[codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678)
## 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>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
|
|
|
import express from "express";
|
|
|
|
|
import request from "supertest";
|
|
|
|
|
import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockIssueService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
getById: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
assertCheckoutOwner: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
getComment: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
removeComment: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockAccessService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
canUser: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
hasPermission: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockHeartbeatService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
getRun: vi.fn(async () => null),
|
|
|
|
|
getActiveRunForAgent: vi.fn(async () => null),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockLogActivity = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn(async () => undefined));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("@paperclipai/shared/telemetry", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
trackAgentTaskCompleted: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
trackErrorHandlerCrash: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../telemetry.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
getTelemetryClient: vi.fn(() => ({ track: vi.fn() })),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../services/index.js", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
accessService: () => mockAccessService,
|
|
|
|
|
agentService: () => ({ getById: vi.fn(async () => null) }),
|
|
|
|
|
documentService: () => ({}),
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspaceService: () => ({}),
|
|
|
|
|
feedbackService: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
listIssueVotesForUser: vi.fn(async () => []),
|
|
|
|
|
saveIssueVote: vi.fn(async () => ({ vote: null, consentEnabledNow: false, sharingEnabled: false })),
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
goalService: () => ({}),
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeatService: () => mockHeartbeatService,
|
|
|
|
|
instanceSettingsService: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
get: vi.fn(async () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
id: "instance-settings-1",
|
|
|
|
|
general: {
|
|
|
|
|
censorUsernameInLogs: false,
|
|
|
|
|
feedbackDataSharingPreference: "prompt",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
})),
|
|
|
|
|
listCompanyIds: vi.fn(async () => ["company-1"]),
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
issueApprovalService: () => ({}),
|
Add first-class issue references (#4214)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators and agents coordinate through company-scoped issues,
comments, documents, and task relationships.
> - Issue text can mention other tickets, but those references were
previously plain markdown/text without durable relationship data.
> - That made it harder to understand related work, surface backlinks,
and keep cross-ticket context visible in the board.
> - This pull request adds first-class issue reference extraction,
storage, API responses, and UI surfaces.
> - The benefit is that issue references become queryable, navigable,
and visible without relying on ad hoc text scanning.
## What Changed
- Added shared issue-reference parsing utilities and exported
reference-related types/constants.
- Added an `issue_reference_mentions` table, idempotent migration DDL,
schema exports, and database documentation.
- Added server-side issue reference services, route integration,
activity summaries, and a backfill command for existing issue content.
- Added UI reference pills, related-work panels, markdown/editor mention
handling, and issue detail/property rendering updates.
- Added focused shared, server, and UI tests for parsing, persistence,
display, and related-work behavior.
- Rebased `PAP-735-first-class-task-references` cleanly onto
`public-gh/master`; no `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes are included.
## Verification
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm test:run packages/shared/src/issue-references.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-references-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRelatedWorkPanel.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx`
## Risks
- Medium risk because this adds a new issue-reference persistence path
that touches shared parsing, database schema, server routes, and UI
rendering.
- Migration risk is mitigated by `CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS`, guarded
foreign-key creation, and `CREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS` statements so
users who have applied an older local version of the numbered migration
can re-run safely.
- UI risk is limited by focused component coverage, but reviewers should
still manually inspect issue detail pages containing ticket references
before merge.
> 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, tool-using shell workflow with
repository inspection, git rebase/push, typecheck, and focused Vitest
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 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: dotta <dotta@example.com>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-21 10:02:52 -05:00
|
|
|
issueReferenceService: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
deleteDocumentSource: async () => undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
diffIssueReferenceSummary: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
addedReferencedIssues: [],
|
|
|
|
|
removedReferencedIssues: [],
|
|
|
|
|
currentReferencedIssues: [],
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
emptySummary: () => ({ outbound: [], inbound: [] }),
|
|
|
|
|
listIssueReferenceSummary: async () => ({ outbound: [], inbound: [] }),
|
|
|
|
|
syncComment: async () => undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
syncDocument: async () => undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
syncIssue: async () => undefined,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
[codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678)
## 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>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
|
|
|
issueService: () => mockIssueService,
|
|
|
|
|
logActivity: mockLogActivity,
|
|
|
|
|
projectService: () => ({}),
|
|
|
|
|
routineService: () => ({ syncRunStatusForIssue: vi.fn(async () => undefined) }),
|
|
|
|
|
workProductService: () => ({}),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function createApp() {
|
|
|
|
|
const app = express();
|
|
|
|
|
app.use(express.json());
|
|
|
|
|
return app;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function installActor(app: express.Express, actor?: Record<string, unknown>) {
|
|
|
|
|
const [{ issueRoutes }, { errorHandler }] = await Promise.all([
|
|
|
|
|
import("../routes/issues.js"),
|
|
|
|
|
import("../middleware/index.js"),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
|
|
|
|
|
(req as any).actor = actor ?? {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "board",
|
|
|
|
|
userId: "local-board",
|
|
|
|
|
companyIds: ["company-1"],
|
|
|
|
|
source: "local_implicit",
|
|
|
|
|
isInstanceAdmin: false,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
next();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
app.use("/api", issueRoutes({} as any, {} as any));
|
|
|
|
|
app.use(errorHandler);
|
|
|
|
|
return app;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function makeIssue() {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: "run-1",
|
|
|
|
|
identifier: "PAP-1353",
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Queued cancel",
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function makeComment(overrides: Record<string, unknown> = {}) {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "comment-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
|
|
|
|
|
authorAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
authorUserId: "local-board",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Queued follow-up",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:01:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:01:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
...overrides,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("issue comment cancel routes", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
vi.resetModules();
|
|
|
|
|
vi.resetAllMocks();
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue(makeIssue());
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.assertCheckoutOwner.mockResolvedValue({ adoptedFromRunId: null });
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(makeComment());
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.removeComment.mockResolvedValue(makeComment());
|
|
|
|
|
mockAccessService.canUser.mockResolvedValue(false);
|
|
|
|
|
mockAccessService.hasPermission.mockResolvedValue(false);
|
|
|
|
|
mockHeartbeatService.getRun.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
id: "run-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
agentId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "running",
|
|
|
|
|
startedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:59:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
mockHeartbeatService.getActiveRunForAgent.mockResolvedValue(null);
|
|
|
|
|
mockLogActivity.mockResolvedValue(undefined);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("cancels a queued comment from its author and restores the deleted body", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
|
|
|
|
|
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
id: "comment-1",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Queued follow-up",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).toHaveBeenCalledWith("comment-1");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
|
|
|
|
|
expect.anything(),
|
|
|
|
|
expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
action: "issue.comment_cancelled",
|
|
|
|
|
details: expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
commentId: "comment-1",
|
|
|
|
|
source: "queue_cancel",
|
|
|
|
|
queueTargetRunId: "run-1",
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("rejects canceling comments that are no longer queued", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(
|
|
|
|
|
makeComment({
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:58:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:58:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
|
|
|
|
|
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(409);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body.error).toBe("Only queued comments can be canceled");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("rejects canceling another actor's queued comment", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(
|
|
|
|
|
makeComment({
|
|
|
|
|
authorUserId: "someone-else",
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
|
|
|
|
|
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(res.body.error).toBe("Only the comment author can cancel queued comments");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|