paperclip/ui/src/lib/subIssueDefaults.test.ts

138 lines
4 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

[codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - A core part of that is the operator experience around reading issue state, agent chat, and sub-task structure > - The current branch had a long run of issue-detail and issue-list UX fixes that all improve how humans follow and steer active work > - Those changes mostly live in the UI/chat surface and should be reviewed together instead of mixed with workspace/runtime work > - This pull request packages the issue-detail, chat, markdown, and sub-issue list improvements into one standalone change > - The benefit is a cleaner, less jumpy, more reliable issue workflow on desktop and mobile without coupling it to unrelated server/runtime refactors ## What Changed - Stabilized issue chat runtime wiring, optimistic comment handling, queued-comment cancellation, and composer anchoring during live updates - Fixed several issue-detail rendering and navigation regressions including placeholder bleed, local polling scope, mobile inbox-to-issue transitions, and visible refresh resets - Improved markdown and rich-content handling with advisory image normalization, editor fallback behavior, touch mention recovery, and `issue:` quicklook links - Refined sub-issue behavior with parent-derived defaults, current-user inheritance fixes, empty-state cleanup, and a reusable issue-list presentation for sub-issues - Added targeted UI tests for the new issue-detail, chat scroll/message, placeholder-data, markdown, and issue-list behaviors ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-scroll.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts ui/src/lib/query-placeholder-data.test.tsx ui/src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx` ## Risks - Medium: this branch touches the highest-traffic issue-detail UI paths, so regressions would show up as chat/thread or sub-issue UX glitches - The changes are UI-heavy and would benefit from reviewer screenshots or a quick manual browser pass before merge ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution enabled ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
import { describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
import type { ExecutionWorkspace, Issue } from "@paperclipai/shared";
import { buildSubIssueDefaults, buildSubIssueDefaultsForViewer } from "./subIssueDefaults";
function makeExecutionWorkspace(overrides: Partial<ExecutionWorkspace> = {}): ExecutionWorkspace {
return {
id: "workspace-1",
companyId: "company-1",
projectId: "project-1",
projectWorkspaceId: "project-workspace-1",
sourceIssueId: null,
status: "active",
mode: "isolated_workspace",
strategyType: "git_worktree",
name: "Parent workspace",
cwd: "/tmp/workspace-1",
repoUrl: null,
baseRef: null,
branchName: "feature/pap-1",
providerType: "git_worktree",
providerRef: null,
derivedFromExecutionWorkspaceId: null,
openedAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
closedAt: null,
cleanupEligibleAt: null,
cleanupReason: null,
config: null,
metadata: null,
lastUsedAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
...overrides,
};
}
function makeIssue(overrides: Partial<Issue> = {}): Issue {
return {
id: "issue-1",
identifier: "PAP-1",
companyId: "company-1",
projectId: "project-1",
projectWorkspaceId: "project-workspace-1",
goalId: "goal-1",
parentId: null,
title: "Parent issue",
description: null,
status: "todo",
priority: "medium",
assigneeAgentId: null,
assigneeUserId: null,
checkoutRunId: null,
executionRunId: null,
executionAgentNameKey: null,
executionLockedAt: null,
createdByAgentId: null,
createdByUserId: null,
issueNumber: 1,
requestDepth: 0,
billingCode: null,
assigneeAdapterOverrides: null,
executionWorkspaceId: null,
executionWorkspacePreference: "shared_workspace",
executionWorkspaceSettings: null,
currentExecutionWorkspace: null,
startedAt: null,
completedAt: null,
cancelledAt: null,
hiddenAt: null,
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z"),
...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 detail](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-3368-plan-a-planning-mode-for-issues/doc/assets/pap-3368/desktop-planning-detail.png) Desktop planning row: ![Desktop planning row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-3368-plan-a-planning-mode-for-issues/doc/assets/pap-3368/desktop-planning-row.png) Desktop staged standard toggle: ![Desktop staged standard toggle](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-3368-plan-a-planning-mode-for-issues/doc/assets/pap-3368/desktop-standard-toggle.png) Mobile planning detail: ![Mobile planning detail](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-3368-plan-a-planning-mode-for-issues/doc/assets/pap-3368/mobile-planning-detail.png) Mobile planning row: ![Mobile planning row](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-3368-plan-a-planning-mode-for-issues/doc/assets/pap-3368/mobile-planning-row.png) ## 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",
[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("buildSubIssueDefaults", () => {
it("inherits the parent agent assignee and workspace context", () => {
const defaults = buildSubIssueDefaults(
makeIssue({
assigneeAgentId: "agent-1",
executionWorkspaceId: "workspace-1",
currentExecutionWorkspace: makeExecutionWorkspace(),
}),
);
expect(defaults).toEqual({
parentId: "issue-1",
parentIdentifier: "PAP-1",
parentTitle: "Parent issue",
projectId: "project-1",
projectWorkspaceId: "project-workspace-1",
goalId: "goal-1",
executionWorkspaceId: "workspace-1",
executionWorkspaceMode: "reuse_existing",
parentExecutionWorkspaceLabel: "Parent workspace",
assigneeAgentId: "agent-1",
});
});
it("inherits a user assignee when the parent is assigned to a user", () => {
const defaults = buildSubIssueDefaults(
makeIssue({
assigneeUserId: "user-1",
}),
);
expect(defaults).toEqual({
parentId: "issue-1",
parentIdentifier: "PAP-1",
parentTitle: "Parent issue",
projectId: "project-1",
projectWorkspaceId: "project-workspace-1",
goalId: "goal-1",
executionWorkspaceMode: "shared_workspace",
assigneeUserId: "user-1",
});
});
it("leaves the sub-issue unassigned when the parent assignee is the current user", () => {
const defaults = buildSubIssueDefaultsForViewer(
makeIssue({
assigneeUserId: "user-1",
}),
"user-1",
);
expect(defaults).toEqual({
parentId: "issue-1",
parentIdentifier: "PAP-1",
parentTitle: "Parent issue",
projectId: "project-1",
projectWorkspaceId: "project-workspace-1",
goalId: "goal-1",
executionWorkspaceMode: "shared_workspace",
});
});
});