master and is not addressed here.
## Risks
- **The migration is a destructive column drop.**
`0229_drop_company_brand_color_and_attachment_max_bytes.sql` removes
`companies.brand_color` and `companies.attachment_max_bytes`. It is safe
because both features are removed in the same change and nothing reads
either column after it. The statements use `DROP COLUMN IF EXISTS`,
matching the convention of the recent drop migrations in this
repository. The drop is not reversible: a downgrade after this migration
loses any stored values.
- **Stored brand colors are lost.** A company that had set a color now
renders the name-derived icon hue that every company without a color
already used. No other surface changes, and an uploaded logo still
overrides the icon.
- **API response shape narrows.** `brandColor` and `attachmentMaxBytes`
leave the company payloads, and `companyBrandColor` leaves the invite
summary payload. A client reading those fields now sees `undefined`. The
bundled UI and CLI are updated in this change.
- **Legacy imports are covered.** Packages exported by older versions
still carry both keys. The manifest schema is non-strict, so the keys
are stripped rather than rejected, and a test locks that in.
- **The over-limit message strings changed.** Anything matching on the
old `... exceeds N bytes` text — a test, a script, or a client that
string-matches `body.error` — needs updating. The status codes (422) and
response shapes are unchanged, so structured clients are unaffected.
- **Attachment limits can only widen.** A deployment that had lowered a
company below the deployment cap now allows uploads up to the cap for
that company. Lower `PAPERCLIP_ATTACHMENT_MAX_BYTES` if a smaller
ceiling is needed.
- **Storybook visual baselines shift** for the `CompanyPatternIcon`
matrix story, because those fixtures had brand colors. That workflow
runs only on a PR labeled `storybook-visual`, so it does not gate this
PR; regenerate the baselines if the label is added.
## Model Used
Claude (Anthropic), Claude Opus, agentic tool use via Claude Code.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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
> - Company import parks every imported agent as a safety default, and
issue assignment wakes are dropped for paused agents
> - The pause was recorded as the generic reason "system" and was almost
invisible: the chat-style task thread showed nothing, the legacy notice
had no action, and the new-task dialog gave no hint
> - Users assigned tasks in an imported company, nothing ran, and there
was no explanation — the imported company looked broken
> - This pull request records a dedicated "import" pause reason and
makes the paused state visible and fixable where the user is looking
> - The benefit is that a silent no-op becomes an explained state with a
one-click resume
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Working with a company whose agents arrived paused from a company
import.
**Subsystem affected**
Shared constants (`PAUSE_REASONS`), company import service
(`server/src/services/company-portability.ts`), task thread and new-task
dialog UI.
**Current behavior**
Imported agents get `pauseReason: "system"`, the same value
plugin-managed and built-in agent pauses use. Assigning an issue to a
paused agent silently drops the wake. The chat-style task thread renders
no paused notice; the legacy thread's notice says "It was paused by the
system." with no action and only renders when the composer is shown.
**Proposed behavior**
Import writes `pauseReason: "import"`. The paused-assignee notice
explains the import pause, offers an inline "Resume agent" button
(suppressed for budget pauses, which clear on their own), and renders
for read-only viewers. The chat-style task thread shows the same notice
above the composer. The new-task dialog warns when the selected assignee
is paused.
**Breaking changes**
None. `PAUSE_REASONS` is widened, not changed; the column already stores
free-text values in other paths, and every consumer is an equality check
with a manual fallback, so an older client shows the generic fallback
copy for the new value.
## What Changed
- `packages/shared/src/constants.ts`: `"import"` added to
`PAUSE_REASONS`.
- `server/src/services/company-portability.ts`: the import pause patch
writes `pauseReason: "import"`.
- `ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.tsx`: `IssueAssigneePausedNotice`
gains import copy, a Resume button, test ids, and is exported; it now
renders even when the composer is hidden. New `onResumeAssignee` /
`resumeAssigneePending` props.
- `ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.tsx`: renders the paused-assignee
notice above the composer dock (the chat-style thread previously had no
paused surface at all).
- `ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.tsx`: wires a resume mutation
(`agentsApi.resume`) through both thread variants and invalidates the
company agent list.
- `ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.tsx`: inline note when the chosen
assignee is paused, with import-specific copy.
## Verification
- `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` — 82 tests pass (pause pin
updated to `"import"`).
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx` — 120 tests pass (new: notice
copy per reason, resume click, budget suppression, active-agent null
render, dialog note).
- `pnpm run typecheck` in `packages/shared`, `server`, and `ui` — clean.
## Risks
- Low risk. The resume action calls the existing `POST
/agents/:id/resume` route with its existing guards. Existing rows keep
`"system"` and fall back to the current generic copy; only new imports
write `"import"`.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) with extended thinking
and tool use, via Claude Code.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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 task composer and the New Task dialog show a work-mode chip (how
the agent will run a task)
> - The default mode was labeled "Agent mode", and the New Task dialog
chip abbreviated every mode to one word ("Auto", "Plan", "Ask")
> - "Agent mode" is confusing because every mode runs an agent, and the
abbreviated chip hid what the label means
> - This pull request renames the mode to "Auto mode" and makes every
mode chip show the full label
> - The benefit is a clearer, consistent mode name in every place the
user selects a work mode
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Description follows the
enhancement template:
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The work-mode selector chips in the task composer and in the New Task
dialog.
**Subsystem affected**
UI (`ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.ts`,
`ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.tsx`).
**Current behavior**
The default work mode is labeled "Agent mode". The New Task dialog chip
shows a shortened label ("Auto", "Plan", "Ask") from a separate
`shortLabel` field.
**Proposed behavior**
The default work mode is labeled "Auto mode". Every chip shows the full
label ("Auto mode", "Plan mode", "Ask mode"). The `shortLabel` field is
removed so no surface can fall back to the short form.
**Reason and benefit**
"Agent mode" does not describe the behavior — all modes use an agent.
"Auto mode" states what the mode does. One label field keeps every
surface consistent.
**Breaking changes**
None. This is a display-string change only. No API, storage, or mode-key
changes.
## What Changed
- Renamed the `standard` work-mode label from "Agent mode" to "Auto
mode" in `ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.ts`, the single source for all mode
chips.
- Changed the New Task dialog mode chip to render the full `label`
instead of `shortLabel`.
- Deleted the `shortLabel` field from `WorkModeMeta` so nothing can
silently regress to the short form.
- Updated unit tests and fixtures to pin the full labels.
## Verification
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui test --
src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/components/task-chat/TaskChatComposer.test.tsx`. All tests pass. The
tests assert the labels are exactly "Auto mode", "Plan mode", and "Ask
mode".
- Manual: start the dev server, open the board, press `c` to open the
New Task dialog, and press Cmd+Period to cycle modes. The chip reads
"Auto mode", "Plan mode", then "Ask mode". The composer chip on an open
task shows the same labels.
## Risks
- Low risk. Display strings only. The chip is a few pixels wider in the
New Task dialog; no layout overflow was observed in any of the three
modes.
## Model Used
- Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model ID `claude-fable-5`), extended
thinking with tool use, run inside a Claude Code agent session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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>
<!-- 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 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.
> - 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.
> - Operators create tasks from the board UI.
> - The create form must show clear progress while it submits.
> - The form showed the same pending state twice.
> - One copy also used the old term "issue" instead of the UI term
"task."
> - This pull request keeps the pending state in the submit button and
removes the duplicate status.
> - The benefit is a clearer form with consistent task language.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No matching public GitHub issue exists for this focused UI bug.
**What happened?**
The create-task form showed `Creating issue...` beside a submit button
that already showed `Creating...`. A low-trust notice in the same form
also used the old UI term `issue`.
**Expected behavior**
The submit button shows the pending state once. Visible UI copy uses
`task` for the work object.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open the create-task dialog.
2. Enter a task title.
3. Select **Create Task**.
4. Observe the duplicate loading status beside the pending button.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced from upstream `master` at
`2c90cf0f2c60d3851880eca3c643c01313af9ffd`.
**Deployment mode**
Local development build.
## What Changed
- Removed the duplicate loading status beside the create-task submit
button.
- Kept inline create errors in the dialog footer.
- Changed the low-trust notice from `issue` to `task`.
- Added a regression test for the single pending-state presentation and
`aria-busy` state.
## Verification
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx`
— 24 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change only removes duplicate pending copy and updates
one UI term.
- The regression test keeps the submit button pending indefinitely to
verify its accessible loading state.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, model ID `gpt-5`. The runtime did not expose the
context-window size. The session used reasoning, repository 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
> - Its UI is the operator's daily surface: task lists, boards, budgets,
agent status — all built on shadcn components and Tailwind
> - Visual values (colors, spacing, type sizes, radii) were hardcoded at
~1,600 call sites: the same "small gray label" was 9/10/11px depending
on the file, charts disagreed with chips about status colors, two
toggle-switch implementations coexisted in two greens, and there was no
visual regression coverage
> - This made the UI drift-prone and made any restyle a
hundreds-of-files project, which discourages design iteration
> - This pull request extracts visual values into a single token layer
in `ui/src/index.css`, adds a Storybook visual regression suite backed
by external immutable baseline archives, and then applies a deliberate
retune reviewed change-by-change on screenshot diffs
> - The benefit is that Paperclip's look becomes a config surface:
retheming is a token edit reviewed as a snapshot diff, drift is blocked
by a token gate, and future UI PRs can prove exactly what changed
visually without committing hundreds of PNGs
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No existing public issue covers this work (searched "design tokens",
"visual regression", "design system" across issues and PRs). Related in
spirit: Refs #8982 (theming a hardcoded panel — a one-off instance of
the same problem class this PR addresses systematically).
**Problem (feature-request form):** UI visual values are hardcoded per
call site with no source of truth and no regression coverage;
consistency depends on reviewer memory, and restyling requires mass file
edits.
**Proposed solution (this PR):** a single token layer + enforcement gate
+ externally stored visual snapshot suite, then an intentional restyle
on top of that foundation.
## What Changed
- **Token extraction (zero visual change, machine-verified during
development):** committed codemods (`scripts/codemod-*.mjs`) moved
~1,600 hardcoded color/type/spacing/radius/shadow/misc values into named
tokens in a non-inline `:root` block of `ui/src/index.css`.
- **Visual regression suite:** `pnpm test:storybook-visual` covers 255
stories × light/dark = 510 Playwright screenshots at `maxDiffPixels: 0`,
plus new primitive-coverage stories and deterministic-render fixes.
- **External visual baselines:** committed PNG snapshots were removed.
`tests/storybook-visual/baseline-manifest.json` pins an immutable
archive URL/hash/size/count, and `scripts/storybook-visual-baseline.mjs`
handles `download`, `verify`, `pack`, and trusted maintainer `upload`
flows.
- **Opt-in visual CI artifacts:** added a `Storybook Visual` workflow
that runs on manual dispatch or PRs labeled `storybook-visual`,
downloads/verifies the baseline, runs Playwright, and uploads Playwright
report/test-result artifacts for review. Normal PR runs do not mutate
baseline objects.
- **Token gate:** `pnpm check:token-gates` — zero hex literals, zero
arbitrary bracket values, zero raw font-sizes in `ui/src/components/**`
and `ui/src/pages/**`, with a documented inline allowlist for legitimate
opt-outs.
- **Theme retune (intentional, snapshot-reviewed):** new base theme
values; radius ladder derived from a single `--radius` knob; micro-type
cluster collapsed to a named ladder (`--text-nano/micro/compact` +
Tailwind `text-xs`/`text-sm`); letter-spacing collapsed to named steps.
- **One status-color vocabulary:** charts, quota/budget bar fills,
RUNNING/live chips, and liveness indicators all use the canonical
`--status-*` hues. Light-mode legibility fixes for red alert surfaces
that used dark-tuned text classes.
- **One switch:** `ToggleSwitch` restyled to the registry capsule form,
second hand-rolled implementation removed, and all call sites unified.
- **Docs:** `DESIGN.md` is the design contract; `doc/design/` holds
audit reports, decision logs, and updated guidance for external baseline
review/update workflows.
- Dead code removed (`agentStatusBadge` duplicate map), byte-identical
contrast constants consolidated, semantic renames
(`--project-seed`/`--project-none`, `--liveness-blue`).
## Verification
- `pnpm check:token-gates` — 3/3 gates CLEAN during the design-system
run
- `pnpm typecheck` && `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build` — green
during the design-system run
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/storybook-visual-baseline.test.mjs` —
pass after external-baseline rework
- `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit --pretty false --module NodeNext
--moduleResolution NodeNext --target ES2022 --types
node,@playwright/test tests/storybook-visual/playwright.config.ts
tests/storybook-visual/storybook-visual.spec.ts` — pass after
external-baseline rework
- `git diff --check origin/pr/9134..HEAD` — pass after external-baseline
rework
- `find tests/storybook-visual -type f -name '*.png' -print | wc -l` —
`0`
- `node scripts/storybook-visual-baseline.mjs verify` — intentionally
fails closed until the first trusted maintainer publishes the baseline
archive and updates `baseline-manifest.json`
## Risks
- **Large but shallow:** the PR still touches many UI files due to
mechanical token extraction and retune work, but committed PNG snapshot
churn has been removed from the branch.
- **Baseline publication required before the visual suite can pass in
clean clones:** the manifest currently has placeholder archive metadata.
A trusted maintainer must publish the first immutable archive, then
update `baseline-manifest.json`.
- **Rendering platform variance:** the external baseline should be
captured in the documented Linux/Chromium environment. Future CI runs
verify against the pinned archive and fail closed on checksum/count
mismatch.
- **Visual CI is opt-in while stabilizing:** add the `storybook-visual`
label or dispatch the workflow manually to produce downloadable
Playwright report/test-result artifacts.
- **Scheduled follow-ups, deliberately out of scope:** Tailwind palette
classes map to semantic tokens in a dedicated pass; card/pill component
consolidation; ESLint ratchet. Tracked in
`doc/design/DECISION-SHEET.md`.
## Model Used
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, `claude-fable-5`, Mythos-class tier) with
extended thinking, running in Claude Code with tool use; mechanical
phases delegated to Claude Sonnet subagents. Follow-up external-baseline
rework assisted by OpenAI Codex (`gpt-5` coding agent with repository,
terminal, and GitHub tool use). All bulk rewrites executed via
deterministic, idempotent scripts committed in `scripts/`; intentional
visual changes were human-reviewed on screenshot contact sheets.
## 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 targeted local verification and documented the
intentional baseline-publication failure above
- [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 new CI run after this
rework)*
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
*(pending review)*
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) and
OpenAI Codex
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Dotta <bippadotta@protonmail.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 board UI is where operators create issues, inspect issue-thread
decisions, write markdown, and move between issue workflow surfaces.
> - A broad recovered branch mixed these operator workflow polish fixes
with unrelated backend, pipeline, plugin, eval, and work-product
changes.
> - Reviewers need the operator UI workflow fixes in a small PR that can
be understood without pulling in the rest of that recovery branch.
> - This pull request extracts only the issue workflow UI slice:
interaction cards, markdown editing fallback behavior, create-issue work
mode shortcuts, file-viewer URL handling, and issue navigation scroll
behavior.
> - The benefit is a lower-risk review path for operator workflow fixes
while keeping unrelated execution-workspace and server work out of this
PR.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
- Refs #8866, the closed broad source PR that this focused slice was
extracted from.
- Related: #8228 is an open UI polish PR, but its file list does not
overlap this branch.
- Related: #4090 is older merged operator workflow polish context.
No public GitHub issue exists for this exact extracted slice. The
problem is that several small operator issue-workflow fixes were bundled
inside a broad recovery branch, making them hard to review and ship
independently.
## What Changed
- Removed interaction continuation wake-policy labels from issue-thread
interaction card headers and updated the card test/story copy
accordingly.
- Added a markdown editor error boundary so rich editor render crashes
fall back to a raw textarea instead of breaking the compose surface.
- Made the create-issue work-mode shortcut accept ctrl-period and iOS
hardware-keyboard command-period-as-Escape behavior without dismissing
the dialog.
- Fixed file-viewer URL navigation to compare against the live browser
search string when router state is stale.
- Restored scroll reset when navigating from an issue detail route back
to the issue index, while preserving browser-history restoration
behavior.
## Screenshots
Before removing the continuation wake-policy badge from interaction card
headers:
After removing the wake-policy badge:
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/IssueThreadInteractionCard.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/context/FileViewerContext.test.ts
ui/src/lib/navigation-scroll.test.ts` — 5 files, 102 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
## Risks
Low risk. The PR is limited to UI workflow components/helpers and their
tests. Main behavioral risks are keyboard shortcut edge cases across
browsers and fallback editor rendering, both covered by focused tests.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5` family; exact served
variant and context window are not exposed in this runtime), with
terminal, Git, GitHub, and test execution 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other
environment-bound secrets.
> - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not
model values that should differ by human operator.
> - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing
whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value.
> - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped
runtime checks deterministic and auditable.
> - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user
values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime
resolution gates.
> - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user
provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required
user secrets or active definitions are unavailable.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #224
Refs #6057
This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core
secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It
is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime
secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the
responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time.
Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as
#1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full
user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here.
## What Changed
- Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values,
keeping stored values out of access metadata.
- Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to
pick them alongside existing secret refs.
- Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve
against the human responsible for the run.
- Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter
dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are
inactive.
- Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access.
- Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user
attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be
resolved.
- Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures
surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures.
- Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes.
- Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered
incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`,
`0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127`
migrations.
- Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR
contains code/docs/tests only.
## Verification
- PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on
`paperclipai/paperclip:master`.
- PASS: `git diff --check`
- PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg
'^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true`
produced no files.
- PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130`
with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`,
`0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`,
`0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`.
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests)
- PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final
Greptile cleanup fixes)
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests
after the final rebase CI fix)
- PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery,
project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors,
watchdog, and stale queue paths.
- PASS: GitHub checks are green on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck +
Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e,
Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review.
- PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5,
and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated
threads.
## Risks
- Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible
user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs
before adapter dispatch.
- `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without
values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind
explicitly.
- External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically
provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side
access for non-local vaults.
- The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release
validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge.
- The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream
migrations; the branch migrations use guarded
column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older
draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter
with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal
reasoning mode are not exposed by the runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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 Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The board UI has been graduating experimental conference-room task
experiences into the default issue and onboarding flows
> - Several task UI improvements were still coupled to the Conference
Room Chat experimental flag even though they are useful outside chat
itself
> - That coupling meant disabling chat also reverted unrelated defaults
such as work-mode labels, task status colors, team creation copy, and
the graduated issue thread
> - This pull request keeps chat-specific gating scoped to chat while
making the graduated task UI the default experience
> - The benefit is that operators can use the newer task workflows
without needing to enable the separate chat experiment
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this exact change.
### Problem or motivation
The Conference Room Chat experimental flag was controlling unrelated
task UI defaults, which made non-chat workflows regress when chat was
disabled.
### Proposed solution
Remove that flag from task-thread, work-mode, onboarding, status, and
team-creation presentation paths while leaving chat-specific behavior
separately gated.
### Alternatives considered
Keeping the flag as a broad umbrella until chat graduates would avoid a
behavior change, but it keeps unrelated UI improvements hidden behind
the wrong capability switch.
### Roadmap alignment
Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this is focused graduation/polish for existing UI
surfaces rather than a new roadmap-level core feature.
Related search:
- Searched open PRs and issues for `conference room chat experimental
flag`: no matches.
- Searched open PRs and issues for `graduated issue thread`: no matches.
## What Changed
- Removes Conference Room Chat flag branching from task-thread
rendering, work-mode labels, task status colors, and team creation copy.
- Makes the onboarding completion path create/reuse an onboarding
project, create the first assigned task, and send the user to the
dashboard instead of chat.
- Deletes the legacy onboarding wizard and classic task-thread files now
that the graduated flow is the default.
- Updates focused UI tests and affected E2E specs for the default task
experience.
- Adds a user-visible onboarding error if restored state is missing the
company or agent required for launch.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/OnboardingWizardVariant.test.tsx
ui/src/components/RunChatSurface.test.tsx
ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.test.tsx
ui/src/components/StatusBadge.test.tsx ui/src/lib/agent-order.test.ts
ui/src/lib/onboarding-launch.test.ts ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts --list
tests/e2e/conference-room-typing-intro.spec.ts
tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts`
- Attempted targeted Playwright execution locally, but this host is
missing Chromium system libraries (`libatk1.0-0t64`, `libatspi2.0-0t64`,
`libxcomposite1`, `libxdamage1`, `libxfixes3`, `libxrandr2`, `libgbm1`,
`libasound2t64`). CI runs the specs in the proper Actions environment.
## Risks
- Medium UI behavior risk: this intentionally changes the default
experience for users who have not enabled Conference Room Chat.
- Medium onboarding risk: completion now creates/reuses a project and
creates the first task instead of only navigating.
- Low migration risk: no database schema or migration changes are
included.
- The PR avoids `pnpm-lock.yaml` and `.github/workflows` changes.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-class coding model, tool-enabled local repository
workflow with shell, git, 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
> - The new issue dialog lets operators create follow-up tasks and
optionally reuse an existing execution workspace
> - Reusing a workspace depends on a searchable selector that can
include workspace names, branches, and local paths
> - The selector previously treated all matched text equally, so hidden
path text could outrank the visible workspace label and unrelated fuzzy
letter matches could leak into results
> - The reusable workspace popover also needed to stay inside the modal
so scrolling and layering behave like the rest of the dialog
> - This pull request improves the shared searchable select scoring and
applies it to reusable execution workspace choices
> - The benefit is a more predictable workspace reuse flow when an
operator searches by branch, task name, or workspace label
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue found for this selector bug.
### Pre-submission checklist
- [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a
duplicate.
- [x] I am on the latest released version of Paperclip (or can reproduce
on `master`).
- [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip itself — not in
my agent adapter, API provider, or local configuration.
### What happened?
Workspace searches could rank hidden path matches ahead of direct
visible label matches, and broad fuzzy matching could match letters
spread across unrelated workspace metadata.
### Expected behavior
Direct label/name matches should sort ahead of weaker hidden metadata
matches, and fuzzy matching should stay constrained enough to avoid
unrelated workspace results.
### Steps to reproduce
1. Open the new issue dialog.
2. Choose reuse existing execution workspace.
3. Search for a term that appears in one workspace label and only in
another workspace path.
4. Observe that the path-only match can rank ahead of the direct visible
label match.
### Paperclip version or commit
Current `master` before this change.
### Deployment mode
Local dev (`pnpm dev`).
### Installation method
Built from source (`pnpm dev` / `pnpm build`).
### Agent adapter(s) involved
- [x] Not adapter-specific (core bug)
### Database mode
Not database-related.
### Access context
Board (human operator).
### Node.js version
Not version-specific.
### Operating system
Not OS-specific.
### Relevant logs or output
No logs; this is client-side selector behavior.
### Relevant config (if applicable)
None.
### Additional context
This PR also keeps the reusable workspace selector popover inside the
modal and contains command-list scroll events to keep the dialog
interaction stable.
### Privacy checklist
- [x] I have reviewed all pasted output for PII (usernames, file paths,
API keys, tokens, company names) and redacted where necessary.
## What Changed
- Added fuzzy scoring helpers for searchable text fields, including
field weights for visible labels versus secondary search metadata.
- Updated `SearchableSelect` to sort filtered results by score while
preserving original order for ties and custom filters.
- Updated reusable execution workspace matching to prefer visible
labels, then descriptions, then hidden search text.
- Kept the reusable workspace selector popover inside the new issue
modal and contained wheel/touch scrolling in the command list.
- Added unit/component coverage for selector ranking, reusable workspace
matching, modal popover containment, and scroll containment classes.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/searchable-select.ts
ui/src/lib/reusable-execution-workspaces.test.ts
ui/src/components/SearchableSelect.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
## Risks
Low risk. The change is scoped to client-side searchable selector
ranking and modal popover behavior. The main behavior shift is that
searches are intentionally less permissive for unrelated fuzzy letter
spreads, which should reduce noisy results but could hide a result
someone previously reached through very loose matching.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with repository file access,
shell/tool execution, and medium reasoning effort. Exact hosted model
build and context window were not surfaced 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The task lifecycle and recovery subsystems decide when agent work is
still productive, stalled, or ready for review.
> - Existing recovery paths can observe stopped or incomplete work, but
there was no first-class per-task watchdog model with scoped review
permissions.
> - Watchdog follow-ups also need strict boundaries so
recovery/status-only runs cannot mutate approvals or perform deliverable
work.
> - This pull request adds the task watchdog data model, API/service
layer, scheduler/review flow, adapter wake context, UI configuration
surfaces, and docs.
> - The branch has been rebased onto current `paperclipai/paperclip`
`master`; the watchdog migration is now ordered after master's latest
migrations as `0104_issue_watchdogs`.
> - The benefit is a more explicit task-review loop that preserves
Paperclip's single-assignee and governance invariants while making
stalled work easier to route.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No linked GitHub issue. Paperclip task:
[PAP-11275](/PAP/issues/PAP-11275).
## Problem or motivation
Task recovery needs a first-class watchdog path that can inspect stopped
work and create scoped follow-ups without bypassing normal task
ownership. Board/UI users need a way to configure watchdogs on tasks and
see watchdog-related live work. Recovery/status-only runs must remain
limited to status reporting and must not create approvals, link
approvals, or submit approval comments.
## Proposed solution
Add a task-watchdog data model, scheduler/classifier, scoped mutation
guard, adapter wake context, API/UI configuration surfaces, and
documentation so watchdog agents can review stopped task subtrees under
explicit boundaries.
## Alternatives considered
Reuse the existing recovery-action flow only. That would keep
stopped-work detection implicit, make per-task watchdog assignment
harder to expose in the UI, and would not provide a durable
scoped-review issue for stalled task trees.
## Roadmap alignment
This is Paperclip control-plane lifecycle infrastructure for task
execution and recovery. I checked `ROADMAP.md`; this PR does not
duplicate an existing planned core item.
## What Changed
- Added issue watchdog schema, migration, shared contracts, validators,
CRUD API, and service support.
- Added task watchdog scheduler/classifier behavior, scoped mutation
enforcement, adapter wake context, and default watchdog mandate
guidance.
- Added UI surfaces for configuring watchdogs on new/existing tasks,
viewing watchdog activity, and exposing the experimental setting.
- Added docs for the user-facing task watchdog workflow and
implementation semantics.
- Gated new-task watchdog setup behind `enableTaskWatchdogs` and blocked
cheap status-only recovery runs from approval mutations.
- Rebased onto current `master` and renumbered the idempotent watchdog
migration from the branch-local `0102_issue_watchdogs` slot to
`0104_issue_watchdogs`.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by loading watchdog classifier input with
a recursive subtree query and centralizing the watchdog origin-kind
constant.
- Added and updated focused server/UI tests for watchdog routes,
scheduler/classifier behavior, scope boundaries, live task visibility,
settings, and new issue dialog behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/task-watchdogs-scheduler.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/task-watchdogs-classifier.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `git diff --check`
- Verified the PR diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows`.
## Risks
- Medium risk: this introduces a new task lifecycle surface touching DB
schema, server routes/services, adapter wake context, and UI task
configuration.
- Watchdog scheduling behavior depends on the new experimental setting
and runtime context checks behaving consistently across local and
production agents.
- The watchdog migration is idempotent (`IF NOT EXISTS` /
duplicate-object guards) so users who tried the previous branch-local
migration number should not get duplicate-object failures.
- CI and the second Greptile pass are pending after the latest
review-fix push.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-class coding agent in the Paperclip workspace. Exact
runtime model id and context window were not exposed to the agent; tool
use and local command 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots — N/A per Paperclip task instruction: do not add
screenshots/images to this PR unless they are specifically part of the
work.
- [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.
> - Issue work mode controls how a task starts and how the conversation
composer frames the operator's intent.
> - Paperclip already supports standard agent execution and planning
mode, but there is no lightweight mode for asking a question without
immediately implying execution or plan drafting.
> - That gap makes low-commitment clarification workflows look like
normal task execution.
> - This pull request adds an explicit Ask mode and threads it through
shared contracts, server heartbeat context, and the issue composer UI.
> - The benefit is that operators can create or switch a task into a
question-oriented mode while preserving existing agent and planning
flows.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No public GitHub issue exists for this change. Inline feature request
follows the repository feature request template.
### Subsystem affected
Cross-cutting: `packages/shared`, `server/`, and `ui/`.
### Problem or motivation
Issue conversations currently distinguish standard agent work from
planning work, but question-first conversations do not have a clear
public mode in the shared contract or UI. Operators who want to ask an
agent a focused question have to use standard mode, which can imply
normal task execution, or planning mode, which asks for a plan rather
than an answer.
### Proposed solution
Add Ask as a first-class issue work mode. It should be selectable from
issue creation and issue chat, cycle alongside Standard and Planning
from the keyboard shortcut/menu, appear distinctly in composer styling,
and be included in heartbeat context so agents know to answer directly
instead of executing or drafting a plan.
### Alternatives considered
- Keep using standard mode for questions: rejected because it does not
communicate answer-only intent to the agent or the UI.
- Reuse planning mode for questions: rejected because planning mode asks
for a plan and is semantically different from asking a question.
- Add only local UI copy: rejected because the mode needs to be
represented in the shared contract and server heartbeat context to be
reliable.
### Roadmap alignment
This is a focused issue-workflow improvement. `ROADMAP.md` was checked
and no duplicate planned core work was found.
### Additional context
Related public searches performed before opening this PR:
- GitHub PR search for `"ask mode" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`
- GitHub issue search for `"ask mode" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`
- GitHub PR search for `"work mode" "ask" repo:paperclipai/paperclip`
No duplicate PR was found.
## What Changed
- Added `ask` to the shared issue work-mode contract and validation
coverage.
- Included issue work mode in heartbeat context summaries so agents can
see standard, planning, and ask state.
- Added Ask mode metadata, styling, composer tone handling, and
selection/cycling behavior in the issue chat/new issue UI.
- Updated focused tests for shared validators, heartbeat context, and
affected UI work-mode flows.
## Verification
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/components/ChatComposer.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/ChatComposer.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/work-mode-meta.test.ts ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
The broader targeted command passed 8 test files / 245 tests.
Visual reference for Standard/Planning/Ask composer states:
https://gist.github.com/cryppadotta/714d8590bac55500a65e7e16de5bb4b8
It emitted an expected warning from an existing server test fixture
about a missing run-log fixture while verifying derived issue comment
metadata.
## Risks
Low to moderate risk. This adds a new enum value that crosses shared,
server, and UI contracts. Existing standard and planning modes are
preserved, but any downstream code assuming only two non-terminal work
modes may need to handle `ask`.
> 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 Codex coding agent in Paperclip CodexCoder mode, with
shell, git, GitHub connector, and local test execution tools. Context
window and exact hosted model snapshot are not exposed in this runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have 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)
- [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`,
`feat/...`) 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] 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The first-run experience (onboarding wizard) and the chat surfaces
(conference-room/board chat, task threads, composers) are the product's
front door — they decide whether a new operator understands "hire
agents, give them work, review results" in the first five minutes
> - Today those surfaces feel ticket-y and form-like: the wizard is a
static multi-step form that ends in an anticlimactic "Launch" screen,
the task composer and board chat behave differently from each other, and
agent-feed issue quicklooks misbehave (multiple flyouts open at once,
cards jump on hover)
> - We wanted to iterate toward a conversational, team-centric NUX — but
without risking the workflows of everyone already running Paperclip
> - This PR reworks the NUX behind a new default-OFF
`enableConferenceRoomChat` experimental flag: a capsule-motif onboarding
wizard that builds your team as you answer, a conference-room chat
surface, one shared ChatComposer across surfaces, brand-accurate status
chips, and feed-quicklook fixes — with the pre-existing UI
fork-and-frozen as `*Classic` components that flag-OFF users keep
> - The benefit is a complete, testable modern NUX that anyone can opt
into from Settings → Experimental, with zero default behavior change and
a clean path to either graduate or drop the experiment
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No pre-existing GitHub issue — feature description per
`feature_request.yml`:
- **Problem / motivation:** Paperclip's onboarding wizard and chat
surfaces grew up as separate ticket-centric forms. New users get a
form-filling experience rather than the feeling of standing up a team;
the board chat and task threads use different composers with different
affordances; the agent feed's issue quicklook can stack multiple
popovers and shifts cards on hover.
- **Proposed solution:** A coherent NUX experiment behind one
experimental flag (`enableConferenceRoomChat`, Settings → Experimental,
default OFF): capsule onboarding wizard with an evolving team capsule,
conference-room chat, unified `ChatComposer`, team-centric copy, brand
status chips, quicklook single-flight fix. Flag-OFF users get the exact
pre-experiment UI via frozen `*Classic` forks, verified by an on/off
parity test matrix.
- **Alternatives considered:** (a) incremental unflagged restyling —
rejected: the changes interlock across surfaces and would drip risk into
every release; (b) a separate app shell / route for the new NUX —
rejected: too much divergence, the flag + classic-fork pattern keeps the
diff reviewable and reversible.
- **Roadmap alignment:** `ROADMAP.md` lists **CEO Chat** ("a
lighter-weight way to talk to leadership agents... should still resolve
to real work objects"). This experiment is groundwork in that direction
(conference-room chat resolves to issues/tasks via the same composer
used in task threads) and does not change the core task-and-comments
model.
Related PRs found in the dedup search (same area, none duplicate this
work — they target the classic wizard, which this PR intentionally
leaves intact and mergeable):
- #5385 — Coach-driven onboarding: conversational entry +
agent-companies package import
- #5378 — Onboarding wizard: reusable adapter picker + probe card
- #6636 — ui(onboarding): friendly error surface + retry for the wizard
- #7005 — fix(onboarding): explicitly await first-task wake
- #2616 — fix: restore workspace directory config in onboarding wizard
## What Changed
- **Experimental flag plumbing** — `enableConferenceRoomChat` in shared
types/validators, server instance-settings service + API, Settings →
Experimental card with explicit enable/disable copy
- **Onboarding wizard** — classic wizard forked and frozen
(`OnboardingWizardClassic`); flag-ON variant is a 5-step capsule wizard
with a persistent evolving `AgentCapsule` (gradient/glow motif),
team-centric reframed copy, and a typing-dots intro (hardened with
fake-timer tests)
- **Conference-room chat** — flag-ON board-chat surface with agent
bubble name/icon headers and copy/vote/timestamp action rows
(`AgentBubbleActionRow`)
- **Unified composer** — shared `ChatComposer` adopted across surfaces;
translucent surface + scroll-mask removal; "Agent mode"/"Plan mode"
relabels; no-assignee confirmation `AlertDialog` (new
`ui/alert-dialog.tsx` primitive); `@task` reference picker +
linkification in mentions
- **Agent feed** — single-flight issue-quicklook store (one popover at a
time), flyouts open to the left, removed hover translate-y jitter
- **Status chips** — brand-accurate task status chips behind the flag
(light/dark, 1px borders per paperclip.ing/brand)
- **Tests** — flag on/off parity matrix across IssueDetail,
NewIssueDialog, Sidebar, wizard, gate components; component tests for
all new pieces
- **Merge with `master`** — one conflict in
`ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.tsx`, resolved by keeping master's
new `AssigneeChip`/`HandoffWakeRow`/`RunStatusBadge` components inside
the flag-gated metadata-row chrome (details in commit `21a5642a`);
post-merge fixes: vitest 4 mock typing in `MarkdownEditor.test.tsx`,
flag hook made safe for provider-less mounts (master's new isolated
component tests)
- **Branch hygiene** — internal design wireframes/mockups stripped
before the PR (they live in the Paperclip issue threads)
- No user-facing documentation changes required: the flag is
intentionally experimental and self-described in the Settings card; no
existing docs reference the affected surfaces
## Verification
- `pnpm run typecheck` — green across the workspace (ui, server, shared,
plugins)
- Full UI suite (`vitest run` in `ui/`, clean worktree at this HEAD):
**1593/1595 passing, 223/224 files** — the 2 remaining failures are in
`src/components/artifacts/ArtifactCard.test.tsx` and **fail identically
on pristine `origin/master`** (pre-existing upstream, unrelated to this
branch)
- Full server suite (`vitest run` in `server/`, same clean worktree):
results in PR checks; flag plumbing covered by instance-settings tests
- Targeted post-merge resolution check: `IssueChatThread`,
`IssueChatThreadSystemNotice`, `IssueDetail`, `Sidebar`,
`ConferenceRoomChatGate`, `OnboardingWizardVariant`, `NewIssueDialog`,
`InstanceExperimentalSettings`, `MarkdownEditor` — 172/172 passing
- Manual walkthrough: flag OFF (default) → onboarding wizard, task
thread, board chat, composer all render the classic UI; flag ON via
Settings → Experimental → capsule wizard, conference-room chat, unified
composer, status chips active
- Screenshots: see below
**Flag on/off screenshots** (committed on this branch under
`screenshots/PR-8000-*`):
| Surface | Flag OFF (classic, default) | Flag ON (experimental) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Settings → Experimental | 
| 
|
| Task thread | 
| 
|
| Home / nav | 
| 
|
| Conference Room (flag-ON only surface) | — | 
|
Capsule onboarding wizard walkthrough screenshots (flag ON) are attached
to the Paperclip design/implementation threads; the wizard requires a
fresh instance so it is captured via the e2e harness
(`tests/e2e/nux-phase4-screenshots.spec.ts`).
## Risks
- **Large surface, but gated:** all new behavior sits behind
`enableConferenceRoomChat`, default OFF; flag-OFF rendering is locked by
frozen `*Classic` forks plus an on/off parity test suite
- **Classic forks are frozen at the fork point (`e3aada1d`):** master
features added to the live thread component after that point (assignee
handoff chips, run status badge, composer mention coach) render in the
flag-ON path; the flag-OFF task thread keeps the fork-point behavior
until the experiment graduates (forks deleted) or is dropped (forks
restored as canonical). Called out for reviewer attention.
- **Merge-conflict resolution in `IssueChatThread.tsx`** (commit
`21a5642a`) deserves reviewer eyes: master's new handoff/run-status
components were kept; the base toast-style no-assignee flow remains
replaced by the AlertDialog flow introduced on this branch
- Schema/server changes are additive (one optional boolean instance
setting); no migrations of existing data
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic) via Claude Code running in the Paperclip agent
harness (agent: ClaudeCoder)
- Branch implemented across multiple agent sessions on Claude Opus-class
models with extended thinking + tool use (file edits, shell, Playwright
screenshots); merge/PR session model ID as reported by the harness:
`claude-fable-5` (Claude Code CLI)
- All code was agent-authored and board-reviewed through Paperclip issue
threads (plans, wireframes, confirmations) before merging
## 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 (none
required — experimental flag, self-documenting Settings card; noted
above)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green (run 3 on `8af3041a`: all 16
gates SUCCESS, incl. e2e and all 4 serialized-suite shards)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(re-review verdict: Confidence 5/5, “Safe to merge”; all 4 round-1
findings fixed + confirmed resolved; both summary notes addressed in
`8af3041a`)
- [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.
> - 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch accumulated multiple already-tested control-plane,
adapter runtime, invite, workspace, plugin, and UI quality fixes on the
primary Paperclip checkout.
> - `origin/master` advanced while those commits were still local, so
the branch needed to be preserved and reconciled before review.
> - Splitting the branch commit-by-commit against the new base produced
overlapping conflicts with recently merged upstream PRs.
> - This pull request keeps the remaining branch as one standalone PR
because the final diff is 38 files after removing screenshot artifacts,
under Greptile's 100-file cap, and can be merged independently after
review.
> - The benefit is that none of the local work is lost, the branch is
now based on current `origin/master`, and reviewers can evaluate the
reconciled changes in one place.
## What Changed
- Merged the local accumulated branch with current `origin/master` and
resolved the invite-flow overlaps from the newer upstream companies
query helper.
- Preserved the local fixes for invite existing-member behavior, invite
link copy fallback, reusable workspace selection, worktree auth, static
SPA fallback, markdown wrapping, plugin slot registration, cloud
upstream UX/server polish, project sorting, and related tests.
- Removed screenshot artifacts from the PR per review request.
- Kept the PR under the requested file limit: 38 files changed, with no
`pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` changes.
## Verification
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/pages/CompanyInvites.test.tsx ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Projects.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/slots.test.ts
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/invite-accept-existing-member.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/static-index-html.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/better-auth.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- Confirmed `git diff --name-only origin/master...HEAD | wc -l` is `38`.
- Confirmed no PR diff entries match `pnpm-lock.yaml`,
`.github/workflows/*`, or `screenshots/*`.
## Risks
- Medium review risk because this is a bundled rescue PR rather than
several narrow feature PRs.
- Invite flow and company cache behavior overlapped with newer upstream
changes; the merge resolution intentionally keeps the shared
`companiesListQueryOptions` helper while preserving local
existing-member invite behavior.
- Visual review evidence is no longer attached in-repo because
screenshots were removed from this PR per review 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 — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, with repository tool access,
terminal execution, and git/GitHub CLI operations.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] UI screenshots were intentionally removed from this PR per review
request
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: CodexCoder <codexcoder@paperclip.local>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the board UI and control plane for supervising AI-agent
companies.
> - Operators repeatedly use mobile navigation, issue creation, inbox
scanning, and markdown reading surfaces.
> - Small layout and interaction rough edges add friction to those
high-frequency workflows.
> - The branch included a set of related board UI polish changes that
were too small to review as many separate PRs.
> - This pull request groups the remaining mobile/navigation/markdown
polish into one standalone branch.
> - The benefit is smoother board operation without mixing in unrelated
backend feature work.
## What Changed
- Tightened company settings navigation behavior on mobile.
- Fixed mobile new issue dialog height and moved issue priority into the
overflow controls on small screens.
- Restored browser controls for home-screen app mode.
- Fixed plugin-route sidebar selection on nested page loads.
- Added markdown preformatted-block wrapping controls and coverage.
- Kept updated issue list pages sorted by updated time in the board UI.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/Layout.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.wrap.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/access/CompanySettingsNav.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/pwa-install-mode.test.ts ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx`
The targeted UI tests passed. React emitted existing act-wrapping
warnings in a few test files, but there were no test failures.
## Risks
- Medium-low: changes span several UI surfaces, but they are mostly
layout/interaction polish with targeted component tests.
- Visual screenshots are not newly captured in this split PR; follow-up
review should include browser/visual QA before marking ready.
> 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 Codex via `codex_local`, tool-enabled coding session;
exact context window not exposed by this runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Human operators create and edit issues through modal-heavy board UI
workflows.
> - The new-issue dialog embeds markdown editors that render
autocomplete menus through body-level portals.
> - Radix Dialog treats those portal clicks as outside-dialog pointer
events and prevents their default behavior.
> - That prevention made completion items hard or impossible to select
from inside the new-issue dialog.
> - This pull request marks the markdown editor floating autocomplete
menu as allowed dialog-external UI and extends the dialog
outside-pointer handler to preserve those interactions.
> - The benefit is that users can click/tap autocomplete completions
while keeping the existing modal behavior intact.
## What Changed
- Added a stable `data-paperclip-floating-ui` marker and explicit
pointer event handling to the markdown editor mention/autocomplete
portal.
- Updated the new issue dialog outside-pointer guard so editor
autocomplete portals are handled like Radix popover portals.
- Added regression coverage for markdown editor portal markup and new
issue dialog completion selection behavior.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx` passed: 2 files, 38 tests.
- Confirmed the branch is rebased onto current `public-gh/master` before
opening this PR.
- Confirmed the diff does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml` or
`.github/workflows` changes.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change is scoped to allowing pointer events from known
body-level UI portals while keeping other outside-dialog pointer events
under Radix Dialog control.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with repository tool use and local
command execution. Exact hosted context window is not surfaced in this
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Screenshot note: this is an interaction/event-handling fix with no
visible UI change; verification is covered by the focused regression
tests above.
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for autonomous companies.
> - Agents and board operators coordinate through company-scoped issues,
comments, documents, and heartbeat wake payloads.
> - Chinese, Japanese, and Hindi text needs to survive the full issue
lifecycle without normalization or prompt serialization damage.
> - The riskiest paths are board issue creation, server
issue/comment/document round-tripping, and scoped wake prompt rendering.
> - This pull request adds focused regression coverage across those
surfaces.
> - The benefit is higher confidence that multilingual operators and
agents can create, search, comment on, complete, and wake on issues
using non-Latin text.
## What Changed
- Added adapter-utils wake payload and prompt rendering coverage for
Chinese, Japanese, and Hindi issue/comment text.
- Added UI New Issue dialog coverage proving multilingual title and
description text is submitted unchanged.
- Added server route coverage that round-trips multilingual issue text
through create, search, comments, documents, completion comments, and
heartbeat context.
- Addressed Greptile feedback by using a typed storage mock and
splitting the server route integration path into smaller ordered
assertions.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/multilingual-issues-routes.test.ts`
- Result: 3 test files passed, 51 tests passed.
## Risks
- Low risk: this PR adds regression coverage only and does not change
runtime behavior.
- The new server test uses embedded Postgres support and skips on
unsupported hosts using the existing helper pattern.
- No migrations are included.
- No `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes are included.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected - check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 based coding agent, with shell, git, Vitest, and
GitHub connector/CLI tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous AI companies.
> - Issues are the core unit of work, and issue comments are how board
users and agents coordinate execution.
> - Some issue conversations need to produce plans and approvals instead
of immediate implementation work.
> - The existing issue contract did not distinguish standard execution
comments from planning-oriented issue work.
> - This pull request adds an issue work-mode contract and board UI
affordances for standard vs planning mode.
> - The benefit is that planning-mode issues can be created, displayed,
discussed, and carried through agent heartbeat context without losing
the normal issue workflow.
## What Changed
- Added `standard` / `planning` issue work-mode contracts across DB,
shared validators/types, server issue flows, plugin protocol, and
adapter heartbeat payloads.
- Added an idempotent `0081_optimal_dormammu` migration for
`issues.work_mode`, ordered after current `public-gh/master` migrations.
- Updated heartbeat/context summaries and issue-thread interaction
behavior so planning work mode is preserved when creating suggested
follow-up issues.
- Added UI support for planning-mode issue creation, issue rows, detail
composer styling, and composer work-mode toggles.
- Added focused server/shared/UI tests plus a Playwright visual
verification spec for planning-mode surfaces.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` and added durable
planning-mode screenshots under `doc/assets/pap-3368/`.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/shared
packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-context-summary.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-goal-context-routes.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/adapter-utils
packages/adapter-utils/src/server-utils.test.ts`
- `PAPERCLIP_E2E_SKIP_LLM=true npx playwright test --config
tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/planning-mode-visual-verification.spec.ts`
## Screenshots
Desktop planning detail:
Desktop planning row:
Desktop staged standard toggle:
Mobile planning detail:
Mobile planning row:
## Risks
- Medium migration risk: this adds a non-null issue column. The
migration uses `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS` so installations that applied
an older branch-local migration number can still apply the final
numbered migration safely.
- Medium contract risk: issue payloads, plugin payloads, and adapter
heartbeat payloads now include work mode; compatibility is handled by
defaulting missing values to `standard`.
- UI risk is moderate because composer controls changed; focused
component tests and visual e2e coverage exercise standard vs planning
display and toggle behavior.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent in a local Paperclip worktree, with
shell/tool use. Exact context-window size is not exposed in this
runtime.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is a control plane operators use repeatedly to supervise
agent companies.
> - Common operator workflows depend on fast scanning of inboxes, issue
sidebars, workspaces, cost totals, and runtime services.
> - Several small UI and service gaps made those workflows slower or
less clear.
> - This pull request groups the operator-facing QoL changes that can
stand alone from recovery and adapter work.
> - The benefit is a denser, clearer board experience for issue triage
and workspace operation.
## What Changed
- Added inbox assignee/project grouping and issue list token/runtime
totals.
- Improved issue properties with removable blocker chips and workspace
task links.
- Improved execution workspace layout, runtime controls, issues tab
default, and stopped-port reuse behavior.
- Added mobile markdown/routine dialog fixes, page title company names,
sidebar polish, and dashboard run task label cleanup.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts`
## Risks
- Medium UI risk because this touches several operator surfaces. The
branch is intentionally grouped around workflow/QoL files and keeps the
file count below the Greptile limit.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` adapter, with
shell/git/GitHub CLI tool use.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip coordinates work through issue-thread interactions, run
history, and cost telemetry.
> - Operators need workflow prompts to be cancellable and costs to be
visible at the issue level.
> - The earlier rollup mixed this workflow/cost work with database
backups, reliability recovery, thread scaling, and settings polish.
> - This pull request isolates the interaction and cost surfaces into a
reviewable slice.
> - The backend now supports cancelling pending question interactions
and summarizing issue-tree costs.
> - The UI component layer can render cancelled questions and interleave
activity with run ledger rows.
## What Changed
- Added `cancelled` as an issue-thread interaction status and result
shape for question interactions.
- Added the board-only `POST
/issues/:id/interactions/:interactionId/cancel` route and service
implementation.
- Added issue-tree cost summary support in the cost service and
`/issues/:id/cost-summary` API route.
- Extended shared cost exports and UI API/query keys for issue cost
summaries.
- Updated `IssueThreadInteractionCard` and `IssueRunLedger` components
for cancelled questions, issue cost surfaces, and activity/run
interleaving.
- Added focused server and component regression coverage.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/costs-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRunLedger.test.tsx`
- Result: 4 test files passed, 45 tests passed.
- UI screenshots not included because this PR updates reusable
components and API surfaces without wiring a new page-level layout.
## Risks
- Adds a new interaction terminal status; clients that switch
exhaustively on interaction status may need to handle `cancelled`.
- Issue-tree cost summaries use recursive issue traversal and should be
watched on unusually large issue trees.
- Page-level issue detail wiring is intentionally left to the board
QoL/issue-detail branch to keep this PR narrow.
> 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-5.5, code execution and GitHub CLI tool use, medium
reasoning effort.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip's board UI is the operator surface for supervising
AI-agent companies.
> - Issue threads are where operators read progress, respond to agents,
inspect markdown, and jump through long histories.
> - Large threads and rich markdown had become difficult to navigate and
expensive to render.
> - The previous rollup mixed these UI scale fixes with unrelated
backend recovery, costs, backups, and settings changes.
> - This pull request isolates the issue-thread scale and markdown
polish work.
> - The benefit is a reviewable UI slice that can merge independently of
the backend reliability, database backup, workflow, and board QoL PRs.
## What Changed
- Virtualized long issue chat threads and stabilized
anchor/jump-to-latest behavior for large histories.
- Added incremental issue-list row loading and tests for
scroll-triggered pagination behavior.
- Hardened markdown body rendering and markdown editor behavior around
HTML tags, image drops, code-copy UI, and escaped newline handling.
- Added a long-thread measurement harness at
`scripts/measure-issue-chat-long-thread.mjs` plus
`perf:issue-chat-long-thread`.
- Added focused UI/lib regression coverage for thread rendering,
markdown, optimistic comments, and message building.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments.test.ts`
- Result: 6 test files passed, 170 tests passed.
- UI screenshots not included because this PR is covered by targeted
component tests and does not introduce a new page layout.
## Risks
- Virtualization changes can affect scroll anchoring in edge cases on
very long threads.
- Markdown/editor hardening changes are intentionally defensive, but
malformed content may render differently than before.
> 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-5.5, code execution and GitHub CLI tool use, medium
reasoning effort.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents through a company-scoped control
plane.
> - The affected surface is the board UI for issue threads, issue lists,
routines, dialogs, navigation, and issue review indicators.
> - Closed PR #4692 bundled backend, schema, docs, workflow, and UI/QoL
work into one oversized change set.
> - Greptile could not keep reviewing that broad PR because it exceeded
the 100-file review limit and mixed unrelated concerns.
> - This pull request extracts the UI/QoL slice into a fresh branch
under the review limit while leaving workflow and lockfile churn out.
> - The benefit is a focused review path for the board UI performance
and workflow improvements without reopening the oversized PR.
## What Changed
- Added long issue-thread virtualization, scroll-container binding,
anchor preservation, latest-comment jump targeting, and related
regression/perf fixtures.
- Improved issue list scalability with scroll-based loading, server
offset parameters, and pagination-focused UI tests.
- Reduced new issue dialog typing churn and split dialog action
subscriptions so broad layout/nav surfaces avoid unnecessary renders.
- Added routine variables help and routine description mention options
for users, agents, and projects.
- Added productivity review badge/link UI and fixed the badge to use
Paperclip's company-prefixed router link.
- Kept the split PR below Greptile's review limit and excluded
`.github/workflows/pr.yml` and `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --no-frozen-lockfile` in the clean worktree to install
`@tanstack/react-virtual` locally without committing lockfile churn.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run --config
vitest.config.ts src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx src/pages/Routines.test.tsx
src/pages/Issues.test.tsx` passed: 5 files, 83 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master..HEAD` passed.
- Split-scope checks: 53 changed files; no `.github/workflows/pr.yml`;
no `pnpm-lock.yaml`.
- Screenshots were not captured in this heartbeat; the changes are
primarily virtualization, routing, pagination, and editor behavior
covered by focused regression tests.
## Risks
- Moderate UI risk because issue-thread virtualization changes scroll
behavior on long conversations; regression tests cover anchor jumps,
latest-comment targeting, row metadata, and short-thread fallback.
- Moderate integration risk because the issue-list offset parameter and
productivity review field depend on matching API behavior.
- Dependency risk: the UI package adds `@tanstack/react-virtual` while
repository policy keeps `pnpm-lock.yaml` out of PRs, so CI must resolve
dependency changes through the repo's normal lockfile policy.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled local repository and
GitHub workflow. Exact runtime context window was not exposed by the
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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Reliable execution depends on heartbeat routing, issue lifecycle
semantics, telemetry, and a fast enough local verification loop to keep
regressions visible
> - The remaining commits on this branch were mostly server/runtime
correctness fixes plus test and documentation follow-ups in that area
> - Those changes are logically separate from the UI-focused
issue-detail and workspace/navigation branches even when they touch
overlapping issue APIs
> - This pull request groups the execution reliability, heartbeat,
telemetry, and tooling changes into one standalone branch
> - The benefit is a focused review of the control-plane correctness
work, including the follow-up fix that restored the implicit
comment-reopen helpers after branch splitting
## What Changed
- Hardened issue/heartbeat execution behavior, including self-review
stage skipping, deferred mention wakes during active execution, stranded
execution recovery, active-run scoping, assignee resolution, and
blocked-to-todo wake resumption
- Reduced noisy polling/logging overhead by trimming issue run payloads,
compacting persisted run logs, silencing high-volume request logs, and
capping heartbeat-run queries in dashboard/inbox surfaces
- Expanded telemetry and status semantics with adapter/model fields on
task completion plus clearer status guidance in docs/onboarding material
- Updated test infrastructure and verification defaults with faster
route-test module isolation, cheaper default `pnpm test`, e2e isolation
from local state, and repo verification follow-ups
- Included docs/release housekeeping from the branch and added a small
follow-up commit restoring the implicit comment-reopen helpers that were
dropped during branch reconstruction
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-telemetry-routes.test.ts`
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-run-log.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/health.test.ts`
- `server/src/__tests__/activity-service.test.ts`,
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`, and
`server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts` were attempted
on this host but the embedded Postgres harness reported
init-script/data-dir problems and skipped or failed to start, so they
are noted as environment-limited
## Risks
- Medium: this branch changes core issue/heartbeat routing and
reopen/wakeup behavior, so regressions would affect agent execution flow
rather than isolated UI polish
- Because it also updates verification infrastructure, reviewers should
pay attention to whether the new tests are asserting the right failure
modes and not just reshaping harness behavior
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact
deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning
enabled, tool use and local code execution 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)
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - A core part of that is the operator experience around reading issue
state, agent chat, and sub-task structure
> - The current branch had a long run of issue-detail and issue-list UX
fixes that all improve how humans follow and steer active work
> - Those changes mostly live in the UI/chat surface and should be
reviewed together instead of mixed with workspace/runtime work
> - This pull request packages the issue-detail, chat, markdown, and
sub-issue list improvements into one standalone change
> - The benefit is a cleaner, less jumpy, more reliable issue workflow
on desktop and mobile without coupling it to unrelated server/runtime
refactors
## What Changed
- Stabilized issue chat runtime wiring, optimistic comment handling,
queued-comment cancellation, and composer anchoring during live updates
- Fixed several issue-detail rendering and navigation regressions
including placeholder bleed, local polling scope, mobile inbox-to-issue
transitions, and visible refresh resets
- Improved markdown and rich-content handling with advisory image
normalization, editor fallback behavior, touch mention recovery, and
`issue:` quicklook links
- Refined sub-issue behavior with parent-derived defaults, current-user
inheritance fixes, empty-state cleanup, and a reusable issue-list
presentation for sub-issues
- Added targeted UI tests for the new issue-detail, chat scroll/message,
placeholder-data, markdown, and issue-list behaviors
## Verification
- `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-chat-scroll.test.ts
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/query-placeholder-data.test.tsx
ui/src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx`
## Risks
- Medium: this branch touches the highest-traffic issue-detail UI paths,
so regressions would show up as chat/thread or sub-issue UX glitches
- The changes are UI-heavy and would benefit from reviewer screenshots
or a quick manual browser pass before merge
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact
deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning
enabled, tool use and local code execution 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Devin Foley
scotttong
Dotta
Hardik Dholariya
Dotta
dotta
