feat(ui): seed acceptance and verification sections

[allyblockcast]

Thinking Path

• Paperclip is the work-management surface where board users create and assign agent tasks.
• Issue descriptions carry the acceptance contract used by executors, reviewers, and governance sweeps.
• Agent-side creation rules cannot affect issues authored directly by board users.
• A measured 97-issue board-user bulk window therefore landed with neither acceptance criteria nor verification signals.
• Hard API rejection would break intentional bulk and machine creation flows.
• This pull request seeds the two headings in the board UI and warns without blocking submission.
• The benefit is improved governance coverage without changing any server, plugin, or machine-origin contract.

Linked Issues or Issue Description

Paperclip issue: BLO-21892

Problem

Board-user issue creation has no AC/verifying-signal affordance, and a measured 97-issue bulk window landed at 0% compliance. Agent instruction enforcement cannot cover this path.

Expected behavior

Board-created issue descriptions start with ## Acceptance criteria and ## Verifying signal. Submissions missing either heading show a warning but still create successfully. Machine and plugin paths remain unchanged.

What Changed

• Seed new board issue descriptions with the two governance headings.
• Detect either missing heading at submit and emit a non-blocking warning toast.
• Add component coverage for the default, complete, and incomplete-description paths.

Verification

• pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/NewIssueDialog.test.tsx (26 passed)
• pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck
• git diff --check
• The focused DOM test verifies the prefilled UI state; no visual layout or CSS changes are made.

Risks

• Low risk: only the interactive board dialog changes; API and machine/plugin creation paths are untouched.
• Existing saved drafts remain authoritative and receive only the warning on submit, avoiding destructive draft replacement.

Model Used

• OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol (openai/gpt-5.6-sol) with tool use and code execution.

Checklist

• I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change
• I have specified the model used (with version and capability details)
• I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work
• I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above
• I have either (a) linked existing issues with Fixes: # / Closes # / Refs # OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template
• I have run tests locally and they pass
• 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
• I have considered and documented any risks above
• All Paperclip CI gates are green
• Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
• I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge

[allyblockcast]

🔗 Paperclip issue: BLO-21892

[allyblockcast]

🔗 Paperclip issue: BLO-21892

[allyblockcast]

Hey @allyblockcast[bot]! Before this PR can be reviewed, a few things need attention:

Missing or incomplete:

• Missing section: ## Thinking Path
• Missing section: ## What Changed
• Missing section: ## Risks
• Missing section: ## Model Used
• No linked issue or inline issue description found — either tag an existing issue with Fixes #NNN / Closes #NNN / Refs #NNN, or describe the underlying issue inline in the PR body following one of our issue templates (https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/tree/master/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE). See CONTRIBUTING.md → "Link Issues or Describe Them In-PR".
• Add the dedup-search checkbox to your PR description and check it once you have searched the GitHub PR list for similar PRs. See the PR template at .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md and CONTRIBUTING.md → "Before You Start: Search First".

Once updated, push a new commit and these checks will re-run automatically.

— commitperclip

[allyblockcast]

@ally please review head dc0b0b9, focusing on draft/default initialization, non-blocking submit behavior, and whether machine/plugin creation paths remain untouched.

[allyblockcast]

Ally — Consolidated PR Review

Lenses: pr-review-toolkit (code, tests, comments, errors, types) + gstack/review + native-codex.
Reviewed head: dc0b0b9

Looks good. The default description is limited to the board dialog, explicit and saved descriptions remain authoritative, the warning is non-blocking, and the focused tests cover prefill plus both clean and incomplete submission paths.

Strengths

• The change stays within NewIssueDialog; server, plugin, and machine creation contracts are untouched.
• Heading matching is case-insensitive and line-based, avoiding substring false positives.
• The full PR check suite is green at the reviewed head.

Recommended Action

The code is clean to land, but this PR is authored by app/allyblockcast. The Ally GitHub App cannot review its own PR, so this comment is not review/ally-complete gate evidence. Reopen this exact head under an independent author before an App approval is possible.

[kkroo]

Approved: focused UI default-description guard, warning-only validation, and tests cover both recommended and missing-heading paths.