PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-07 07:23:08 +02:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	408f70e69f	fix(runner): preserve stock Codex base instructions (#14920 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native Runner connects Paperclip tasks to Codex app-server. > - Paperclip passed its runtime context as `baseInstructions`. > - That field replaces the stock Codex base prompt. > - This pull request sends the same Paperclip context as additive developer instructions. > - Codex keeps its stock prompt and still receives Paperclip task instructions and tools. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? The native Codex driver and Rust provider sent Paperclip context through `baseInstructions` on thread start and resume. Codex used this text in place of its stock base instructions. Direct-chat resume also sent an empty replacement base. The Runner Lab session path used the same replacement field. Expected behavior Codex should retain its stock base prompt. Paperclip should add its runtime context through `developerInstructions`. Other provider facades should retain their current instruction handling. Steps to reproduce 1. Create a native Codex session through Paperclip Runner. 2. Inspect the `thread/start` request in the native provider trace. 3. Resume the session and inspect `thread/resume`. 4. Before this fix, these paths set `baseInstructions`. After this fix, the Codex paths set `developerInstructions` and omit `baseInstructions`. Paperclip version or commit Reproduced against master at `cad26c6bfb736039c8ed5743da650a44792a083c`. Deployment mode Built from source. Native Codex app-server and runnerd paths. A local protocol probe used codex-cli 0.153.4 and a localhost Responses stub. No duplicate fix or matching public issue was found in the GitHub search. ## What Changed - Send additive developer instructions on Codex start and resume in the TypeScript driver, Rust provider, and Runner Lab session path. - Carry the additive fragment through runnerd, including runtime asset path mapping. - Preserve existing instruction fields for other provider facades, including OpenCode. - Add start/resume/direct-chat regression coverage and check the actual Rust provider request. - Document the historical option and trace field names. Record progress and follow-ups in the working checklist. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm build` — passed. - Targeted Codex driver lifecycle, driver, and live-session Vitest suites — 139 tests passed. - `cargo test --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p paperclip-runner-core --test codex_provider` — 91 passed, 2 ignored subprocess helpers. - Real app-server probe: a localhost Responses stub captured identical 14,732-character stock base instructions on fresh start and cold resume. Both requests retained the Paperclip marker in developer input. Both stub turns completed. No paid inference was used. - Runnerd transport Vitest suite — 182 tests passed. - The initial `pnpm test:run` attempt reported local dependency-loading, embedded PostgreSQL startup, and macOS `/var` versus `/private/var` path failures. It was stopped after those failures. Loading-suite reruns passed 1,428 tests after the build; native interaction/finalization reruns passed 38 tests. A seven-suite diagnostic rerun passed 463 tests and isolated the remaining path and PostgreSQL setup failures. - With `TMPDIR=/private/tmp`, workspace, gateway, interaction, and attachment suites passed all 356 tests. The remaining environment-image and native-session-resumption suites passed all 44 tests with the same canonical temp path. All affected suites passed on rerun. The original full local command was stopped after failures and is not claimed as passing. - All 55 PR checks passed at `83281439456181396f3707eecda5d2ebc90bd14d`. Greptile scored 5/5 with no open review threads. - No paid live campaign or Product E2E browser suite was run. This change has protocol and regression coverage; it does not claim improved task quality. ## Risks - Stock Codex behavior may differ from behavior under the previous Paperclip replacement prompt. Restoring that behavior is the intended change. - Existing Codex threads retain their saved replacement base prompt. They need a provider session reset to receive the stock base. This PR does not reset active sessions or alter recovery rules. - The legacy `baseInstructions` option and trace field names remain for compatibility. They now describe the additive Paperclip fragment for Codex. - The separate Codex-through-ACP dependency patch remains a follow-up in the harness coverage checklist. This PR covers native app-server execution. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model variant and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, shell execution, and test tools. ## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-02 08:53:47 -05:00
Dotta	560e7e48b5	feat(runner): add SDK and developer tooling (#12608 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner package already provides the production protocol and execution spine. > - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test tools, and local inspection tools. > - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one package boundary. > - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and drift checks. > - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change application execution selection. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected `packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and developer tooling. Problem or motivation The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces. Proposed solution Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing unchanged. Alternatives considered We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states that do not build. Roadmap alignment No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the runner package that is already on `master`. ## What Changed - Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK surfaces. - Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay, and evaluation tools. - Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and fixtures. - Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted compatibility data remains readable. - Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift checks. - Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and clean-consumer checks. - Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases, process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits. - Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch registry already tracks. - Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime selection, or the application UI. ## Verification GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests, generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and Greptile review must pass on the exact head. Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub Actions for verification. ## Risks This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server execution are outside this pull request. ## Stack 1. This PR: runner SDK and developer tooling. 2. [Codex production server integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616). 3. [Provider-neutral task-thread UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and code 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature request template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge	2026-08-31 21:33:11 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

408f70e69f

fix(runner): preserve stock Codex base instructions (#14920 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native Runner connects Paperclip tasks to Codex app-server.
> - Paperclip passed its runtime context as `baseInstructions`.
> - That field replaces the stock Codex base prompt.
> - This pull request sends the same Paperclip context as additive
developer instructions.
> - Codex keeps its stock prompt and still receives Paperclip task
instructions and tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The native Codex driver and Rust provider sent Paperclip context through
`baseInstructions` on thread start and resume. Codex used this text in
place of its stock base instructions. Direct-chat resume also sent an
empty replacement base. The Runner Lab session path used the same
replacement field.

**Expected behavior**

Codex should retain its stock base prompt. Paperclip should add its
runtime context through `developerInstructions`. Other provider facades
should retain their current instruction handling.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a native Codex session through Paperclip Runner.
2. Inspect the `thread/start` request in the native provider trace.
3. Resume the session and inspect `thread/resume`.
4. Before this fix, these paths set `baseInstructions`. After this fix,
the Codex paths set `developerInstructions` and omit `baseInstructions`.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced against master at `cad26c6bfb736039c8ed5743da650a44792a083c`.

**Deployment mode**

Built from source. Native Codex app-server and runnerd paths. A local
protocol probe used codex-cli 0.153.4 and a localhost Responses stub.

No duplicate fix or matching public issue was found in the GitHub
search.

## What Changed

- Send additive developer instructions on Codex start and resume in the
TypeScript driver, Rust provider, and Runner Lab session path.
- Carry the additive fragment through runnerd, including runtime asset
path mapping.
- Preserve existing instruction fields for other provider facades,
including OpenCode.
- Add start/resume/direct-chat regression coverage and check the actual
Rust provider request.
- Document the historical option and trace field names. Record progress
and follow-ups in the working checklist.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- Targeted Codex driver lifecycle, driver, and live-session Vitest
suites — 139 tests passed.
- `cargo test --manifest-path
packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml --locked -p
paperclip-runner-core --test codex_provider` — 91 passed, 2 ignored
subprocess helpers.
- Real app-server probe: a localhost Responses stub captured identical
14,732-character stock base instructions on fresh start and cold resume.
Both requests retained the Paperclip marker in developer input. Both
stub turns completed. No paid inference was used.
- Runnerd transport Vitest suite — 182 tests passed.
- The initial `pnpm test:run` attempt reported local dependency-loading,
embedded PostgreSQL startup, and macOS `/var` versus `/private/var` path
failures. It was stopped after those failures. Loading-suite reruns
passed 1,428 tests after the build; native interaction/finalization
reruns passed 38 tests. A seven-suite diagnostic rerun passed 463 tests
and isolated the remaining path and PostgreSQL setup failures.
- With `TMPDIR=/private/tmp`, workspace, gateway, interaction, and
attachment suites passed all 356 tests. The remaining environment-image
and native-session-resumption suites passed all 44 tests with the same
canonical temp path. All affected suites passed on rerun. The original
full local command was stopped after failures and is not claimed as
passing.
- All 55 PR checks passed at `83281439456181396f3707eecda5d2ebc90bd14d`.
Greptile scored 5/5 with no open review threads.
- No paid live campaign or Product E2E browser suite was run. This
change has protocol and regression coverage; it does not claim improved
task quality.

## Risks

- Stock Codex behavior may differ from behavior under the previous
Paperclip replacement prompt. Restoring that behavior is the intended
change.
- Existing Codex threads retain their saved replacement base prompt.
They need a provider session reset to receive the stock base. This PR
does not reset active sessions or alter recovery rules.
- The legacy `baseInstructions` option and trace field names remain for
compatibility. They now describe the additive Paperclip fragment for
Codex.
- The separate Codex-through-ACP dependency patch remains a follow-up in
the harness coverage checklist. This PR covers native app-server
execution.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model variant and context window
are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection,
code editing, shell execution, and test tools.

## 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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

2026-10-02 08:53:47 -05:00

Dotta

560e7e48b5

feat(runner): add SDK and developer tooling (#12608 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner package already provides the production protocol and
execution spine.
> - Contributors still need stable SDK surfaces, deterministic test
tools, and local inspection tools.
> - Those surfaces share generated contracts and must change as one
package boundary.
> - This pull request adds the package-local SDK, labs, examples, and
drift checks.
> - The benefit is a reviewable developer platform that does not change
application execution selection.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

`packages/paperclip-runner` — runner SDK, conformance tools, and
developer tooling.

**Problem or motivation**

The production runner spine is present, but package consumers cannot
build deterministic integrations, inspect sessions, or verify
provider-neutral behavior through supported surfaces.

**Proposed solution**

Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, scenario, conformance, and
evaluation surfaces. Add generated contract inventories and
package-local verification scripts. Keep production application routing
unchanged.

**Alternatives considered**

We considered splitting each generated catalog, SDK surface, and demo
into separate pull requests. Those changes share exports, fixtures, and
drift gates. Splitting them would create intermediate package states
that do not build.

**Roadmap alignment**

No overlapping item appears in `ROADMAP.md`. This work extends the
runner package that is already on `master`.

## What Changed

- Add browser, React, standalone, live-session, and issue-thread SDK
surfaces.
- Add deterministic mock control-plane, scenario, conformance, replay,
and evaluation tools.
- Add bounded Codex, OpenCode, and ACPX development transports and
fixtures.
- Keep deferred managed-provider execution fail-closed. Persisted
compatibility data remains readable.
- Add generated capability inventories with their source files and drift
checks.
- Add examples, package documentation, browser checks, and
clean-consumer checks.
- Preserve the reviewed protocol bounds, replay compatibility aliases,
process environment isolation, and semantic redaction limits.
- Update the ACPX package patch that the existing workspace patch
registry already tracks.
- Do not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`, repository workflows, server runtime
selection, or the application UI.

## Verification

GitHub Actions is the verification authority for this pull request. The
repository CI, package TypeScript and Rust checks, package tests,
generated-output drift checks, browser checks, security scans, and
Greptile review must pass on the exact head.

Local test suites were not run because this series uses parallel GitHub
Actions for verification.

## Risks

This is a large greenfield package change. The main risks are public
export drift, generated-output drift, and optional React consumer
compatibility. Package boundary checks, clean-consumer checks, and
browser tests cover those risks. Production adapter selection and server
execution are outside this pull request.

## Stack

1. **This PR:** runner SDK and developer tooling.
2. [Codex production server
integration](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12616).
3. [Provider-neutral task-thread
UI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12617).

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, high-reasoning mode, with tool use and code
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 searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the feature request
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

2026-08-31 21:33:11 -05:00