## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The user interface tests verify company skill installation flows.
> - The install-preview dialog sets state through passive React effects.
> - The local test helper flushed render work but did not flush passive
effects.
> - Timer hops did not guarantee that React completed those effects
before user actions.
> - This pull request delegates the helper to React act and removes the
timer hops.
> - The benefit is deterministic CompanySkills tests without a
product-code change.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The CompanySkills install-preview dialog tests used a timer hop after
opening the dialog. The timer could run before React completed passive
effects. A later click then used stale dialog state.
**Expected behavior**
The test helper must flush passive effects before the test interacts
with the dialog. The tests must pass without a race between timer
callbacks and React scheduler tasks.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the CompanySkills test file many times from the ui directory.
2. Observe intermittent failures that report an empty agent list or a
null slug.
3. Run the same tests with React act to flush passive effects.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Commit 834f33c31b.
**Deployment mode**
Local dev (pnpm dev).
**Installation method**
Built from source (pnpm dev / pnpm build).
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (core bug).
**Database mode**
Not database-related.
## What Changed
- Delegate the local test helper to React act.
- Remove four setTimeout(0) hops that no longer provide synchronization.
- Keep all 29 tests and all product code unchanged.
## Verification
- Run npx vitest run src/pages/CompanySkills.test.tsx from ui/.
- Run pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec tsc --noEmit.
- Confirm that the full CI suite passes.
## Risks
Low risk. The change affects one test helper and one test file. It
changes test synchronization only.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code review support. The exact
context window and reasoning configuration are not exposed in this run.
## 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 (for example test/...) 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>
ca9c17df60