Files
paperclip-docs/docs/reference/api/checkbox-confirmations.md
Aron PrinsandClaude Opus 5 325c9eb819 seo: hand-write titles and descriptions for all 192 pages (#115)
## Why

The build derived `<title>` from the **sidebar label** and the
description from the **first paragraph clipped to 220 characters**. Both
are the wrong source. A sidebar label is written for a 240px-wide nav
that supplies its own context; a search result has none.

On production that produced:

- **7 pages titled "Overview"**, and 32 pages sharing a title with
another page
- **109 of 193 descriptions cut off mid-word**, and 174 over 160
characters (where Google truncates)

```
/guides/welcome/key-concepts/
  BEFORE (220):  ...and if you misunderstand them early, the product wi
```

Near-identical titles are the weak-differentiation signal behind
"crawled — currently not indexed", which is the exact symptom on this
property.

## What changed

`seo_title` and `seo_description` frontmatter on **every one of the 192
pages**, written by hand against each page's real content and optimised
for the click — lead with what the reader can do, name the concrete
things covered, no keyword stuffing, no repeating the title.

| | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Duplicate titles | 32 pages | **0** |
| Duplicate descriptions | — | **0** |
| Descriptions cut mid-word | 109 | **0** |
| Descriptions over 160 chars | 174 | **0** |
| Title length (incl. suffix) | up to "Overview" | **26–60** |
| Description length | 31–240 | **122–158** |

**No prose was rewritten.** I measured content overlap between the
colliding pairs first — only 17–23%, so these were always distinct pages
wearing the same label, not duplicate content. The `docs/` diff is **564
insertions, zero deletions**.

### Examples

```
BEFORE — all seven identical:  "Overview | Paperclip Docs"
AFTER:  "Adapters Overview"      "API Overview"        "CLI Overview"
        "Deployment Overview"    "Bundled Skills"      "Optional Skills"
        "Experimental Features"

BEFORE — both identical:  "Issues | Paperclip Docs"
AFTER:  "Issues: Creating and Tracking Work"   /guides/day-to-day/issues/
        "Issues API"                           /reference/api/issues/
```

```
/guides/getting-started/five-minute-path/
BEFORE (220):  The shortest route from a running Paperclip instance to an agent that has
               just completed work for you. After Paperclip is installed, the path takes
               about 5 minutes: create a company, hire a CEO agent, approve its first s
AFTER  (131):  Install Paperclip, create a company, hire a CEO agent, and approve its
               first strategy — a working AI company in about five minutes.
```

## Plumbing

- **`site/build-release.mjs`** prefers the authored fields; the derived
path stays only as a fallback the CI gate prevents ever reaching.
`<title>`, `<meta name="description">`, and the `TechArticle` JSON-LD
all read from the same source.
- **`site/app.js`** uses the same fields, so a client-side transition
cannot leave a different title on screen than the crawler was served.
Verified in-browser: navigating `/guides/day-to-day/issues/` →
`/reference/api/issues/` swaps to exactly the server-rendered values, no
JS errors.
- **`scripts/verify-seo-metadata.mjs`** (new) enforces presence,
uniqueness, length, complete-sentence endings, and the
frontmatter-safety rules. Wired into `docs:test` and CI as its own step.

I negative-tested the gate rather than assuming it works — it correctly
fails on a duplicate title, a mid-word description, and a missing field,
and passes again once restored.

## Automating it going forward

`skills/sync-docs/SKILL.md` now:

- gains an **"Authored SEO metadata"** section: why the fields exist,
the enforced rules as a table, and how to actually write them (title
names the subject not the nav position; description writes for the
click; never generate mechanically from the first paragraph — *that is
the fallback the gate exists to prevent*).
- requires both fields in the **page-authoring instruction** given to
every subagent, with guidance on when to update an existing description
versus leave it.
- runs `docs:test:seo-metadata` and `docs:test:crawlable-links` as
**fail-loud gates in Phase 7** before commit.
- documents all six build gates in the files/gates section.

So once this lands, a new page cannot ship without hand-written
metadata, and a title collision cannot reach production.

## Verified

All six verifiers pass:

```
Static route verification passed
Asset fingerprint verification passed
Hierarchical Skills nav verification passed
Skill source block verification passed (11 skill pages, 1 control page)
Crawlable-link contract passed: 40886 internal links across 194 pages resolve in one hop
Authored-SEO contract passed: 192 pages carry a unique, hand-written seo_title and seo_description
```

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
2026-08-25 22:51:42 +02:00

214 lines
10 KiB
Markdown

---
paperclip_version: v2026.609.0
seo_title: Checkbox Confirmations API
seo_description: An issue-thread interaction that asks a person to select any subset of a known option list, then confirm or reject the whole request in one action.
---
# Checkbox Confirmations
A checkbox confirmation is an issue-thread interaction that asks the board or a user to select any subset of a known option list, then confirm or reject the request as a whole. It renders as a card in the issue thread, and the response comes back as structured data: the accepted option ids, or a rejection with an optional reason.
Create one with `kind: request_checkbox_confirmation` on the interactions routes below. The same payload validation applies across the API, the CLI, plugin helpers, and the UI. Available since v2026.609.0.
![A checkbox confirmation card in an issue thread: prompt, markdown details, a five-option list with three options checked, select-all and clear-selection controls, and custom accept and reject buttons.](../../user-guides/screenshots/light/interactions/checkbox-confirmation-card.png)
All routes are mounted under `/api` and authenticate with `Authorization: Bearer {token}`.
| Method | Path | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| POST | `/api/issues/{issueId}/interactions` | Create an interaction |
| GET | `/api/issues/{issueId}/interactions` | List an issue's interactions |
| POST | `/api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/accept` | Accept, with the selected option ids |
| POST | `/api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/reject` | Reject, optionally with a reason |
The `respond` route on interactions serves `ask_user_questions`; a checkbox confirmation resolves only through `accept` or `reject`. Once resolved, an interaction is sealed and further responses are rejected.
---
## Create a checkbox confirmation
```
POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions
```
Request body:
- `kind` - `request_checkbox_confirmation`.
- `payload` - the checkbox payload. Full schema below.
- `title` - heading rendered on the card in the issue thread.
- `summary` - one-line summary rendered under the title.
- `idempotencyKey` - optional, recommended. See [Idempotency](#idempotency).
- `continuationPolicy` - `wake_assignee`, `wake_assignee_on_accept`, or `none`. Defaults to `wake_assignee` for this kind. See [Continuation policy](#continuation-policy).
Permissions: agents can create interactions on issues they are assigned to or have commented on; board users can create them on any issue in their company.
### Example
```bash
curl -sS -X POST \
-H "Authorization: Bearer {token}" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
"https://paperclip.example.com/api/issues/{issueId}/interactions" \
-d '{
"kind": "request_checkbox_confirmation",
"idempotencyKey": "checkbox:{issueId}:cleanup-files:{planRevisionId}",
"title": "Confirm files to delete",
"summary": "Pick the files you want removed before I run the cleanup.",
"continuationPolicy": "wake_assignee",
"payload": {
"version": 1,
"prompt": "Check the files you want deleted.",
"detailsMarkdown": "I will run the deletion against everything you check, then report back here.",
"options": [
{ "id": "draft-report-march", "label": "Old draft report", "description": "QA test pass, March." },
{ "id": "tmp-export-2025", "label": "tmp/export-2025.csv" }
],
"defaultSelectedOptionIds": ["draft-report-march"],
"minSelected": 0,
"maxSelected": null,
"acceptLabel": "Delete selected",
"rejectLabel": "Request changes",
"rejectRequiresReason": true,
"rejectReasonLabel": "What should change?",
"supersedeOnUserComment": true,
"target": {
"type": "issue_document",
"issueId": "{issueId}",
"key": "plan",
"revisionId": "{latestPlanRevisionId}"
}
}
}'
```
---
## Payload schema
Fields of `payload` (`RequestCheckboxConfirmationPayload`):
| Field | Type | Required | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| `version` | literal `1` | yes | - | Schema version. Send `1`. |
| `prompt` | string, 1-1000 chars | yes | - | Headline rendered above the checkbox list. |
| `detailsMarkdown` | string (max 20,000 chars) or `null` | no | `null` | Markdown context rendered above the option list. |
| `options` | array of option objects, 1-200 entries | yes | - | The selectable list. Option fields below. |
| `defaultSelectedOptionIds` | string array | no | `[]` | Option ids pre-checked in the UI. Every id must reference an entry in `options`, and the array length may not exceed `maxSelected` when that is set. |
| `minSelected` | integer, 0 or greater | no | `0` | Selection floor. The server rejects an accept whose final selection has fewer ids than this. Cannot exceed the number of options. |
| `maxSelected` | integer (0 or greater) or `null` | no | `null` (unbounded) | Selection ceiling. When set, must be greater than or equal to `minSelected` and no greater than the number of options. |
| `acceptLabel` | string (1-80 chars) or `null` | no | `null` (UI default) | Label on the accept button. |
| `rejectLabel` | string (1-80 chars) or `null` | no | `null` (UI default) | Label on the reject button. |
| `rejectRequiresReason` | boolean | no | `false` | When `true`, a reject without a non-empty `reason` returns `422`. |
| `rejectReasonLabel` | string (1-160 chars) or `null` | no | `null` | Field label for the reject reason input. |
| `allowDeclineReason` | boolean | no | `true` | Whether the reason input renders at all. |
| `declineReasonPlaceholder` | string (1-240 chars) or `null` | no | `null` | Placeholder text in the reason input. |
| `supersedeOnUserComment` | boolean | no | `true` (set server-side) | When `true`, a later board or user comment resolves the pending interaction with `outcome: "superseded_by_comment"`. |
| `target` | target object or `null` | no | `null` | Binds the request to an issue document revision. See [Target binding and staleness](#target-binding-and-staleness). |
Option object fields:
| Field | Type | Required | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| `id` | string, 1-120 chars | yes | - | Stable identifier, unique within the payload. Returned in `selectedOptionIds` on accept. |
| `label` | string, 1-120 chars | yes | - | Option text rendered next to the checkbox. |
| `description` | string, max 500 chars | no | - | Secondary line rendered under the label. |
---
## Accept
```
POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/accept
```
```json
{ "selectedOptionIds": ["draft-report-march", "tmp-export-2025"] }
```
Behavior:
- Accepting requires a board or user role. The agent that created the interaction cannot accept it.
- If `selectedOptionIds` is omitted, the server falls back to the payload's `defaultSelectedOptionIds`.
- The server validates that every id references a known option, deduplicates the list, and enforces `minSelected` and `maxSelected`. Unknown ids return `422`.
## Reject
```
POST /api/issues/{issueId}/interactions/{interactionId}/reject
```
```json
{ "reason": "Keep the March draft; only delete tmp/export-2025.csv." }
```
`reason` is required when the payload set `rejectRequiresReason: true` (missing or empty returns `422`), otherwise optional.
---
## Results and outcomes
A resolved interaction carries a `result` (`RequestCheckboxConfirmationResult`). On accept:
```json
{
"version": 1,
"outcome": "accepted",
"selectedOptionIds": ["draft-report-march", "tmp-export-2025"]
}
```
| `outcome` | Result fields | When it happens |
|---|---|---|
| `accepted` | `selectedOptionIds` (may be empty when `minSelected` is `0`) | A board or user accepted the interaction. |
| `rejected` | `reason`, `commentId`; `selectedOptionIds` is absent | A board or user rejected it. |
| `superseded_by_comment` | `commentId` | A board or user commented on the issue while the interaction was pending and `supersedeOnUserComment` was `true`. |
| `stale_target` | `staleTarget` | The targeted issue document revision is no longer current. |
---
## Continuation policy
The interaction's `continuationPolicy` controls whether the issue assignee is woken when the interaction resolves:
- `wake_assignee` (default for this kind) wakes the assignee after the board or user resolves the interaction. The wake delivers the `result` above.
- `wake_assignee_on_accept` wakes only on accept, skipping rejection wakes.
- `none` never wakes the assignee. Use it only when you do not need to resume after the decision.
A pending interaction is an explicit waiting path: after creating one, the source issue is normally moved to `in_review` with a comment naming what the board must decide.
## Target binding and staleness
`target` reuses the `request_confirmation` target schema, typically:
```json
{
"type": "issue_document",
"issueId": "{issueId}",
"key": "plan",
"revisionId": "{latestRevisionId}"
}
```
`documentId` and `revisionNumber` may also be included. When a newer revision of the targeted document lands, the pending interaction expires with `outcome: "stale_target"`; rebuild against the latest revision and create a fresh interaction.
## Idempotency
Use a deterministic `idempotencyKey` such as `checkbox:{issueId}:{decisionKey}:{revisionId}` so retries after a transient error reuse the same card instead of stacking duplicates. When recreating after a `stale_target` or `superseded_by_comment` outcome, include the new revision id in the key.
---
## Choosing an interaction kind
Checkbox confirmations are one of four issue-thread interaction kinds:
| Kind | Use when | Not for |
|---|---|---|
| `request_checkbox_confirmation` | The responder must select any subset of a known list (up to 200 options) and then confirm or reject. | Pure yes/no decisions, free-form answers, or proposing new tasks. |
| `request_confirmation` | A single yes/no decision bound to a target, such as accepting a plan revision. | Multi-select choices. |
| `ask_user_questions` | A short structured form: a handful of typed questions with answers, options, or text. | Selecting many items from one long list. |
| `suggest_tasks` | Proposing concrete tasks; accepted items become real subtasks. | Selections the agent will act on itself. |
The distinguishing property of a checkbox confirmation: it is a confirmation, not a question. The responder accepts or rejects the interaction as a whole, and the selected ids ride along on the accept call.
For the shared interaction envelope and the other kinds, see the [Issues API](./issues.md).