2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
// @vitest-environment jsdom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polish operator UI task controls (#5427)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Operators spend most of their day scanning skills, routines, inbox
groups, and activity cards
> - Several small UI rough edges made those surfaces harder to scan or
easier to crash on real API payloads
> - These fixes are grouped together because they are low-risk operator
quality-of-life improvements rather than separate control-plane
contracts
> - This pull request polishes skills metadata, routine run-now access,
grouped issue creation defaults, monitor activity rendering, and
activity row identity layout
> - The benefit is a smoother board workflow with fewer small
interruptions while keeping the change set compact
## What Changed
- Improves company skill source display and the used-by agent list.
- Truncates long skill source paths and adds a copy affordance.
- Adds a row-level run-now button to the routines table.
- Adds grouped issue creation defaults for inbox issue groups and aligns
grouped add buttons to the right.
- Fixes `IssueMonitorActivityCard` when `monitorNextCheckAt` arrives as
an ISO string.
- Polishes activity row actor avatar/name layout by using the shared
avatar primitive.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueMonitorActivityCard.test.tsx` — 91 passed.
- The routines test emitted the pre-existing Radix warning about missing
`DialogTitle`/description in dialog content; tests still passed.
- Pairwise merge checks against the other two PR branches reported no
textual conflicts.
## Risks
- Low: changes are UI-focused and covered by targeted component/lib
tests.
- Low-to-medium: activity row layout changes could affect dense feed
scanability; the implementation uses the shared avatar component and
keeps truncation 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 coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled
Paperclip heartbeat environment. 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 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>
2026-05-07 12:24:02 -05:00
|
|
|
import { act, type AnchorHTMLAttributes, type ReactNode } from "react";
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
import { createRoot } from "react-dom/client";
|
|
|
|
|
import { QueryClient, QueryClientProvider } from "@tanstack/react-query";
|
|
|
|
|
import type { Issue, RoutineListItem } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
|
|
|
import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
Polish board settings and skills workflow (#4863)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip's board UI and bundled skills are the operator layer for
configuring agents, routines, issue workflows, and local troubleshooting
loops.
> - The prior rollup mixed this operator polish with database backups,
backend reliability, thread scale, and cost/workflow primitives.
> - This pull request isolates the remaining board QoL, settings,
issue-detail integration, adapter config cleanup, and skills smoke
tooling.
> - It includes some integration-level overlap with the thread and
workflow slices so this branch can run from `origin/master` while still
preserving the full original work.
> - Preferred merge order is the narrower primitives first, then this
integration PR last.
> - The benefit is that reviewers can inspect the user-facing
board/settings/skills layer separately from backend infrastructure
changes.
## What Changed
- Added board/settings polish for agents, routines, company settings,
project workspace detail, and issue detail controls.
- Added agent/routine UI regression tests and New Issue dialog coverage.
- Integrated issue-detail activity/cost/interaction surfaces and leaf
work pause/resume controls.
- Cleaned bundled adapter UI config defaults and onboarding copy.
- Added terminal-bench loop and work-stoppage diagnosis skills plus a
smoke test script.
- Updated attachment type handling and Paperclip skill/API guidance.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/Agents.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
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`
- Result: 7 test files passed, 54 tests passed.
- `pnpm run smoke:terminal-bench-loop-skill`
- Result: JSON output included `"ok": true` and `"cleanup": true`.
- UI screenshots not included because verification is focused
component/page coverage for the changed board surfaces.
## Risks
- This is the integration-heavy PR in the split and intentionally
overlaps some component/API primitives with the issue-thread and
workflow PRs so it can run from `origin/master`.
- Preferred merge order: #4859, #4860, #4861, #4862, then this PR last.
If earlier branches merge first, this PR may need a straightforward
conflict refresh in shared UI files.
- The terminal-bench smoke script creates temporary mock issues and
relies on cleanup; the verified run returned `cleanup: true`.
> 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>
2026-04-30 15:28:11 -05:00
|
|
|
import { Routines, buildRoutineGroups, sortRoutines } from "./Routines";
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let currentSearch = "";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const navigateMock = vi.fn();
|
|
|
|
|
const routinesListMock = vi.fn<(companyId: string) => Promise<RoutineListItem[]>>();
|
|
|
|
|
const issuesListMock = vi.fn<(companyId: string, filters?: Record<string, unknown>) => Promise<Issue[]>>();
|
[codex] Split PR #4692 UI/QoL updates (#4701)
## 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>
2026-04-28 17:18:58 -05:00
|
|
|
const markdownEditorRenderMock = vi.fn((props: { mentions?: Array<{ id: string; name: string }> }) => props);
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
const issuesListRenderMock = vi.fn(({ issues }: { issues: Issue[] }) => (
|
|
|
|
|
<div data-testid="issues-list">{issues.map((issue) => issue.title).join(", ")}</div>
|
|
|
|
|
));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("@/lib/router", () => ({
|
Polish operator UI task controls (#5427)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Operators spend most of their day scanning skills, routines, inbox
groups, and activity cards
> - Several small UI rough edges made those surfaces harder to scan or
easier to crash on real API payloads
> - These fixes are grouped together because they are low-risk operator
quality-of-life improvements rather than separate control-plane
contracts
> - This pull request polishes skills metadata, routine run-now access,
grouped issue creation defaults, monitor activity rendering, and
activity row identity layout
> - The benefit is a smoother board workflow with fewer small
interruptions while keeping the change set compact
## What Changed
- Improves company skill source display and the used-by agent list.
- Truncates long skill source paths and adds a copy affordance.
- Adds a row-level run-now button to the routines table.
- Adds grouped issue creation defaults for inbox issue groups and aligns
grouped add buttons to the right.
- Fixes `IssueMonitorActivityCard` when `monitorNextCheckAt` arrives as
an ISO string.
- Polishes activity row actor avatar/name layout by using the shared
avatar primitive.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueMonitorActivityCard.test.tsx` — 91 passed.
- The routines test emitted the pre-existing Radix warning about missing
`DialogTitle`/description in dialog content; tests still passed.
- Pairwise merge checks against the other two PR branches reported no
textual conflicts.
## Risks
- Low: changes are UI-focused and covered by targeted component/lib
tests.
- Low-to-medium: activity row layout changes could affect dense feed
scanability; the implementation uses the shared avatar component and
keeps truncation 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 coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled
Paperclip heartbeat environment. 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 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>
2026-05-07 12:24:02 -05:00
|
|
|
Link: ({ to, children, ...props }: AnchorHTMLAttributes<HTMLAnchorElement> & { to: string; children: ReactNode }) => (
|
|
|
|
|
<a href={to} {...props}>
|
|
|
|
|
{children}
|
|
|
|
|
</a>
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
useNavigate: () => navigateMock,
|
|
|
|
|
useLocation: () => ({ pathname: "/routines", search: currentSearch ? `?${currentSearch}` : "", hash: "" }),
|
|
|
|
|
useSearchParams: () => [new URLSearchParams(currentSearch), vi.fn()],
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/CompanyContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useCompany: () => ({ selectedCompanyId: "company-1" }),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/BreadcrumbContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useBreadcrumbs: () => ({ setBreadcrumbs: vi.fn() }),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/ToastContext", () => ({
|
[codex] Harden execution reliability and heartbeat tooling (#3679)
## 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>
2026-04-14 13:34:52 -05:00
|
|
|
useToastActions: () => ({ pushToast: vi.fn() }),
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/routines", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
routinesApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
list: (companyId: string) => routinesListMock(companyId),
|
|
|
|
|
create: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
update: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
run: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/issues", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
issuesApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
list: (companyId: string, filters?: Record<string, unknown>) => issuesListMock(companyId, filters),
|
|
|
|
|
update: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/agents", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
agentsApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
list: vi.fn(async () => [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Agent One",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
title: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
reportsTo: null,
|
|
|
|
|
capabilities: null,
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "process",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
contextMode: "thin",
|
|
|
|
|
budgetMonthlyCents: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
spentMonthlyCents: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
lastHeartbeatAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
icon: "code",
|
|
|
|
|
metadata: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
urlKey: "agent-one",
|
|
|
|
|
pauseReason: null,
|
|
|
|
|
pausedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "agent-2",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Agent Two",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
title: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
reportsTo: null,
|
|
|
|
|
capabilities: null,
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "process",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
contextMode: "thin",
|
|
|
|
|
budgetMonthlyCents: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
spentMonthlyCents: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
lastHeartbeatAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
icon: "code",
|
|
|
|
|
metadata: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
urlKey: "agent-two",
|
|
|
|
|
pauseReason: null,
|
|
|
|
|
pausedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/projects", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
projectsApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
list: vi.fn(async () => [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "project-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
urlKey: "project-alpha",
|
|
|
|
|
goalId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
goalIds: [],
|
|
|
|
|
goals: [],
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Project Alpha",
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
leadAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
targetDate: null,
|
|
|
|
|
color: "#22c55e",
|
|
|
|
|
pauseReason: null,
|
|
|
|
|
pausedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
archivedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspacePolicy: null,
|
|
|
|
|
codebase: null,
|
|
|
|
|
workspaces: [],
|
|
|
|
|
primaryWorkspace: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "project-2",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
urlKey: "project-beta",
|
|
|
|
|
goalId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
goalIds: [],
|
|
|
|
|
goals: [],
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Project Beta",
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
leadAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
targetDate: null,
|
|
|
|
|
color: "#38bdf8",
|
|
|
|
|
pauseReason: null,
|
|
|
|
|
pausedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
archivedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspacePolicy: null,
|
|
|
|
|
codebase: null,
|
|
|
|
|
workspaces: [],
|
|
|
|
|
primaryWorkspace: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Split PR #4692 UI/QoL updates (#4701)
## 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>
2026-04-28 17:18:58 -05:00
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/access", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
accessApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
listUserDirectory: vi.fn(async () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
users: [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
principalId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
user: {
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Taylor",
|
|
|
|
|
email: "taylor@example.com",
|
|
|
|
|
image: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
})),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/instanceSettings", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
instanceSettingsApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
getExperimental: vi.fn(async () => ({ enableIsolatedWorkspaces: false })),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/heartbeats", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeatsApi: {
|
|
|
|
|
liveRunsForCompany: vi.fn(async () => []),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/IssuesList", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
IssuesList: (props: { issues: Issue[] }) => issuesListRenderMock(props),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/PageTabBar", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
PageTabBar: ({ items }: { items: Array<{ label: string }> }) => (
|
|
|
|
|
<div>{items.map((item) => item.label).join(", ")}</div>
|
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("@/components/ui/tabs", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
Tabs: ({ children }: { children: unknown }) => <div>{children as never}</div>,
|
|
|
|
|
TabsContent: ({ children }: { children: unknown }) => <div>{children as never}</div>,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/MarkdownEditor", () => ({
|
[codex] Split PR #4692 UI/QoL updates (#4701)
## 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>
2026-04-28 17:18:58 -05:00
|
|
|
MarkdownEditor: (props: { mentions?: Array<{ id: string; name: string }> }) => {
|
|
|
|
|
markdownEditorRenderMock(props);
|
|
|
|
|
return <div data-testid="markdown-editor" />;
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/InlineEntitySelector", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
InlineEntitySelector: () => <button type="button">selector</button>,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/RoutineRunVariablesDialog", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
RoutineRunVariablesDialog: () => null,
|
|
|
|
|
routineRunNeedsConfiguration: () => false,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/RoutineVariablesEditor", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
RoutineVariablesEditor: () => null,
|
|
|
|
|
RoutineVariablesHint: () => null,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../components/AgentIconPicker", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
AgentIcon: () => <span data-testid="agent-icon" />,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any
|
|
|
|
|
(globalThis as any).IS_REACT_ACT_ENVIRONMENT = true;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function createRoutine(overrides: Partial<RoutineListItem>): RoutineListItem {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
projectId: "project-1",
|
|
|
|
|
goalId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
parentIssueId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Routine title",
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: "agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
concurrencyPolicy: "coalesce_if_active",
|
|
|
|
|
catchUpPolicy: "skip_missed",
|
|
|
|
|
variables: [],
|
Add routine revision history and restore flow (#5285)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies.
> - Routines are the scheduled/recurring work surface that keeps a
company operating without manual kicks.
> - Operators need routine edits to be auditable and recoverable,
especially when routines control assignments, prompts, triggers, and
webhook secrets.
> - Documents already have revision-style safety, but routines did not
have equivalent history or restore semantics.
> - This pull request adds append-only routine revisions across the
database, shared contracts, server routes, and board UI.
> - The benefit is safer routine iteration: users can inspect history,
compare changes, restore older definitions, and avoid overwriting newer
edits.
## What Changed
- Added `routine_revisions` storage, latest revision pointers on
routines, shared types, validators, and API docs for routine revision
history.
- Added server service/route support for listing routine revisions,
conflict-aware routine saves, and append-only restore operations.
- Added a History tab on routine detail with revision preview,
structured change summaries, description line diffs, dirty-edit
blocking, restore confirmation, and restored webhook secret surfacing.
- Extracted the line diff helper from `DocumentDiffModal` into
`ui/src/lib/line-diff.ts` for reuse.
- Rebased the branch onto current `public-gh/master` and renumbered the
routine revision migration to `0077_unusual_karnak` after upstream
`0076_useful_elektra`.
- Made the `0077` routine revision migration idempotent so installs that
already applied the branch-local `0076_unusual_karnak` can safely
advance.
- Updated the plugin SDK test harness routine fixture with the new
revision fields required by the shared `Routine` contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db run check:migrations` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/shared
packages/shared/src/validators/routine.test.ts` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui
ui/src/lib/line-diff.test.ts
ui/src/components/RoutineHistoryTab.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/workspace-routines.test.ts ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx`
passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/server
server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts --pool=forks
--poolOptions.forks.isolate=true` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk typecheck` passed after
updating the SDK test harness fixture.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` passed; this refreshed
local generated SDK output needed by plugin example typechecks.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
## Risks
- Medium migration risk: this adds routine revision storage and
backfills existing routines. The migration is ordered after upstream
`0076` and uses `IF NOT EXISTS` / duplicate-object guards to tolerate
earlier branch-local migration application.
- Restore behavior intentionally appends a new revision instead of
mutating history; callers expecting an in-place rollback need to follow
the new latest revision pointer.
- Restoring webhook triggers recreates webhook secret material, so users
must copy newly surfaced secrets after restore.
- Conflict-aware saves now reject stale routine edits when the client
sends an older `baseRevisionId`.
> 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/tool use in a local
git worktree. 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
Screenshots: not attached in this draft PR; the new UI flow is covered
by component tests listed above.
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-05 11:54:52 -05:00
|
|
|
latestRevisionId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
latestRevisionNumber: 1,
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
createdByAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
updatedByAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
updatedByUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastTriggeredAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastEnqueuedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
triggers: [],
|
|
|
|
|
lastRun: null,
|
|
|
|
|
activeIssue: null,
|
|
|
|
|
...overrides,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function createIssue(overrides: Partial<Issue> = {}): Issue {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "issue-1",
|
|
|
|
|
identifier: "PAP-1000",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
projectId: "project-1",
|
|
|
|
|
projectWorkspaceId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
goalId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Routine execution issue",
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: "agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByUserId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
issueNumber: 1000,
|
|
|
|
|
originKind: "routine_execution",
|
|
|
|
|
originId: "routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
originRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
requestDepth: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
billingCode: null,
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAdapterOverrides: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspaceId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspacePreference: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionWorkspaceSettings: null,
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
startedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
completedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
cancelledAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
hiddenAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
labels: [],
|
|
|
|
|
labelIds: [],
|
|
|
|
|
myLastTouchAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastExternalCommentAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastActivityAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
isUnreadForMe: false,
|
|
|
|
|
...overrides,
|
Add planning mode for issue work (#5353)
## 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>
2026-05-06 07:01:28 -05:00
|
|
|
workMode: overrides.workMode ?? "standard",
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function flush() {
|
|
|
|
|
await Promise.resolve();
|
|
|
|
|
await Promise.resolve();
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((resolve) => window.setTimeout(resolve, 0));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("Routines page", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
let container: HTMLDivElement;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
container = document.createElement("div");
|
|
|
|
|
document.body.appendChild(container);
|
|
|
|
|
currentSearch = "";
|
|
|
|
|
navigateMock.mockReset();
|
|
|
|
|
routinesListMock.mockReset();
|
|
|
|
|
issuesListMock.mockReset();
|
[codex] Split PR #4692 UI/QoL updates (#4701)
## 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>
2026-04-28 17:18:58 -05:00
|
|
|
markdownEditorRenderMock.mockClear();
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
issuesListRenderMock.mockClear();
|
|
|
|
|
localStorage.clear();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
container.remove();
|
|
|
|
|
document.body.innerHTML = "";
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("groups routines by project using project names for the section labels", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const groups = buildRoutineGroups(
|
|
|
|
|
[
|
|
|
|
|
createRoutine({ id: "routine-1", title: "Morning sync", projectId: "project-1" }),
|
|
|
|
|
createRoutine({ id: "routine-2", title: "Weekly digest", projectId: "project-2", assigneeAgentId: "agent-2" }),
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"project",
|
|
|
|
|
new Map([
|
|
|
|
|
["project-1", { name: "Project Alpha" }],
|
|
|
|
|
["project-2", { name: "Project Beta" }],
|
|
|
|
|
]),
|
|
|
|
|
new Map([
|
|
|
|
|
["agent-1", { name: "Agent One" }],
|
|
|
|
|
["agent-2", { name: "Agent Two" }],
|
|
|
|
|
]),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(groups.map((group) => group.label)).toEqual(["Project Alpha", "Project Beta"]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(groups[0]?.items.map((item) => item.title)).toEqual(["Morning sync"]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(groups[1]?.items.map((item) => item.title)).toEqual(["Weekly digest"]);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polish board settings and skills workflow (#4863)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip's board UI and bundled skills are the operator layer for
configuring agents, routines, issue workflows, and local troubleshooting
loops.
> - The prior rollup mixed this operator polish with database backups,
backend reliability, thread scale, and cost/workflow primitives.
> - This pull request isolates the remaining board QoL, settings,
issue-detail integration, adapter config cleanup, and skills smoke
tooling.
> - It includes some integration-level overlap with the thread and
workflow slices so this branch can run from `origin/master` while still
preserving the full original work.
> - Preferred merge order is the narrower primitives first, then this
integration PR last.
> - The benefit is that reviewers can inspect the user-facing
board/settings/skills layer separately from backend infrastructure
changes.
## What Changed
- Added board/settings polish for agents, routines, company settings,
project workspace detail, and issue detail controls.
- Added agent/routine UI regression tests and New Issue dialog coverage.
- Integrated issue-detail activity/cost/interaction surfaces and leaf
work pause/resume controls.
- Cleaned bundled adapter UI config defaults and onboarding copy.
- Added terminal-bench loop and work-stoppage diagnosis skills plus a
smoke test script.
- Updated attachment type handling and Paperclip skill/API guidance.
## Verification
- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/Agents.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
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`
- Result: 7 test files passed, 54 tests passed.
- `pnpm run smoke:terminal-bench-loop-skill`
- Result: JSON output included `"ok": true` and `"cleanup": true`.
- UI screenshots not included because verification is focused
component/page coverage for the changed board surfaces.
## Risks
- This is the integration-heavy PR in the split and intentionally
overlaps some component/API primitives with the issue-thread and
workflow PRs so it can run from `origin/master`.
- Preferred merge order: #4859, #4860, #4861, #4862, then this PR last.
If earlier branches merge first, this PR may need a straightforward
conflict refresh in shared UI files.
- The terminal-bench smoke script creates temporary mock issues and
relies on cleanup; the verified run returned `cleanup: true`.
> 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>
2026-04-30 15:28:11 -05:00
|
|
|
it("sorts routines by selected field and direction without mutating the source list", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const routines = [
|
|
|
|
|
createRoutine({
|
|
|
|
|
id: "routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Weekly digest",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
lastRun: {
|
|
|
|
|
id: "run-1",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
routineId: "routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "manual",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "succeeded",
|
|
|
|
|
triggeredAt: new Date("2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
idempotencyKey: null,
|
|
|
|
|
triggerPayload: null,
|
|
|
|
|
dispatchFingerprint: null,
|
|
|
|
|
linkedIssueId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
coalescedIntoRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
failureReason: null,
|
|
|
|
|
completedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
linkedIssue: null,
|
|
|
|
|
trigger: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
createRoutine({
|
|
|
|
|
id: "routine-2",
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Morning sync",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-04T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
lastRun: null,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(sortRoutines(routines, "title", "asc").map((routine) => routine.title)).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
"Morning sync",
|
|
|
|
|
"Weekly digest",
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(sortRoutines(routines, "updated", "desc").map((routine) => routine.id)).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
"routine-2",
|
|
|
|
|
"routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(sortRoutines(routines, "lastRun", "desc").map((routine) => routine.id)).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
"routine-1",
|
|
|
|
|
"routine-2",
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(routines.map((routine) => routine.id)).toEqual(["routine-1", "routine-2"]);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("renders the routines sort control before the group control", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
routinesListMock.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
issuesListMock.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: {
|
|
|
|
|
queries: { retry: false },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Routines />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let sortButton = container.querySelector<HTMLButtonElement>('button[title="Sort"]');
|
|
|
|
|
let groupButton = container.querySelector<HTMLButtonElement>('button[title="Group"]');
|
|
|
|
|
for (let attempts = 0; attempts < 5 && (!sortButton || !groupButton); attempts += 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
sortButton = container.querySelector<HTMLButtonElement>('button[title="Sort"]');
|
|
|
|
|
groupButton = container.querySelector<HTMLButtonElement>('button[title="Group"]');
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(sortButton).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(groupButton).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(sortButton!.compareDocumentPosition(groupButton!) & Node.DOCUMENT_POSITION_FOLLOWING).toBeTruthy();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polish operator UI task controls (#5427)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Operators spend most of their day scanning skills, routines, inbox
groups, and activity cards
> - Several small UI rough edges made those surfaces harder to scan or
easier to crash on real API payloads
> - These fixes are grouped together because they are low-risk operator
quality-of-life improvements rather than separate control-plane
contracts
> - This pull request polishes skills metadata, routine run-now access,
grouped issue creation defaults, monitor activity rendering, and
activity row identity layout
> - The benefit is a smoother board workflow with fewer small
interruptions while keeping the change set compact
## What Changed
- Improves company skill source display and the used-by agent list.
- Truncates long skill source paths and adds a copy affordance.
- Adds a row-level run-now button to the routines table.
- Adds grouped issue creation defaults for inbox issue groups and aligns
grouped add buttons to the right.
- Fixes `IssueMonitorActivityCard` when `monitorNextCheckAt` arrives as
an ISO string.
- Polishes activity row actor avatar/name layout by using the shared
avatar primitive.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/inbox.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueMonitorActivityCard.test.tsx` — 91 passed.
- The routines test emitted the pre-existing Radix warning about missing
`DialogTitle`/description in dialog content; tests still passed.
- Pairwise merge checks against the other two PR branches reported no
textual conflicts.
## Risks
- Low: changes are UI-focused and covered by targeted component/lib
tests.
- Low-to-medium: activity row layout changes could affect dense feed
scanability; the implementation uses the shared avatar component and
keeps truncation 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 coding agent, GPT-5 model family (`gpt-5`), tool-enabled
Paperclip heartbeat environment. 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 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>
2026-05-07 12:24:02 -05:00
|
|
|
it("shows a row-level run now button on the routines table", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
routinesListMock.mockResolvedValue([createRoutine({ id: "routine-1", title: "Morning sync" })]);
|
|
|
|
|
issuesListMock.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: {
|
|
|
|
|
queries: { retry: false },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Routines />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let runNowButton = Array.from(container.querySelectorAll("button")).find((button) =>
|
|
|
|
|
button.textContent?.includes("Run now"),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
for (let attempts = 0; attempts < 5 && !runNowButton; attempts += 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
runNowButton = Array.from(container.querySelectorAll("button")).find((button) =>
|
|
|
|
|
button.textContent?.includes("Run now"),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(runNowButton).toBeTruthy();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
[codex] Split PR #4692 UI/QoL updates (#4701)
## 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>
2026-04-28 17:18:58 -05:00
|
|
|
it("passes company mention options to the routine description editor", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
routinesListMock.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
issuesListMock.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: {
|
|
|
|
|
queries: { retry: false },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Routines />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let createButton = Array.from(container.querySelectorAll("button")).find((button) =>
|
|
|
|
|
button.textContent?.includes("Create routine"),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
for (let attempts = 0; attempts < 5 && !createButton; attempts += 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
createButton = Array.from(container.querySelectorAll("button")).find((button) =>
|
|
|
|
|
button.textContent?.includes("Create routine"),
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(createButton).toBeTruthy();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
createButton?.click();
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (let attempts = 0; attempts < 5; attempts += 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
const hasMentionOptions = markdownEditorRenderMock.mock.calls.some(([props]) => (props.mentions ?? []).length > 0);
|
|
|
|
|
if (hasMentionOptions) break;
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const callsWithMentions = markdownEditorRenderMock.mock.calls
|
|
|
|
|
.map(([props]) => props.mentions ?? [])
|
|
|
|
|
.filter((mentions) => mentions.length > 0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(callsWithMentions.at(-1)?.map((mention) => mention.id)).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
"user:user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
"agent:agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
"agent:agent-2",
|
|
|
|
|
"project:project-1",
|
|
|
|
|
"project:project-2",
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-04 13:38:34 -05:00
|
|
|
it("shows recent runs through the issues list scoped to routine execution issues", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
currentSearch = "tab=runs";
|
|
|
|
|
routinesListMock.mockResolvedValue([createRoutine({ id: "routine-1" })]);
|
|
|
|
|
issuesListMock.mockResolvedValue([
|
|
|
|
|
createIssue({ id: "issue-1", title: "Routine execution A" }),
|
|
|
|
|
createIssue({ id: "issue-2", title: "Routine execution B", identifier: "PAP-1001", issueNumber: 1001 }),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: {
|
|
|
|
|
queries: { retry: false },
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Routines />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
await flush();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(issuesListMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith("company-1", { originKind: "routine_execution" });
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|