[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
|
|
|
// @vitest-environment node
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import { describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
|
Present ordered sub-issues as a workflow checklist (#4523)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators use issue detail pages and child issue lists to understand
multi-step execution plans.
> - Ordered sub-issues currently read like a flat table, so dependency
chains and current next steps are harder to scan.
> - The branch work adds a workflow-oriented presentation for child
issues without changing the single-assignee task model.
> - This pull request makes ordered sub-issues read more like a progress
checklist while preserving normal issue list controls.
> - The benefit is that operators can see completed steps, active work,
blocked follow-ups, and dependency order at a glance.
## What Changed
- Added workflow sorting utilities and tests for dependency-aware child
issue ordering.
- Added sub-issue progress summary, checklist numbering, current-step
affordances, blocker context, and done-state de-emphasis in the issue
list UI.
- Wired issue detail sub-issue panels to use the workflow sort/progress
checklist presentation.
- Updated issue service behavior/tests for child issue ordering inputs
used by the UI.
- Added a Storybook visual review fixture and screenshot helper for the
sub-issue workflow checklist surface.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workflow-sort.test.ts`
- Result: 6 test files passed, 55 tests passed, 34 embedded Postgres
issue-service tests skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is
unavailable on this host.
- Visual review: generated Storybook screenshots from the existing local
Storybook server on port 6006 with `node
scripts/screenshot-subissues.mjs /tmp/pap-2189-subissues-screens
http://localhost:6006`.
- Screenshot artifacts:
- Desktop dark: 
- Desktop light: 
- Mobile dark: 
- Mobile light: 
- Local Storybook note: starting a second Storybook process selected
port 6008 because 6006 was occupied, then Vite failed with an esbuild
host/binary version mismatch (`0.25.12` host vs `0.27.3` binary). The
already-running Storybook server on 6006 served the fixture successfully
for screenshots.
## Risks
- Medium UI risk: the issue list now has additional sub-issue-specific
visual states, so dense lists should be checked for spacing and
scanability.
- Low ordering risk: workflow sorting is covered by focused unit tests,
but unusual dependency topologies may still need reviewer attention.
- No migration risk: this PR does not add database migrations or touch
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
> 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 shell/git/GitHub
workflow. Context window is runtime-provided and not exposed 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 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>
2026-04-26 07:36:49 -05:00
|
|
|
import type { Issue } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
|
|
|
import {
|
Add ordered sub-issue navigation (#5938)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped
issues, comments, and execution context.
> - The issue detail page is the board surface where operators and
agents inspect a task in its parent/child workflow.
> - Ordered sub-issues need a low-friction way to move through work
without returning to the parent list after every issue.
> - Existing issue detail navigation only covered sibling transitions
and did not continue into a parent issue's first ordered child.
> - This pull request adds ordered previous/next navigation for issue
detail views and extends it to continue from a parent or last sibling
into the first direct child.
> - The benefit is a smoother review/execution path through hierarchical
work while preserving hidden issue filtering and dependency-aware
ordering.
## What Changed
- Added `IssueSiblingNavigation` and route-state handling so issue
detail footers can link to previous/next ordered issues.
- Extended sub-issue ordering helpers to build navigation from siblings
plus direct children, including root-parent and
last-sibling-to-first-child cases.
- Added page, component, and library tests for ordered sibling
navigation, child fallback navigation, hidden issues, and link
rendering.
- Fixed the quicklook blur/click race Greptile found by deferring close
until after portaled link clicks can complete, with a regression test.
- Polished the navigation landmark label so it remains accurate when the
next target is a direct child rather than a sibling.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueLinkQuicklook.test.tsx
src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
src/components/IssueSiblingNavigation.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --config vitest.config.ts` from `ui/` -
31 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed.
- `git diff --check` - passed.
- GitHub PR checks on latest head `34046be2` - passed: Greptile Review,
verify, e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, Snyk, and serialized server shards.
- Screenshots: not captured in this heartbeat; this PR is a draft and
the changed states are covered by focused component/page tests.
## Risks
- Low risk; this is a UI navigation addition with no database or API
contract changes.
- The main behavioral risk is navigation ordering drift if
`workflowSort` expectations change later.
- The IssueDetail navigation now waits for child issue loading, which
avoids stale child fallback links but can delay footer navigation
briefly while data loads.
> 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 shell
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 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>
2026-05-13 15:43:51 -05:00
|
|
|
buildIssueSiblingNavigation,
|
Present ordered sub-issues as a workflow checklist (#4523)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators use issue detail pages and child issue lists to understand
multi-step execution plans.
> - Ordered sub-issues currently read like a flat table, so dependency
chains and current next steps are harder to scan.
> - The branch work adds a workflow-oriented presentation for child
issues without changing the single-assignee task model.
> - This pull request makes ordered sub-issues read more like a progress
checklist while preserving normal issue list controls.
> - The benefit is that operators can see completed steps, active work,
blocked follow-ups, and dependency order at a glance.
## What Changed
- Added workflow sorting utilities and tests for dependency-aware child
issue ordering.
- Added sub-issue progress summary, checklist numbering, current-step
affordances, blocker context, and done-state de-emphasis in the issue
list UI.
- Wired issue detail sub-issue panels to use the workflow sort/progress
checklist presentation.
- Updated issue service behavior/tests for child issue ordering inputs
used by the UI.
- Added a Storybook visual review fixture and screenshot helper for the
sub-issue workflow checklist surface.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workflow-sort.test.ts`
- Result: 6 test files passed, 55 tests passed, 34 embedded Postgres
issue-service tests skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is
unavailable on this host.
- Visual review: generated Storybook screenshots from the existing local
Storybook server on port 6006 with `node
scripts/screenshot-subissues.mjs /tmp/pap-2189-subissues-screens
http://localhost:6006`.
- Screenshot artifacts:
- Desktop dark: 
- Desktop light: 
- Mobile dark: 
- Mobile light: 
- Local Storybook note: starting a second Storybook process selected
port 6008 because 6006 was occupied, then Vite failed with an esbuild
host/binary version mismatch (`0.25.12` host vs `0.27.3` binary). The
already-running Storybook server on 6006 served the fixture successfully
for screenshots.
## Risks
- Medium UI risk: the issue list now has additional sub-issue-specific
visual states, so dense lists should be checked for spacing and
scanability.
- Low ordering risk: workflow sorting is covered by focused unit tests,
but unusual dependency topologies may still need reviewer attention.
- No migration risk: this PR does not add database migrations or touch
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
> 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 shell/git/GitHub
workflow. Context window is runtime-provided and not exposed 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 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>
2026-04-26 07:36:49 -05:00
|
|
|
buildSubIssueProgressSummary,
|
|
|
|
|
shouldRenderRichSubIssuesSection,
|
|
|
|
|
shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary,
|
|
|
|
|
} from "./issue-detail-subissues";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function issue(
|
|
|
|
|
id: string,
|
|
|
|
|
status: Issue["status"],
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: string,
|
|
|
|
|
blockedByIds: string[] = [],
|
|
|
|
|
): Issue {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
id,
|
|
|
|
|
identifier: `PAP-${id}`,
|
|
|
|
|
title: `Issue ${id}`,
|
|
|
|
|
status,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date(createdAt),
|
|
|
|
|
blockedBy: blockedByIds.map((blockerId) => ({ id: blockerId })),
|
|
|
|
|
} as Issue;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
[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
|
|
|
|
Add ordered sub-issue navigation (#5938)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped
issues, comments, and execution context.
> - The issue detail page is the board surface where operators and
agents inspect a task in its parent/child workflow.
> - Ordered sub-issues need a low-friction way to move through work
without returning to the parent list after every issue.
> - Existing issue detail navigation only covered sibling transitions
and did not continue into a parent issue's first ordered child.
> - This pull request adds ordered previous/next navigation for issue
detail views and extends it to continue from a parent or last sibling
into the first direct child.
> - The benefit is a smoother review/execution path through hierarchical
work while preserving hidden issue filtering and dependency-aware
ordering.
## What Changed
- Added `IssueSiblingNavigation` and route-state handling so issue
detail footers can link to previous/next ordered issues.
- Extended sub-issue ordering helpers to build navigation from siblings
plus direct children, including root-parent and
last-sibling-to-first-child cases.
- Added page, component, and library tests for ordered sibling
navigation, child fallback navigation, hidden issues, and link
rendering.
- Fixed the quicklook blur/click race Greptile found by deferring close
until after portaled link clicks can complete, with a regression test.
- Polished the navigation landmark label so it remains accurate when the
next target is a direct child rather than a sibling.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueLinkQuicklook.test.tsx
src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
src/components/IssueSiblingNavigation.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --config vitest.config.ts` from `ui/` -
31 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed.
- `git diff --check` - passed.
- GitHub PR checks on latest head `34046be2` - passed: Greptile Review,
verify, e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, Snyk, and serialized server shards.
- Screenshots: not captured in this heartbeat; this PR is a draft and
the changed states are covered by focused component/page tests.
## Risks
- Low risk; this is a UI navigation addition with no database or API
contract changes.
- The main behavioral risk is navigation ordering drift if
`workflowSort` expectations change later.
- The IssueDetail navigation now waits for child issue loading, which
avoids stale child fallback links but can delay footer navigation
briefly while data loads.
> 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 shell
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 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>
2026-05-13 15:43:51 -05:00
|
|
|
function siblingIssue(
|
|
|
|
|
id: string,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: string,
|
|
|
|
|
blockedByIds: string[] = [],
|
|
|
|
|
overrides: Partial<Issue> = {},
|
|
|
|
|
): Issue {
|
|
|
|
|
return {
|
|
|
|
|
...issue(id, "todo", createdAt, blockedByIds),
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: "parent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
title: `Sibling ${id}`,
|
|
|
|
|
hiddenAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
...overrides,
|
|
|
|
|
} as Issue;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
[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
|
|
|
describe("shouldRenderRichSubIssuesSection", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
it("shows the rich sub-issues section while child issues are loading", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderRichSubIssuesSection(true, 0)).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("shows the rich sub-issues section when at least one child issue exists", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderRichSubIssuesSection(false, 1)).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("hides the rich sub-issues section when there are no child issues", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderRichSubIssuesSection(false, 0)).toBe(false);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
Present ordered sub-issues as a workflow checklist (#4523)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators use issue detail pages and child issue lists to understand
multi-step execution plans.
> - Ordered sub-issues currently read like a flat table, so dependency
chains and current next steps are harder to scan.
> - The branch work adds a workflow-oriented presentation for child
issues without changing the single-assignee task model.
> - This pull request makes ordered sub-issues read more like a progress
checklist while preserving normal issue list controls.
> - The benefit is that operators can see completed steps, active work,
blocked follow-ups, and dependency order at a glance.
## What Changed
- Added workflow sorting utilities and tests for dependency-aware child
issue ordering.
- Added sub-issue progress summary, checklist numbering, current-step
affordances, blocker context, and done-state de-emphasis in the issue
list UI.
- Wired issue detail sub-issue panels to use the workflow sort/progress
checklist presentation.
- Updated issue service behavior/tests for child issue ordering inputs
used by the UI.
- Added a Storybook visual review fixture and screenshot helper for the
sub-issue workflow checklist surface.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workflow-sort.test.ts`
- Result: 6 test files passed, 55 tests passed, 34 embedded Postgres
issue-service tests skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is
unavailable on this host.
- Visual review: generated Storybook screenshots from the existing local
Storybook server on port 6006 with `node
scripts/screenshot-subissues.mjs /tmp/pap-2189-subissues-screens
http://localhost:6006`.
- Screenshot artifacts:
- Desktop dark: 
- Desktop light: 
- Mobile dark: 
- Mobile light: 
- Local Storybook note: starting a second Storybook process selected
port 6008 because 6006 was occupied, then Vite failed with an esbuild
host/binary version mismatch (`0.25.12` host vs `0.27.3` binary). The
already-running Storybook server on 6006 served the fixture successfully
for screenshots.
## Risks
- Medium UI risk: the issue list now has additional sub-issue-specific
visual states, so dense lists should be checked for spacing and
scanability.
- Low ordering risk: workflow sorting is covered by focused unit tests,
but unusual dependency topologies may still need reviewer attention.
- No migration risk: this PR does not add database migrations or touch
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
> 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 shell/git/GitHub
workflow. Context window is runtime-provided and not exposed 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 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>
2026-04-26 07:36:49 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary", () => {
|
2026-04-27 08:48:26 -05:00
|
|
|
it("requires both the opt-in flag and multiple child issues", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary(true, 2)).toBe(true);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary(true, 1)).toBe(false);
|
Present ordered sub-issues as a workflow checklist (#4523)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - Operators use issue detail pages and child issue lists to understand
multi-step execution plans.
> - Ordered sub-issues currently read like a flat table, so dependency
chains and current next steps are harder to scan.
> - The branch work adds a workflow-oriented presentation for child
issues without changing the single-assignee task model.
> - This pull request makes ordered sub-issues read more like a progress
checklist while preserving normal issue list controls.
> - The benefit is that operators can see completed steps, active work,
blocked follow-ups, and dependency order at a glance.
## What Changed
- Added workflow sorting utilities and tests for dependency-aware child
issue ordering.
- Added sub-issue progress summary, checklist numbering, current-step
affordances, blocker context, and done-state de-emphasis in the issue
list UI.
- Wired issue detail sub-issue panels to use the workflow sort/progress
checklist presentation.
- Updated issue service behavior/tests for child issue ordering inputs
used by the UI.
- Added a Storybook visual review fixture and screenshot helper for the
sub-issue workflow checklist surface.
## Verification
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx
ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
ui/src/lib/workflow-sort.test.ts`
- Result: 6 test files passed, 55 tests passed, 34 embedded Postgres
issue-service tests skipped because `@embedded-postgres/darwin-x64` is
unavailable on this host.
- Visual review: generated Storybook screenshots from the existing local
Storybook server on port 6006 with `node
scripts/screenshot-subissues.mjs /tmp/pap-2189-subissues-screens
http://localhost:6006`.
- Screenshot artifacts:
- Desktop dark: 
- Desktop light: 
- Mobile dark: 
- Mobile light: 
- Local Storybook note: starting a second Storybook process selected
port 6008 because 6006 was occupied, then Vite failed with an esbuild
host/binary version mismatch (`0.25.12` host vs `0.27.3` binary). The
already-running Storybook server on 6006 served the fixture successfully
for screenshots.
## Risks
- Medium UI risk: the issue list now has additional sub-issue-specific
visual states, so dense lists should be checked for spacing and
scanability.
- Low ordering risk: workflow sorting is covered by focused unit tests,
but unusual dependency topologies may still need reviewer attention.
- No migration risk: this PR does not add database migrations or touch
`pnpm-lock.yaml`.
> 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 shell/git/GitHub
workflow. Context window is runtime-provided and not exposed 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 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>
2026-04-26 07:36:49 -05:00
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary(false, 1)).toBe(false);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(shouldRenderSubIssueProgressSummary(true, 0)).toBe(false);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("buildSubIssueProgressSummary", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
it("counts statuses and picks the first actionable issue in workflow order", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const summary = buildSubIssueProgressSummary([
|
|
|
|
|
issue("3", "todo", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z", ["2"]),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("1", "done", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("2", "in_progress", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", ["1"]),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("4", "blocked", "2026-04-04T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("5", "cancelled", "2026-04-05T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.totalCount).toBe(4);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.doneCount).toBe(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.inProgressCount).toBe(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.blockedCount).toBe(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.countsByStatus.todo).toBe(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.countsByStatus.cancelled).toBeUndefined();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.target?.kind).toBe("next");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.target?.issue.id).toBe("2");
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("waits on the first blocked issue when no remaining work is actionable", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const summary = buildSubIssueProgressSummary([
|
|
|
|
|
issue("1", "done", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("2", "blocked", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
issue("3", "cancelled", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.target?.kind).toBe("blocked");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(summary.target?.issue.id).toBe("2");
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
Add ordered sub-issue navigation (#5938)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through company-scoped
issues, comments, and execution context.
> - The issue detail page is the board surface where operators and
agents inspect a task in its parent/child workflow.
> - Ordered sub-issues need a low-friction way to move through work
without returning to the parent list after every issue.
> - Existing issue detail navigation only covered sibling transitions
and did not continue into a parent issue's first ordered child.
> - This pull request adds ordered previous/next navigation for issue
detail views and extends it to continue from a parent or last sibling
into the first direct child.
> - The benefit is a smoother review/execution path through hierarchical
work while preserving hidden issue filtering and dependency-aware
ordering.
## What Changed
- Added `IssueSiblingNavigation` and route-state handling so issue
detail footers can link to previous/next ordered issues.
- Extended sub-issue ordering helpers to build navigation from siblings
plus direct children, including root-parent and
last-sibling-to-first-child cases.
- Added page, component, and library tests for ordered sibling
navigation, child fallback navigation, hidden issues, and link
rendering.
- Fixed the quicklook blur/click race Greptile found by deferring close
until after portaled link clicks can complete, with a regression test.
- Polished the navigation landmark label so it remains accurate when the
next target is a direct child rather than a sibling.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueLinkQuicklook.test.tsx
src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts
src/components/IssueSiblingNavigation.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --config vitest.config.ts` from `ui/` -
31 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - passed.
- `git diff --check` - passed.
- GitHub PR checks on latest head `34046be2` - passed: Greptile Review,
verify, e2e, Canary Dry Run, policy, Snyk, and serialized server shards.
- Screenshots: not captured in this heartbeat; this PR is a draft and
the changed states are covered by focused component/page tests.
## Risks
- Low risk; this is a UI navigation addition with no database or API
contract changes.
- The main behavioral risk is navigation ordering drift if
`workflowSort` expectations change later.
- The IssueDetail navigation now waits for child issue loading, which
avoids stale child fallback links but can delay footer navigation
briefly while data loads.
> 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 shell
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 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>
2026-05-13 15:43:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("buildIssueSiblingNavigation", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
it("orders linear blocker chains before selecting previous and next siblings", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", ["1"]);
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z", ["2"]),
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
current,
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.previous?.id).toBe("1");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.next?.id).toBe("3");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.currentIndex).toBe(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.totalCount).toBe(3);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("degrades branch and merge graphs to stable workflow order", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z", ["1"]);
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("4", "2026-04-04T00:00:00.000Z", ["2", "3"]),
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", ["1"]),
|
|
|
|
|
current,
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.previous?.id).toBe("2");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.next?.id).toBe("4");
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("falls back to created time and id when siblings have no direct blocker hints", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
current,
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.previous?.id).toBe("1");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation?.next?.id).toBe("3");
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("hides navigation for root issues without children or hidden current issues", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
expect(buildIssueSiblingNavigation(siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: null }), []))
|
|
|
|
|
.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(buildIssueSiblingNavigation(siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: null }), [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: null }),
|
|
|
|
|
])).toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(buildIssueSiblingNavigation(siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z", [], { hiddenAt: new Date() }), []))
|
|
|
|
|
.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("hides navigation when the current issue is the only visible child", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [
|
|
|
|
|
current,
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", [], { hiddenAt: new Date() }),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation).toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("returns only next for the first sibling and only previous for the last sibling", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const first = siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
const last = siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
const siblings = [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
last,
|
|
|
|
|
first,
|
|
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(buildIssueSiblingNavigation(first, siblings)).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
previous: null,
|
|
|
|
|
next: { id: "2" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(buildIssueSiblingNavigation(last, siblings)).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
previous: { id: "2" },
|
|
|
|
|
next: null,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("uses the first direct child as next when a root issue has no sibling next", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: null });
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [], [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z", ["2"], { parentId: "1" }),
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: "1" }),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
previous: null,
|
|
|
|
|
next: { id: "2" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("uses the first direct child as next when the current sibling is last", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const current = siblingIssue("2", "2026-04-02T00:00:00.000Z");
|
|
|
|
|
const navigation = buildIssueSiblingNavigation(current, [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("1", "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
current,
|
|
|
|
|
], [
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("4", "2026-04-04T00:00:00.000Z", ["3"], { parentId: "2" }),
|
|
|
|
|
siblingIssue("3", "2026-04-03T00:00:00.000Z", [], { parentId: "2" }),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(navigation).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
previous: { id: "1" },
|
|
|
|
|
next: { id: "3" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|