Commit Graph
32 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip dd777f4b73 feat(dot): complete onboarding and expand governed Runner capabilities (#15414)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents, their work, and their permissions.
> - Paperclip Runner supplies the same admitted tool authority to each
provider.
> - The Dot provider in #15402 needs reliable onboarding and useful
agent capabilities.
> - An idle Dot could not start work, assign a human, read skills, or
produce a workspace artifact.
> - Pairing also relied on a second configuration save before ordinary
admission could work.
> - This pull request adds governed idle admission and shared Runner
tools, and completes pairing atomically.
> - Operators can test Dot with fresh data while keeping normal company,
approval, budget, and run ownership checks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Paperclip Runner, dedicated Dot MCP access, OAuth onboarding,
experimental settings, and empty worktree startup. This PR builds on
merged provider PR #15402. It reuses the merged MCP gateway from #14846
and assistant connection work from #14933 and #15380.

**Problem or motivation**

An idle Dot could see assignments but could not act on a conversation
request until someone created a task first. Its Runner catalog could not
assign tasks to humans or read pinned skills and workspace files.
First-time OAuth discovery and pairing also needed browser fixes, and a
completed pairing did not persist its binding reference on the agent.

**Proposed solution**

Keep Dot within the existing Runner. Admit a visible agent-authored
intake task for idle requests. Add people, human assignment, cross-task,
skill, and optional sandbox workspace tools through shared authority.
Relay assigned app calls through the configured MCP gateway. Add lease
renewal and follow-up references. Save pairing and its configuration
revision atomically. Show prerequisites and provide a complete copy
prompt.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the experimental provider in #15402. It uses the existing
governed gateway, task model, skills, artifact path, and native Runner.
It adds no separate execution subsystem.

## What Changed

- Add a standalone OpenAI Dot agent choice with an independent
experimental opt-in. It works with the general Runner option off.
Require Assistant connections (MCP), authenticated sign-in, and public
HTTPS for pairing.
- Use Dot’s own option for company package import. Allow an unpaired Dot
configuration to save after external billing acknowledgement; task
admission still requires pairing. Prepare the shared dev binary for
Dot-only opt-in.
- Label saved Dot agents as OpenAI Dot. Use prerequisite-check copy in
setup and runtime configuration.
- Route Dot creation directly to pairing after explicit external billing
acknowledgement. Hide local CLI, model, and harness setup for Dot.
Preserve the shared Runner implementation and canonical API type. Other
Runner providers still require their general opt-in.
- Add an empty worktree option with fresh signing keys and no production
data copy.
- Fix public-client OAuth negotiation, discovery compatibility, and
optional separate browser authorization origin.
- Add one-use pairing consent preview, clear copied setup instructions,
and atomic binding persistence and cleanup.
- Add idle request admission with stable request IDs and normal
scheduling, permissions, budgets, and task ownership.
- Add identity and people discovery, human task assignment and
reassignment, and authorized cross-task comments and documents.
- Read assigned skill files from pinned manifests. Relay assigned app
calls through the merged gateway without exposing credentials.
- Add an off-by-default workspace bridge. Constrain paths and writes.
Run commands in a deny-by-default OS sandbox with no network or injected
credentials. Reserve mutations before effects and never blindly repeat
uncertain work.
- Add rolling lease renewal, task pagination, bounded operation limits,
and deduplicated follow-up references without comment bodies in
webhooks.
- Add an off-by-default attachment reading setting. Restrict reads to
files on the current assigned task. Verify size and hash, cache bounded
verified copies per run, paginate text or binary bytes, and recheck live
authority before returning.
- Keep file grants operator-owned. Reject agent self-grants across
configuration routes. Preserve attachment consent in create/import
forms. Close generic API file bypasses while retaining current-run
response snapshots and permitted uploads.
- Keep provider limits explicit. Do not inherit a Dot binding,
attachment permission, or workspace permission when hiring another
agent.
- Include the required Markdown format in cross-task document writes and
validate the API title limit. Verify real creation and revision
persistence.
- Restrict command execution to Linux bubblewrap with descendant
containment. macOS retains workspace file tools and artifact publishing,
while refusing command calls. Explain the platform limit in setup.
- Exclude Paperclip instance state from workspace files, uploads,
artifact publication, and sandbox commands. Protect nested directories
and case variants. Fail closed when the directory protection scan
exceeds 4,096 directories.
- Add static UI compression for slow public tunnels. Document setup, the
complete tool inventory, and qualification limits.

## Verification

- Merge preparation on `00ca2c75b` integrates merged base #15402 and
master `fc6304dfe`. The ancestry commit preserves the reviewed follow-up
source tree. The subsequent security fix excludes instance state from
file tools, uploads, artifact publication, and sandbox commands. It
preserves private task authorization and task monitors. It regenerates
the combined tool catalog, seeded catalog digest, and protocol manifest.
Workspace typecheck, full build, and UI token gates pass. All sixteen
real Dot broker cases and 93 company import cases pass after the review
fixes and creator-attribution test correction. The exported
human-assignment catalog and Unicode page boundaries are also fixed. All
ten catalog tests and nine workspace/skill bridge tests pass. All 35
workspace bridge and authority tests passed after the instance-state
fix, including real macOS commands in that intermediate version. The
subsequent document and descendant-containment fixes pass 44 focused
tests across bridge, authority, and setup UI, with six Linux command
cases skipped on macOS. Real cross-task documents pass the route
validator and persist two revisions. macOS refuses command execution and
does not advertise the tool. Full workspace typecheck and build, changed
server/UI typechecks, and token gates pass again on the final commit.
Greptile rates final head 00ca2c75b 5/5 and its completed check
concludes success; all review threads are resolved. All 58 current-head
checks are complete: 54 passed and 4 intentionally skipped. This
includes full tests, typecheck, build, Runner, browser E2E, release
verification, and Canary Dry Run. The older full local root attempt
finished with 16,602 passes, 93 skips, and ten failures across two
suites: it began before source edits and retained earlier imported
implementations while loading later tests. Both suites pass a clean
final-head rerun (25 passed, six Linux-only command cases skipped on
macOS). This mixed-source full attempt is not a final-head full-suite
pass; use the fresh CI evidence below.
- Full workspace typecheck and build pass for the standalone Dot change
on head `392d54f80`. UI token gates are clean. The full workspace
typecheck passed before the final importer UI edit; the changed UI
typecheck, build, and token gates pass again on the final commit. The
server build passes for its unchanged final source.
- Standalone selection, creation, settings, harness visibility,
inventory, and runtime admission checks pass. OAuth onboarding and the
real Rust/PostgreSQL broker suite pass 27 cases with the general Runner
option disabled. Dot and MCP revocation still block pairing; other
Runner providers remain disabled. Create, hire, conversion, and
inherited-hire route regressions pass 68 cases. The runtime selection
suite passes 20 cases. The setup UI suite passes 50 cases. Company
import and dev binary checks pass 97 cases. Import UI checks pass 29
cases, including Dot-only selection, preservation of imported Dot
agents, generic Runner fallback, canonical configuration serialization,
and required billing acknowledgement. A read of the synthetic instance
reports the native binary required with Dot enabled, the general rollout
disabled, and no persisted native work.
- The latest attachment, operator-consent, generic API file-guard, and
bridge checks pass 80 tests. Cache and native lifecycle checks pass 550
tests; create/import builders pass 45 tests; attachment setup UI checks
pass 16 tests. The real Rust/PostgreSQL Dot broker suite passes 15
cases.
- Earlier authority, human assignment, pinned skill, confinement,
cancellation, inheritance, onboarding, replay, OpenAPI, and gateway
regressions pass their focused rechecks. Workspace writes reject
concurrent stale hashes.
- In the live empty test-drive, turn the general Runner option off and
leave Dot and MCP on. Add agent shows a separate OpenAI Dot choice.
Create rejects missing billing acknowledgement, saves the canonical Dot
configuration, and opens pairing. The existing paired Dot remains ready
and passes its prerequisite checks. No new plugin pairing was needed for
this UI change. The final browser import preview keeps a Dot source
agent as OpenAI Dot, falls back a generic Runner agent while its switch
is off, and offers Dot independently.
- Real Dot completed OAuth, signed MCP Events readiness, and an
event-only assigned document task in an empty synthetic instance.
Pairing saved its binding without a second configuration save.
- Real Dot verified human assignment, cross-task comments and documents,
pinned skill reading, sandbox commands, lease renewal, follow-up input,
and a downloaded artifact whose bytes and hash matched its receipt. An
idle conversation request created an intake, created a task for its
human owner, continued after a definite missing-file read error, and
finalized Done with exit code 0.
- After operator approval, real Dot read a synthetic assigned-task
attachment and wrote its file-only random proof into an agent-authored
document. Its first test required accepting review because the existing
document tool removed the final newline.
- On head `2626c8f9b`, real Dot read a 13,849-byte synthetic attachment
in two pages, used `expectedSha256` on page two, saved exactly its final
random marker, verified readback, and finalized Done with exit code 0. A
direct inbox check was required for this attachment qualification; it
does not claim event-only delivery.
- Previous head `392d54f80` passes all 55 checks (53 passed, two
intentionally skipped), including the full test, typecheck, build,
native Runner, browser, and release verification gates. Greptile rates
this head 5/5; all review threads are resolved.
- Head `2626c8f9b` passed all 56 checks: 54 passed and two intentionally
skipped. This includes full typecheck, build, native Runner, server
tests, serialized suites, browser E2E, and Canary Dry Run. The unchanged
Cursor managed-runtime test exceeded its five-second deadline on the
first attempt; its focused local suite passed all eight cases, and the
single CI rerun plus dependent verify gate passed.
- A prior full local serial test attempt reported 19 failures (16,141
passed, 88 skipped) and stopped before later wrapper groups. It began
before the final source edits. Every failed suite has a passing fresh
recheck; the macOS snapshot stress case passes alone in 227 seconds. The
previous head `000fb9261` passed all 56 CI checks. PRs leave
`pnpm-lock.yaml` unchanged; CI and the refresh bot own dependency
resolution.

## Risks

- Dot remains off by default. Its own opt-in does not enable other
Runner providers. It still requires the MCP option; disabling Dot blocks
new work while keeping existing recovery and saved bindings.
- Dot requires a stable public HTTPS origin. Its base provider in #15402
is merged. Temporary tunnels are useful for testing but are not
permanent deployments.
- Idle intake creates a visible agent-authored task. It does not
fabricate a human message or bypass ordinary admission.
- Workspace commands require Linux bubblewrap with a private PID
namespace; deployment qualification is still needed. macOS file tools
and artifact publishing remain available, but commands are disabled
because sandbox-exec does not contain detached descendants. There is no
unrestricted fallback. Command protection fails closed above 4,096
workspace directories. The historical macOS command walkthrough does not
qualify the current Linux implementation.
- Provider model choice, token usage, cost, native thread control, and
global external stopping remain unavailable. Known Paperclip budget
gates still apply.
- The workspace bridge and attachment reader are separate opt-in
settings. Reading assigned task files sends their contents to OpenAI.
Revocation prevents future reads but cannot withdraw bytes already sent.
Files are read on request; automatic inbound attachment staging remains
disabled.
- An existing event registration can retain earlier instructions that
prohibit extra tasks. Dot asked for permission before a second intake
after the final event-only bootstrap; that extra no-nudge continuation
is not live-qualified under that earlier registration. The later
attachment qualification submitted normally through the composer. The
revised onboarding prompt describes the new idle entry point, and its
protocol polling path is tested.
- OpenAI event delivery can be delayed; a webhook acknowledgement is not
proof that Dot has begun work.
- A running Dot can retain an old plugin catalog after tool refresh.
Refresh and actual tool exposure must be checked before using new
top-level actions.
- Hosted and remote controller modes are not qualified.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact deployment ID and context window
size are not exposed in this session. Capabilities used: reasoning,
repository editing, code execution, test inspection, and browser
control.

## 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 linked existing issues or described the issue in-PR
following the relevant issue 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 or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites and all
fresh failure rechecks pass; the earlier full attempt is disclosed
above)
- [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>
2026-10-07 19:44:17 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8cfedd7df8 fix(runner): restore task monitors and durable timed waits (#15446)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their task execution.
> - Agents need a durable way to return to work after a delayed check.
> - The issue monitor scheduler already provides a one-shot wake for an
assignee.
> - Native runners reject generic execution-policy writes and had no
bound monitor tool.
> - Scheduling alone is insufficient because native completion also
needs to accept a timed wait.
> - This pull request adds an authorized monitor tool and connects it to
completion and the existing scheduler.
> - An agent can now schedule its next check, end the run, and resume on
the same task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native runner could not set its own task monitor. `call_api` correctly
rejected execution-policy writes, while `schedule_wake` had no
production binding. `paperclip_finish` also rejected monitor waits.

**Expected behavior**

A standard native run can set a one-shot monitor on its current task or
another accessible task assigned to the same agent. After a confirmed
schedule on the current task, it can yield. The scheduler later delivers
`issue_monitor_due`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start a standard native task.
2. Ask the agent to check the task again later and end its current run.
3. Inspect available tools and try the generic issue execution-policy
update.
4. Observe the missing native tool and the lifecycle-write denial.

Related PRs: #14680 concerns monitor notes in the shared wake prompt.
#11919 changes attempt-limit scope. This PR adds native scheduling and
completion authority and retains the existing cumulative attempt bounds.
It does not depend on either PR.

## What Changed

- Add provider-neutral `set_task_monitor` with a default current-task
target, future timestamp, required notes, existing bounds, and explicit
clearing.
- Check company, task visibility, ownership, runtime permissions, work
mode, and active-run authority. Preserve review-only restrictions.
Reject the reserved server-owned quota-recovery name before saving or
accepting a native wait.
- Commit the monitor, audit event, and retry receipt together. Retry
receipts survive a successor run without re-arming cleared or consumed
timers.
- Permit `paperclip_finish` to yield to a persisted monitor. Recheck
ownership and the schedule when committing final disposition. Release
execution without an immediate continuation.
- Preserve due monitors during native execution. Fence wake admission
and consumption against replacement, clearing, reassignment, and
completion. Preserve unrelated review policy.
- Expose scheduled and consumed monitor instructions in task context.
Update provider schemas, Rust validation, generated contracts, and
execution documentation.
- Add an opt-in live Codex smoke script with isolated data and explicit
run/session/runner/process evidence.

## Verification

- Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after rebase.
Server typecheck passed again after review fixes. All CI test shards
pass on `3def77b1b`, including runner TypeScript/Rust, server,
serialized server, workspace, and browser tests. All CI gates are green,
including the canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 on the same commit with
zero unresolved threads.
- The local monolithic `pnpm test:run`, started before the rebase, was
interrupted after current-head CI test coverage passed. It is not
counted as a standalone full-suite pass; the focused local regression
suites passed.
- Targeted server tests cover scheduling, replacement, clearing, policy
preservation, cumulative bounds, cross-run retries, permissions,
provider-neutral discovery, review restrictions, completion authority,
and scheduler/finalizer races.
- Runner contract/catalog/semantic tests and Rust terminal-tool tests
cover the new operation and monitor completion.
- Live Codex test passed twice (latest live run on `e0bcd63e6`) in a
temporary database and workspace, with a 300,000 ms warm window. First
run `67bd7709-c089-4d4a-9d2b-0d6b618a34b0` yielded at
`2026-10-07T13:15:03.274Z`. Second run
`97c323f9-595a-4cc5-a007-db5a2fbb937c` started at `13:15:30.952Z`,
received `issue_monitor_due`, and completed the same task. Exactly one
monitor wake was recorded.
- Both live runs used native session
`7b1dd753-1c9b-4e7a-b22f-a125dbc3748c`, runner
`e90d9a1b-3502-4ee3-b15e-edc024c555d4`, provider session
`01a11680-6d01-70c0-9a55-db7246ed66c3`, and PID `64218` with the same
process start time. This proves warm reuse for that local Codex test,
not only successful scheduling.
- Reproduce the paid live test with `node --import
./server/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs
server/scripts/smoke-native-task-monitor.ts --run`, with the installed
Codex binary on `PATH` and a valid local login.

## Risks

- The scheduler now defers monitor dispatch while the task has an active
native run. A stuck run still depends on the existing recovery
lifecycle.
- Idempotency uses the existing run ledger; no table or migration is
added.
- Other providers share the tested tool and completion contracts. Only
Codex received a live model test.
- Existing `call_api` lifecycle restrictions remain enforced. Monitor
waits do not bypass task blockers, reviews, or approvals.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with tool use, code execution, and
TypeScript/Rust editing. The session does not expose the exact deployed
model ID or context-window size.

## 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>
2026-10-07 08:41:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip faa8e452c7 fix(tasks): stop repeated reminders for historical questions (#15392)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task questions remain saved so a person can answer them later.
> - The composer moves an old question into history after a newer human
message.
> - Native completion still treated every pending question as a required
response.
> - This caused agents to demand an old answer after the person moved
work forward.
> - This pull request shares the historical-question rule across context
and task execution.
> - Agents can finish verified work while the original question remains
answerable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15229, Refs #14613, Refs #13130.

**What happened?**

An agent repeatedly asked a person to answer a question that had moved
into feed history. Completion feedback explicitly told the agent to
request a response. The saved pending row also blocked task completion.

**Expected behavior**

A question before newer human direction remains answerable in the feed.
Its pending state alone must not require another reminder or stop
completed work. A new input blocker, an approval, or a configured review
stage must keep its gate.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Let a task agent create an ordinary question.
2. Dismiss the question and send a newer task message.
3. Let the agent finish the requested work and submit its completion
report.
4. Observe a demand to answer the old question and a retained completion
gate.

## What Changed

- Add one company-scoped predicate for historical questions. Only later
human comments count. Exclude agent attribution, run attribution, system
notices, and untrusted source data.
- Apply the predicate to completion feedback, native waits,
finalization, commit validation, retry validation, blocked routing, and
successful-run handoff.
- Include question classification and guidance in heartbeat context and
both native task-context tools. Add the guidance to fresh and resumed
task prompts.
- Replace automatic reminders for current ordinary questions with
instructions to assess the real blocker, continue independent work, and
withdraw obsolete questions through the existing API.
- Preserve historical question rows during completion while cancelling
their live native source runs through the existing post-commit and
recovery paths. Let an authorized human answer them after completion
without reopening work or creating a response wake. Preserve
cancellation, current-input, approval, permission, credential,
connection, and review gates. Add no dismissal storage or migration.
- Document the rule in the execution contract and agent skill. Refresh
generated capability source anchors. Add database-backed status,
context, attribution, and governance regression tests.

## Verification

- `pnpm build` passed. The server rebuild also passed after the
lifecycle fix. Generated capability contract and inventory checks passed
after the agent documentation update.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. Final `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server
exec tsc --noEmit` also passed after the last test additions.
- Lifecycle and interaction regressions passed: 224 tests in 3 suites.
Context and prompt tests also passed. Final historical-question cases
passed (33 tests), native cancellation/recovery cases passed (6 tests),
and the existing interaction/confirmation suites passed (72 tests). The
full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after more than two
hours with unrelated fixture/hook timeout failures; it did not pass. All
52 successful GitHub checks are green on the latest commit, including
the complete test matrix; no checks are pending or failing. Greptile is
5/5 and both review threads are resolved.
- Regression cases cover the old-question/new-human-message sequence,
final task status, answering after completion with no wake, live-run
cancellation and crash recovery, current input blockers, both
task-context tools, API context, timestamp precision, attribution
boundaries, and protected gates.

## Risks

- A later human task message makes an earlier ordinary question
historical even if its input is still missing. The agent must identify
the current blocker and ask only for information that still prevents
work.
- Browser dismissal remains a local preference. Dismissal without a
later human message is not recorded by this change.
- No schema change or data migration. Completion retains ordinary
historical questions; cancellation still expires them. A completed task
accepts historical answers only from an authorized human and creates no
response-delivery outbox row. Governed requests retain their gates.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository editing, code execution, and
browser diagnostics. The exact deployment model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session.

## 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>
2026-10-06 20:33:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b508a05c43 feat: add internal agent complaints and suggestions (#15367)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use legacy skills or native runner tools to work on tasks.
> - Those agents can encounter friction that does not belong in the task
thread.
> - A complaint should preserve the raw reaction. A suggestion should
describe an improvement.
> - This pull request adds attributed local storage and both submission
paths.
> - Agents can submit feedback once and continue their primary work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Server, database, shared contracts, runtime skills, and native runner
tools.

**Problem or motivation**

Agents have no default internal channel for incidental complaints and
suggestions. Sending this feedback through task comments adds noise and
can alter task workflows.

**Proposed solution**

Store free-form feedback in the current instance database. Derive agent,
run, company, and task attribution from active authority. Provide
default legacy skills and provider-neutral native actions. Keep the
instructions close to Warp's MIT-licensed originals.

**Alternatives considered**

Task comments and external Slack delivery add unwanted side effects.
Mandatory suggestion fields and short editorial limits would discard
useful feedback. This release has no listing API, UI, read tool,
automatic triage, or external forwarding.

**Roadmap alignment**

This is a maintainer-requested addition to the existing runtime skills
and runner tool paths. It does not duplicate a listed roadmap milestone.
Searches for complaint tooling, suggestion-box, and agent commentary
found no overlapping public PR or issue.

## What Changed

- Add the company-scoped `agent_commentary` table, shared validation,
and idempotent migration `0310`.
- Add one transactional service and the agent-only POST route. Validate
active authority before writes or replay. Redact known credentials.
Commit a content-free audit with each new record.
- Add `submit_complaint` and `submit_suggestion` to standard, ask, and
planning modes. Keep review, revocation, and completion restrictions.
Store replay identity on the commentary row.
- Mount `complain` and `suggestion-box` by default for legacy agents.
Bundle a dependency-free Node.js stdin helper in the operational skill
and allow its POST through the sandbox bridge.
- Preserve Warp's complaint voice and suggestion guidance, with
attribution and local transport adaptations. Keep source attribution and
MIT notices in each skill's LICENSE, outside runtime instructions.
- Document custom-runtime HTTP use and database inspection. Add
real-database tests and a repeatable live Codex smoke for local and
Daytona execution.
- Pin the lagging-source migration fixture before the identity-repair
migration so later migrations preserve its regression coverage.

## Verification

- Personally ran real Codex submissions in all four environments on
2026-10-06. Local runs passed at 20:35 UTC. Daytona native passed at
20:31 UTC; Daytona legacy passed at 20:33 UTC. Each stored exactly two
rows with company, agent, run, and task attribution, wrote the
continuation marker, exited zero, created no task comments, and left
task status unchanged. Each recorded two content-free activity entries.
- Daytona used production provider hooks, real remote execution and file
transfer, the legacy queue callback bridge, and native private WebSocket
ingress. The current Linux runner was built from `abf47b595`, staged,
and verified against controller contracts. Both sandboxes were confirmed
deleted. This is a focused feedback transport smoke; it does not claim
full Runner E2E catalog or browser qualification.
- The immutable base image and Linux binary digest are recorded in [the
verification
documentation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/agent-commentary/doc/agent-commentary.md#verification).
The smoke script can save content-free JSON evidence. No credentials or
feedback bodies are in these reports.

| Environment | Runner | Complaint row | Suggestion row |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| local | legacy Codex | `59413a00-1de2-4bb1-bcc6-9c4b54c64aa6` |
`3db2364d-3e15-4f47-846f-875d3902999d` |
| local | native Codex | `5da22b5f-41df-4de5-8ba0-d9345ab01267` |
`2d5abe17-dd41-403c-a5ee-4729f2d58921` |
| daytona | legacy Codex | `27c9d0aa-8477-409f-9da0-e8ffa48dee50` |
`209681c9-d1e9-4ce1-999e-48fa07692389` |
| daytona | native Codex | `6eb001bb-4bcf-43f7-8717-f662f53dc7c3` |
`77c383d8-a997-49e5-a33e-25c70e15c0b2` |

- Run the local check with `node cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/cli.mjs
server/scripts/verify-agent-commentary-live.ts`. The documentation gives
the Daytona invocation. Both use disposable instance databases and
normal Codex provider usage.
- Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the test
extension. The build includes runner generation, contracts, and replay
checks. The smoke scripts also passed a separate TypeScript check. The
lagging-source migration regression passed. All equivalent current-head
Vitest CI shards passed. The local monolithic `pnpm test:run` invocation
was stopped after CI supplied that coverage; it did not complete
locally.
- Focused tests cover company isolation, spoofing, revoked credentials,
stale ownership, post-finish rejection, concurrent replay, conflicting
keys, atomic rollback, and deletion through existing services. Boundary
tests cover empty text, Unicode, text beyond 8,000 characters, and the
524,288-character ceiling without truncation. Mounting tests cover
Codex, Claude, and sandbox staging. Helper tests cover standalone Node
execution, stdin, invalid UTF-8, redirects, HTTP failure, and its
deadline. Privacy and bridge tests cover successful and rejected
requests.
- Instructions were compared with Warp's originals. MIT notices and
source credits live only in LICENSE files. Native tools preserve
truthful disclosure when asked, without routine announcements.
- [Full
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37508559190)
and Greptile 5/5 passed on the earlier feature commit `5209c3501`. The
later head found the migration-fixture assumption fixed in this update.
On `8a4965164`, all 55 check contexts passed after one browser shard
rerun. Its initial reviewer signoff failure also passed an isolated
local browser run (1 test). Greptile scored that head 5/5 and identified
one smoke cleanup gap. `6ecbafb0b` fixes failed-acquisition cleanup with
four passing tests and a passing smoke-script typecheck. Fresh CI is
pending for this final test-only fix. No commentary production code
changed during verification.

## Risks

- Feedback is internally attributed. It is not anonymous. Existing
redaction removes known credentials, but agents must still omit
sensitive content. Normal provider transcripts can include their
submitted arguments.
- Default skill availability changes for existing legacy agents. Runtime
policy filtering still applies. The helper uses the existing Node.js
runtime with no extra dependencies; custom runtimes can call the HTTP
endpoint.
- Feedback is removed with its run, agent, or company. Task deletion
clears only the issue pointer. Normal database backups include the
table.
- The migration is additive and has no backfill. Writes serialize on the
active run for replay consistency. No server suggestion quota is
imposed.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6-astra` through Codex, with `xhigh` reasoning effort and a
reported 258,400-token context window. Capabilities used: repository
inspection, code execution, and live runtime verification. No subagents
were used.

## 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
- [ ] 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-06 16:14:06 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e34abee670 feat(mcp): connect assistants to a team with user OAuth (#14846)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip gives teams durable tasks, agent execution, budgets, and
approvals.
> - People also use assistants in Codex, Claude, and other MCP clients.
> - Those assistants need a scoped connection that preserves the
person’s permissions and attribution.
> - Delegating a task must not turn the assistant into the assigned
agent.
> - This PR adds opt-in user OAuth, ten first-party tools, browser
consent, and workflow packages.
> - Paid product evals verify the resulting tasks, documents,
attribution, retries, and access boundaries.
> - The team keeps working after the assistant conversation ends.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

A person cannot connect an external assistant to an existing team
through browser consent and safely delegate durable work as themselves.

**Proposed solution**

Expose an opt-in `/mcp/paperclip` endpoint with individually described
first-party operations. Bind every connection to a person, client,
company, resource, and scopes. Reuse domain authorization and
scheduling. Package shared team-review, delegation, and follow-up
workflows for OpenAI/Codex and Claude.

**Alternatives considered**

Related PRs #9393 and #12549 cover earlier remote MCP and board-operator
approaches. This change uses user OAuth and a bounded public catalog. It
does not expose a generic executor, operator administration, static
shared board credentials, or external agent execution. Registry listing
work in #9851 is a separate distribution step.

**Roadmap alignment**

This maintainer-requested implementation extends the governed MCP
gateway, activity attribution, durable work products, and hosted
deployment direction in `ROADMAP.md`. It implements the first release of
the saved design plan; external agent participation and granted
third-party tools remain later releases.

## What Changed

- Add MCP 2.0 discovery and task status/comment/document Events on the
same authenticated endpoint. Persist subscriptions and delivery
receipts, verify HTTPS callbacks, sign Standard Webhooks, encrypt
callback material, recheck permissions/Cloud membership, and bound
retries/expiry. Older MCP clients keep their existing tools.
- Add discovery, dynamic client registration, S256 PKCE, resource
validation, rotating refresh tokens, revocation, and company consent.
Store credentials as hashes and recheck membership at execution.
- Add tools for connection identity, agents/projects, task
search/read/create, human comments, documents/deliverables, and
pending-approval links. Preserve current domain permissions and
scheduling.
- Add durable mutation receipts across reconnects. Matching retries
replay results; uncertain outcomes keep the same request ID and require
inspection.
- Add consent and connection-management pages, OAuth log redaction,
shared plugin workflows, and separate OpenAI/Codex and Claude package
outputs.
- Add eight paid Product E2E cases across three models, independent
durable-state grading, usage evidence, cleanup, and report integration.
Add task-document guidance and regenerate the runner capability
inventories.
- Add migrations 0301 and 0302, the dated implementation plan, result
notes, and direct-client setup instructions in `doc/public-mcp.md`.

## Verification

- Merge integration `e180b1948`: resolved conflicts with current master,
preserved both eval registries, regenerated capability catalogs, and
regenerated migrations as 0301/0302 while keeping the original
replay-safe SQL byte-identical. Local migration safety/snapshot tests
(26), MCP/OAuth tests (38), redaction/OpenAPI tests (71), and eval
catalog/grading tests (198) pass. Token and capability gates pass. Full
recursive typecheck passed. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with no
unresolved findings. CI is green on this exact head (55 successes, two
intentional skips, one neutral result): one unchanged Cursor sandbox
test timed out at 10 seconds, then passed locally in 856 ms. A single
retry of that failed shard and the aggregate workflow passed. Merge
remains blocked on the repository code-owner approval rule.

Earlier checks passed at `6aa0962d4fb715f2190bb7bb22efacab2e58495d`: 55
successes, two intentional skips and one neutral result. [The earlier CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36901592350)
includes all test shards, browser tests, typecheck, build and canary dry
run. Greptile was 5/5 on that commit with no unresolved review threads.
GitHub still requires code-owner review under the repository merge
rules; passing checks do not bypass that approval. Paid source
fingerprints remain separate below and in the dated result note.

- Paid Events qualification passes **3/3**: GPT-5.4 Mini, Claude Haiku
4.5 and Claude Sonnet 4.6. Each uses a real public HTTPS callback,
signature verification and report retrieval in a fresh conversation. A
final Mini regression passes after the quota/status fixes. All evidence
validates. Bounded tunnel startup retries occur before provider calls
and remain visible; failed earlier attempts retain their original
grades.
- The earlier complete seven-case matrix passes **21/21**, with a
separate **3/3** delegation regression. Two preceding matrices also
passed 21/21 each. A complete 24-cell matrix including Events has not
been run. [The dated
results](doc/plans/2026-10-01-public-mcp-paid-eval-results.md) retain
exact source fingerprints, failures, model IDs and partial costs.
- Node 24: repository-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass
after merging master. Server typecheck passes after the final
quota/status changes. Eval typecheck and all 892 eval-support tests
pass.
- All 33 real MCP/OAuth tests pass. The preceding combined MCP,
redaction, private-address and DNS-rebinding run passed 129 tests; two
later MCP regressions cover quota reuse and unchanged-status
suppression. All 28 adjacent issue-tree/stale-lock route tests pass. CI
then found a null checkout result in the existing concurrent-workspace
path; logging now uses optional status access. All 12 closed-workspace
tests and all 33 MCP tests pass after that correction. The exact-start
event calibration exposed a timestamp gap; scanning now includes the
subscription start, with all 33 MCP tests and server typecheck passing.
These two narrow corrections follow the paid regression.
- A real Core → Cloud → Core authority round trip passes OAuth, MCP 2.0
subscription/delivery, current membership loss, unsubscribe, legacy SDK
tools, refresh and revocation. Its callback transport is a fixture with
independent HMAC verification. The paid Events campaigns separately
prove public HTTPS delivery.
- Earlier component qualification passed UI 7,117 tests, CLI 502, shared
832, skills catalog 20, database 160 and OpenAPI 10. Token gates, module
boundaries, migration order and plugin regeneration passed. CI covers
general/serialized suites, eight browser shards, runner checks,
typecheck, build and canary dry run.
- **Local full-suite limitation:** the earlier monolithic run was not
clean. It encountered overlapping schema rebuilding, Mac database
shared-memory limits and isolated CLI/fixture failures. Targeted reruns
passed. The existing >32 MiB Git filename stress test still hit its
300-second Mac timeout. The additional serialized sweep stopped after 62
passing suites once CI passed. Original failures and partial logs
remain; this PR does not claim a wholly green local monolithic run.
- Local Codex CLI and Claude Code OAuth login and MCP SDK
interoperability were verified. Public-store installation, actual
ChatGPT Work Cloud Events UI, staging HTTPS client behavior and hosted
newcomer provisioning remain release gates.

Enablement is moving to **Settings → Experimental → Assistant
connections (MCP)** in the stacked follow-up
[#14933](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/14933). Merge
both for the intended setup experience. This foundation branch alone
still uses `PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_MCP_ENABLED=true`. After deployment, set
`PAPERCLIP_PUBLIC_URL` to the authenticated instance's HTTPS origin, and
connect to `/mcp/paperclip`. Select a team and allow writes in browser
consent. Configure an available agent and budget, then delegate and
retrieve results later. For Events, rescan the deployed plugin catalog
in ChatGPT Work Cloud; the host supplies its webhook credentials when
the user asks to watch a task. See [the setup
runbook](doc/public-mcp.md).

## Risks

- Events are at-least-once and may arrive out of order. No replay cursor
is advertised. Clients must refresh finite subscriptions, read current
state and avoid comment feedback loops. Callback material uses the
instance secrets master key; hosted subscriptions require the updated
Cloud broker and are bounded to five minutes/the access proof expiry.
- ChatGPT Work Cloud/dot event UI, plugin rescan and a hosted staging
subscription remain deployment gates. Local signed-webhook and paid
model evidence does not claim those surfaces have been exercised.
- Disabled by default. Merging adds schema and opt-in code; it does not
deploy a public endpoint, publish a store listing, create a team, or
start paid agents.
- Migrations 0301 and 0302 are additive and idempotent. Their SQL is
unchanged from the earlier preview numbers, so hash-aware upgrade
reconciliation preserves prior staging applications. Normal instance
upgrades must apply it before enabling MCP.
- Task creation and comments can schedule paid agent work. Consent and
tool descriptions disclose that effect. Revocation blocks future calls
but does not undo delegated work.
- Public deployments need edge rate limits and credential-safe logging.
Internal dispatch is restricted to the closed catalog and carries a
request-local verified actor.
- Hosted onboarding requires the companion Cloud broker, encryption-key
configuration, and tenant rollout. Self-hosted direct connections can
use this PR alone.
- Store acceptance and agent-mode participation are not claimed.
Checked-in plugin endpoints are development defaults; rebuild packages
for a real deployment before installation.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. A
more specific serving version and context-window size were not exposed
by the session. Paid eval models: `gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17`,
`claude-haiku-4-5-20251001`, and `claude-sonnet-4-6`.

## 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 (targeted/component checks;
full local-run limitations are recorded above)
- [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>
2026-10-06 11:48:53 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 16b7db35ff Shorten planning skills and measure task decomposition (#15296)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - Planning guidance helps agents choose owners and dependencies.
> - The runtime skill favors few tasks, but the catalog skill requires a
child-task breakdown.
> - Both add repeated process instructions that can distract from the
requested outcome.
> - This change keeps the ownership and dependency rules and removes the
required matrix and repeated checklist.
> - A bounded Product E2E comparison measures saved outcomes and task
handoffs before qualification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #11057. Related measurement work: #15218.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Planning and delegation through the runtime plan-to-tasks and bundled
task-planning skills.

**Current behavior**
The two skills contain about 1,900 words and conflicting guidance on
whether plans require child tasks.

**Proposed behavior**
Keep cohesive work with one owner. Split only for a real owner, parallel
output, dependency, independent review, or follow-up lifecycle. Preserve
existing authorization and planning mechanics.

## What Changed

- Shorten both skills to about 400 words combined. Preserve their keys
and installed-version behavior.
- Remove the duplicate operational-skill pointer and regenerate affected
source metadata.
- Add twelve explicit Product E2E cells: four scenarios with current,
short and disabled planning skills.
- Use the current task composer and actual create-response ID; calibrate
public skill APIs and browser creation without providers.
- Eliminate an observed collision in chat-test company prefixes with a
per-suite sequence.
- Grade saved documents, exact author/run attribution, child count,
prerequisite execution order, review boundaries and completion handoffs.
- Retain current skill bytes and report source, selections, run
accounting and failures.

## Verification

- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: pass.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 1,287 Vitest tests and 128 Node checks
pass.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite plan-task-guidance`: twelve
local Codex cells.
- Archived current skills match master
`72ff3a9f27e581a27acb49771e8658bbb0bbaa47` exactly.
- Corrected fixture: three real public-API/database calibrations pass
with zero provider runs; all 35 evaluator checks and Product E2E
typecheck pass.
- Setup campaign
[37399550253](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37399550253)
was canceled after source review found unsupported bundled edits and
automatic core reinstallation. Its paid-cell step was skipped: zero
provider runs, no behavioral grade.
- The next setup
[37401094799](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37401094799)
failed before task creation on the old title-field selector: zero actual
runs, original FAIL retained, cleanup passed. A real browser/API
calibration of the new helper passes with paused non-provider agents and
zero runs.
- Full local typecheck/build pass. Full local tests retain one unchanged
five-minute Git streaming timeout (also fails isolated), 9,591 passes
and 5,796 skips. CI's chat failure was a proven random fixture-prefix
collision; five affected cases pass after the test-only repair.
- Paid behavior comparison and new-head CI/review remain pending. This
PR remains a draft.

## Risks

- The shorter text may change delegation decisions. Live outcomes are
not yet qualified.
- The initial comparison uses one profile and one attempt per cell. It
cannot establish cross-model reliability or cost trends.
- Disabled means unassigned company-owned copies; the company library
remains discoverable. This does not qualify global removal, automatic
accepted-plan wiring changes, or installed-copy migration.
- Skill availability does not prove a model read or cognitively used it.
- No provider/tool protocol, permission, timeout or runtime lifecycle
behavior changes in production.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with repository inspection, code editing and tool
use. The exact backend model ID and context-window size are not exposed
in this session. The declared eval model is native Codex `gpt-5.6-sol`.

## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-06 09:36:01 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a65ca09508 fix(runner): settle accepted results after shutdown failures (#15217)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and the tasks they perform.
> - The native runner saves tool results and completion reports before
it releases a session.
> - Large project discovery responses can exceed the durable command
limit.
> - A shutdown failure can leave a saved answer waiting for workspace
repair.
> - Recovery reused the old assessment for a different status decision,
which violated a database constraint.
> - This pull request bounds discovery responses and lets recovery
commit the saved result after workspace repair.
> - The benefit is a task that reaches its correct final status without
another provider turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native run can save its final answer, fail during shutdown, and leave
the task In Progress after workspace repair succeeds. Reconciliation
tries to reuse the failed-workspace assessment for a new decision. The
one-decision-per-assessment constraint rejects the write. Replaying the
old decision can also retain a fresh coordinator lease. Separately,
retained session cleanup only recognizes the old `adapter_failed` label.

The project-list tool returns full project records, including large
descriptions and workspace configuration. A large response exceeds the
runner's durable command limit. The settlement diagnostic previously
recorded only a failure flag.

**Expected behavior**

Project discovery stays within the command limit. Recovery finishes the
saved result after workspace repair, releases its lease, and preserves
the original error for inspection. It does not repeat provider work or
relax session ownership checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Return large project records from `list_projects` and observe an
oversized semantic result.
2. Persist an accepted native completion result, then record a shutdown
failure.
3. Finalize with a failed workspace, repeat that attempt, then record
successful workspace repair.
4. Reconcile the run. Before this fix, the issue stays In Progress.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on `a386a599983519eb1d399f8b770bfccdb2a74762`.

**Deployment mode**

Self-hosted server with Paperclip Runner.

Related transport work: #12208 drains queued events; #12241 resumes
interrupted semantic calls. This change addresses bounded project
discovery and accepted-result finalization.

## What Changed

- Read bounded project summary projections from the database and return
at most 50 authorized summaries with a continuation cursor and explicit
description truncation. Agent and run trust boundaries narrow the
database candidates; project-specific policies still receive full
authorization. Only visible projects determine continuations. The
default project-list API remains unchanged.
- Record bounded, content-free settlement failure causes for command
limits, storage errors, and rejected dispatch.
- Include workspace state in assessment identity. Preserve the initial
assessment for interrupted finalization, and commit replacement
assessment and decision references together.
- Release the coordinator lease when an existing decision is replayed,
without repeating its effects.
- Clear stale errors when recovery succeeds and retain them in
`recoveredExecutionFailure`.
- Accept both current and legacy close-failure labels in the existing
exact-state cleanup path.
- Add regression tests and update the tool contracts and recovery
documentation.

## Verification

- Red: the new project paging, settlement diagnostic, current cleanup
label, and repaired-workspace regressions failed on the original
implementation.
- Green: protocol/catalog/tool checks (117 tests), the full project-tool
and finalizer suites (47 tests), cleanup ownership cases (70 tests), and
cleanup sweep cases (4 tests) pass. Database-backed pagination covers
large descriptions/configuration, complete enumeration, uppercase
cursors, agent/run restrictions, project-policy scope contributions, and
identical results/cursors when hidden projects are added.
- The initial CI failures in interrupted Board waits, contended endpoint
proof, and semantic schema validation were reproduced and fixed; all
affected cases pass locally.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed.
- `pnpm build` — passed.
- `pnpm test:run` — started before the review corrections; it spanned
several source revisions and was stopped after reporting old-behavior
and timing failures. It is not claimed green. Fresh project and recovery
suites pass; the recovery suite also passes all 25 cases with the broad
runner’s isolated home/config. The Slack timing case passed in
isolation. Latest-head CI is the authoritative complete test matrix.
- Existing authorization suite — 66 tests passed.
- Latest-head CI on `8e5763d915aa6f375bdab6601996899ea01496fc` — 55
checks passed, 4 intentionally skipped, no pending or failing checks.
- Greptile — 5/5, zero unresolved threads on the same commit.
- `git diff --check` — passed.

## Risks

- `list_projects` now returns summaries. Callers must follow
`nextCursor` and use the authorized project API for full records.
Candidate narrowing is only an optimization: project policy and
responsible-user authorization remain authoritative.
- Assessment identity changes for workspace finalization. Existing
evidence remains intact; no migration is needed.
- Cleanup still requires matching identities, settled tool evidence, and
verified process ownership. Unknown tool outcomes remain blocked from
session reuse.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and GitHub
tools. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in
this session.

## 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>
2026-10-05 10:31:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip eb049aebf2 feat(skills): let agents update company skills safely (#15049)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is an open source control plane for AI-agent companies.
> - Company skills give agents reusable work instructions.
> - Skill Studio can edit skill files and save version history.
> - Agents can create a skill, but they do not have a first-class update
tool.
> - An agent update needs a version check and safe retry behavior to
prevent lost edits.
> - This pull request adds `update_skill` through the existing company
skill file API.
> - The change keeps company policy, version history, and audit records
in one path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: the server API, shared validation, and runner tool
catalog.

**Problem or motivation**

An agent can create a company skill but cannot update its `SKILL.md`
through a first-class tool. An unguarded retry can also create duplicate
versions or overwrite a newer edit.

**Proposed solution**

Add `update_skill` with a required current version ID and a retry key.
Route it through the existing skill file API. Reject stale versions and
changed-input retries. Save the version and audit event together.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate write endpoint would duplicate the Skill Studio mutation path
and policy checks. This PR reuses that path instead.

**Roadmap alignment**

This work extends Skills Manager and Skill Studio, which are listed in
`ROADMAP.md`.

**Additional context**

The tool accepts a complete `SKILL.md`, not a partial patch. Callers
must read the current version before they edit it.

## What Changed

- Add optional version and retry fields to the existing skill file
update contract.
- Add a guarded API update with a stable retry receipt and attributed
audit event.
- Add `update_skill` to native and semantic runner tool catalogs, with
mode and policy gates.
- Add unit, integration, protocol, and semantic-tool regression
coverage.
- Document agent use and extend the OpenAPI request contract.

## Verification

- Focused tests and direct server and runner TypeScript checks passed
before this PR.
- `git diff --check` passed after the rebase onto `master`.
- CI passed on the latest PR head, including the full test matrix,
typecheck, and build. Local full typecheck and build stopped because
`cargo` is not installed. The local full test run ended without a
verdict.
- No dedicated end-to-end eval scenario was added or run. The protocol
coverage and semantic-tool test cover the new action deterministically.
- Reviewers can read a skill version, call `update_skill`, repeat the
same key, then try a stale version and a changed-input key. Only the
first edit must create a new version.

## Risks

- File writes and database transactions must stay in sync when a write
fails. The integration tests cover failed writes and retry behavior, but
CI must verify them on the PR head.
- Existing Skill Studio callers do not send the new optional
coordination fields. Their request shape remains valid.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex CLI assisted with this change. The runner did not expose
the exact model ID or context window. The agent used code execution and
repository 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; exact model ID and context window were not exposed)
- [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 (focused tests; full suite
is pending CI)
- [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 (53 pass, 4 skip on the latest
head)
- [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>
2026-10-03 12:37:55 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip b17019e14d fix(agents): reduce default instructions and qualify stock harnesses (#14948)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its adapters supply task context and access to Paperclip skills and
tools.
> - The default hire manual and shared prompts also repeat general work
procedures.
> - Those procedures overlap with stock provider instructions and the
Paperclip skill.
> - Existing E2E fixtures supply a QA manual, so they do not qualify the
production default.
> - This pull request reduces the generic instructions and adds real
default-hire coverage.
> - The benefit is less competing guidance, with inspectable evidence
for preserved skills and task context.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #14920. That merged change preserves native Codex base
instructions. This PR covers the default manual, shared legacy prompts,
operational skill guidance, and the narrowly approved ACP
skill-discovery/session-environment repair for measured delivery and
credential-persistence failures.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

New non-CEO hires without a custom bundle and legacy task/chat startup
and continuation prompts.

**Current behavior**

The shipped default manual contains 602 words. Generic task/chat prompts
and ordinary resume deltas repeat work procedures already available
through the harness and Paperclip skill.

**Proposed behavior**

The default manual contains only the eight-word company identity. Shared
startup prompts retain identity and connection guidance. Ordinary resume
deltas retain current work context without the generic execution
contract.

**Reason and benefit**

Let the stock harness guide general work. Keep Paperclip-specific
capabilities and independently test default hires, skills, ordered
comments, and chat restart.

**Breaking changes**

New default hires receive less guidance. Existing saved manuals,
explicit custom bundles, CEO templates, and specialized wake contracts
retain their behavior. The obsolete includeExecutionContract option
remains accepted for source compatibility.

## What Changed

- Reduce the default hire manual to one sentence.
- Reduce shared task/chat defaults and remove the generic
ordinary-resume contract.
- Keep connection guidance, auth, skills, custom prompts, and
specialized wake context.
- Add credential-free instruction-boundary gates and 26 explicit Product
E2E cells across eight legacy/native profiles, including two focused
Paperclip-storage cases.
- Capture public hire receipts before providers run, then grade
delivered prompts and independent task/chat outcomes.
- Add an early legacy skill API recipe for saving a task document,
checking the saved revision receipt and linking the document. Improve
stock task/heartbeat skill-selection metadata and show a clickable
Markdown UI-link example. Keep native tool completion separate.
- Advertise bounded routing descriptions and exact successfully staged
SKILL.md paths in legacy ACP Claude; keep full bodies on demand and
preserve remote path rebasing.
- Remove only the provider environment from copied persisted ACP session
records, while loading current run credentials and preserving all other
options/conversation state.
- Regenerate both capability metadata inventories and reject stale
manifests/inventories before provider admission.
- Publish the original reduction and focused skill-repair comparisons,
preserving all failures, automatic recovery, cost coverage and
limitations.

## Verification

**Behavioral qualification remains pending.** Original legacy ACP Claude
loses the issue document only in the reduced cohort beneath an unchanged
credential failure. A source-backed diagnosis finds that neither
ordinary assignment reads the staged operational skill, while the
runtime persists provider environment in session state. The new common
repairs expose skill metadata/path and omit persisted env; strict
document and credential guards stay intact. [Inspectable diagnosis and
retained
hashes](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9f654db4541d3d002769c988f6e51fc0b08dadbd/doc/plans/2026-10-03-legacy-acp-claude-readiness.md).

Current repair head `de0965984ff3edf611ae6d0e7ca5c7d5ae3947bb`
incorporates master `569c7203aa24b95440682983ce7940ba1d4247bd` (merged
#14961/#15007). All 222 affected adapter tests, adapter-utils/E2E
typechecks, and final 96 variant/grader/retry calibrations pass. The
frozen historical comparator is
`c25697f4260b6f3adfea143c3ae9932e2f42986d`: 8,280 of 8,291 paths
identical, exactly two production instruction paths plus nine declared
unit expectations differ. The operational skill/discovery/environment
repairs, selected model/profile/task/core grader/auth/permissions/retry
policy are identical. Both actual launcher prepare→verify admissions
pass with zero providers. [Immutable manifest and exact
receipts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/9f654db4541d3d002769c988f6e51fc0b08dadbd/doc/plans/2026-10-03-legacy-acp-claude-evidence/manifest.json).

One original legacy ACP Claude cell per variant is authorized, with
enforced single campaign attempts, 12-minute deadlines and company/agent
1,000-cent hard stops; every product recovery run/cost is counted.
Actual live outcomes are pending. Current normal CI has one failed
server shard and failed aggregate verify under diagnosis; other normal
gates including typecheck/build/Rust/all eight browser shards pass.
Fresh review completed successfully; the valid historical startup/resume
masking finding was fixed with per-invocation task/chat checks and
strict complete-snapshot capture, calibrated and resolved. Prior heads,
failures and campaigns below remain historical evidence, not checks on
this repair head.

- Prior head `36aa4d81c49a1a8f6f04b1a068fae19aa901955f` is replayed on
merged hiring master `862a5758ba0e88a33232c1f1fa645e85c38a3113`. All 52
current-head checks pass with two intentional Storybook skips, including
repository typecheck/test/build and the browser shard. Fresh Greptile is
5/5 with zero unresolved review threads. Exact-head stock prerequisites
pass 599 assertions (598 TypeScript + 1 Rust), all six gates and
retained receipt verification, zero providers/source errors. Fingerprint
`a7f5a22d860a88fe20cce213c6d5e0004788f32c8363930729aea4fd740ad16d`.
Combined catalog/hiring calibrations pass 67 assertions, E2E typecheck
and 26-cell stock discovery pass. Canonical contract/inventory checks
and the later issue-derived reference calibration are retained; that
reference-only follow-up is not live-qualified by earlier frozen runs.
- Prior full repository typecheck/build passed. The complete local
Vitest run executed 14,956 tests: 14,870 passed, 83 skipped, three
timing failures. All three affected files passed unchanged narrow
reruns; original failures remain retained. Current-head CI now passes
the full general checks; the original local failures remain retained.
- The original 24-pair default-manual/shared-prompt comparison has two
new overall classic Claude/OpenCode document-delivery failures plus an
additional legacy ACP Claude document loss beneath an unchanged
credential-guard failure (not closed by later runs), two newly passing
OpenCode ordered cases, seven unchanged failures and 13 unchanged
passes. Equal 15/24 totals do not establish behavioral equivalence.
[Complete original
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/875f4c397d9e8c3f12f39dedd59abaf1eaf5236e/doc/plans/2026-10-02-stock-harness-live-comparison.md).
- The skill-only repair holds the eight-word manual/shared prompts and
merged #14920 fixed. All four matched profile configurations and 203
fixture/behavior files match. Candidate
`abd0b628ca642c09a54a4edc56a5227402f6686e` varies only the two skill
sources against baseline `bc83fe030234439ac51279502a28803958963e2e`.
[Candidate
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37060885547)
and [baseline
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37060888047)
each pass 571 exact-source prerequisites before providers; all eight
cells clean up successfully. Failed campaigns publish successfully and
remain failed.
- Repair pairs: Claude original Fail → Pass; Claude explicit Pass →
Pass; both OpenCode cases Fail → Fail. Explicit OpenCode's handoff
worsens beneath the unchanged failing UI-link grade: baseline gives a
clickable API URL, candidate gives a code-formatted path without an
anchor. The request's usable-link wording is narrower in the UI-only
oracle. [Complete repair report and safe
projection](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/875f4c397d9e8c3f12f39dedd59abaf1eaf5236e/doc/plans/2026-10-02-legacy-document-skill-repair.md).
- The subsequent narrow stock metadata/link correction has two matched
Pass → Pass cases, zero new machine failures/passes and no pending
pairs. Both original-case handoff links remain deficient: candidate uses
a wrong PAP prefix, baseline supplies a bare prefix-less slug path; the
preserved original oracle only requires a durable document. Both
explicit clickable UI-link cases pass revision/content/link grading. All
four exact-source 587-check gates, single assignment runs and cleanup
pass. This does not establish fix causality because baseline also
succeeds. [Candidate
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37069547401)
freezes `fe9dc1e3c518825242ed889ab9c8352986f8c2ed`; [matched
baseline](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37069552374)
freezes `0d7ecfa96d72fba79b7f0a25052b42c0686c0488`. This is a skill-only
comparison with reduced manuals/shared prompts held constant, not a
repeat of the historical-manual comparison. Only original and clarified
explicit classic OpenCode cases are selected, two per variant/four
expected turns. 8,242 other tracked files and both profile hashes match;
protected workflows admit each exact source before credentials.
[Complete qualification
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/74d0d3d945f4c52d0814b5a845ab5bd09f33cd6b/doc/plans/2026-10-02-opencode-skill-routing-link-qualification.md).
Candidate original loads Paperclip/reference before saving publicly;
baseline original loads it after writing locally, then saves publicly
within the same assignment. Reported cost totals are $0.0107824490
candidate / $0.0107909015 baseline, with unmetered runtime. The later
reference-only issue-derived link correction is provider-free calibrated
and **not live-qualified** by these frozen runs; no further paid runs.
- Retained tool calls show the repaired original OpenCode assignment
loads only its assigned output skill before writing locally. Operational
Paperclip is first loaded during automatic disposition recovery; its
early recipe is visible then, but it never saves the missing document.
Explicit candidate loads Paperclip and reads the new reference before
saving successfully. All nine actual runs are counted. Reported LLM
totals are $0.3802537209 baseline and $0.4918990161 candidate; local
runtime is unmetered.
- Initial setup, packaging, cancelled/missing-cell recovery, callback
test and relative-output attempts remain retained. No completed provider
failure was rerun. Frozen measurement branches are unchanged by later
canonical metadata maintenance.
- Run `pnpm test:e2e:runner:stock-harness`, `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`,
and `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`. Select `stock-harness` explicitly
for paid execution; it is excluded from `--all`.

Prior-head integration: `36aa4d81c49a1a8f6f04b1a068fae19aa901955f`
replays this PR on merged hiring #14985
(`862a5758ba0e88a33232c1f1fa645e85c38a3113`), preserving the four
explicit custom-CEO-bundle checks, minimal generic manual boundary, and
both suites. The combined fixture catalog and hiring calibrations pass
67 assertions; exact-head stock prerequisites pass 599 assertions (598
TypeScript + 1 Rust), all six gates and retained-receipt verification,
zero providers/source errors, fingerprint
`a7f5a22d860a88fe20cce213c6d5e0004788f32c8363930729aea4fd740ad16d`. E2E
typecheck and 26-cell stock discovery pass. Fresh current-head CI passes
all 52 checks with two intentional skips, and fresh Greptile is 5/5 with
zero unresolved review threads.

The prior source-plan browser failure is retained: a deterministic
process fixture replayed its last `fixture:plan` command on
`chat_task_completed`, writing revision 2 with identical body after the
approval handoff. This was not paid provider execution. Rebased
current-head CI passes the same assertion without an old-head retry or a
change to that browser fixture.

The merged hiring change was measured separately on immutable matched
unions, with this reduced/shared/operational context and native
completion guidance held constant. [Complete original two-profile
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/f0512647656be78e48abd8c22a3078db8bf6bcd2/doc/plans/2026-10-02-hiring-template-live-comparison.md):
[candidate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37075466208)
/ [historical
baseline](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37075469463),
705 provider-free prerequisites each. Both pairs are unchanged Fail →
Fail on the exact-five count, with six core delivery checks passing all
four cells; 28 actual successful runs include eight automatic completion
wakes, zero retries, four successful cleanups. Source-read coverage is
uncomparable, actual model charges unknown. Separately versioned
provider-free accounting remains analytical work; original verdicts are
preserved. This does not rerun or qualify the completed default-manual
or native campaigns.

## Risks

- Legacy ACP Claude's additional delivery loss is not closed by any
later matched run and blocks the no-extra-failing-behavior merge
criterion. Legacy document delivery may have relied on the prior
manual/shared prompts. The early skill repair improves Claude in one
trial; the later OpenCode pairs pass in both variants and cannot
establish causality or robust recovery. Both original-case links remain
deficient beneath the storage-only grade. The later issue-derived
reference correction has only provider-free validation. Native
finish/block descriptions must not be supplied to legacy agents.
- The comparison holds merged native Codex fix #14920 constant; it
cannot measure that fix's before/after task performance.
- These bounded skill/context/chat workflows do not measure general
coding quality. Unrepresented providers remain unqualified.
- Saved manuals and old Codex sessions are not automatically migrated.
Codex through ACP still has a separate base-instruction follow-up.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family as identified by this session. The exact
deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed. The assistant
used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, and delegated PR/eval
work.

## 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 (relevant suites and all
three unchanged narrow reruns pass; complete-run timing failures
retained in Verification)
- [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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the new repair head
(prior-head checks retained above)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the new repair head
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-03 12:32:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d034ba7491 fix(interactions): derive question storage from canonical forms (#14946)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents request human input through durable issue interactions.
> - A question form has a canonical presentation and a compatibility
storage format.
> - The creation API required agents to write both formats.
> - Tool guidance told agents to split text and choice questions across
those formats.
> - This pull request accepts one complete canonical form and derives
storage fields on the server.
> - The benefit is a complete question card with stable answer and retry
behavior.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related work: Refs #13630 and #14430. PR #13630 addresses the display of
historical partial forms. This change fixes creation and keeps the check
that rejects conflicting new forms.

**What happened?**

A question save supplied three compatibility questions and one canonical
text question. The API correctly rejected the incomplete canonical form.
The Runner's tool description encouraged this split. Sending only a
complete canonical form also failed because the API required
compatibility questions.

**Expected behavior**

An agent sends one complete `payload.questionSet` with every text and
choice question. Paperclip derives `payload.questions` for storage and
answer compatibility. Existing legacy requests remain valid. Explicitly
conflicting dual forms remain invalid.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Call `paperclip_request_human_input` with `interactionKind:
"questions"`.
2. Send `payload: { version: 1, questionSet: ... }` with a required text
question and a required choice question.
3. The old API rejects the missing compatibility questions. With this
change, it stores both questions and preserves the canonical form.
4. Retry with the same idempotency key. Confirm that only one
interaction exists.
5. Submit both answers. Confirm that the normal resolver and
continuation rules apply.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The branch is based on `cf8ad63c8`. The problem affects the native
Runner and the interaction creation API.

**Deployment mode**

Server deployment with the native Paperclip Runner. Integration tests
use the real interaction service and an embedded test database.

## What Changed

- Add one shared canonical-to-storage projection. Reuse it for native
harness question requests.
- Accept canonical-only question creation at the shared validator and
server boundary.
- Export the input type and update the plugin SDK and its RPC contract.
- Advertise a typed, complete question form in the live and scenario
tool schemas.
- Enforce canonical text and custom-answer constraints before ordinary
or native resolution. Preserve harmless display whitespace.
- Run regex matching in isolated workers with a deadline and resource
limits. Both answer paths await the result before persistence. Saved
native delivery uses the validated answer without taking another worker
slot.
- Update agent guidance and generated Runner contracts.
- Test mixed forms, option-ID collisions, retries, answers, legacy
requests, and conflicting forms.

## Verification

- Interaction service, HTTP route, native bridge, and Runner authority
suites: 221 tests passed after correcting an obsolete tool-description
assertion.
- Shared validator, plugin SDK, CLI, and UI compatibility suites: 67
tests passed.
- Runner core tool-contract suite: 20 tests passed. AJV validates live
and scenario schemas.
- Final review regressions: 172 shared, service, native bridge, and
authority tests passed. These cover text length, pattern, numeric
limits, whitespace, custom option IDs, and historical pending cards.
- Runner session suites: 67 tests passed. Published example tests: 4
tests passed.
- Server typecheck and the shared/server builds passed after the
compatibility fixes.
- Final delivery verification: 35 response-delivery tests passed. The
native delivery regression proves saved answers do not enter pattern
workers; server typecheck and build passed.
- Pattern security and answer-flow verification: 205 tests passed after
repairing the child fixture loader. These cover pathological matching,
event-loop responsiveness, worker concurrency, slot cleanup, HTTP
routes, native delivery, and the full helper in a child process.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the bounded-worker revision.
- `pnpm build` passed on the bounded-worker revision.
- All 55 GitHub checks passed on `fe457af`; four optional jobs were
skipped. An unchanged Cursor adapter test timed out once in CI, passed
locally, and passed on one failed-job rerun.
- Reviewers can send the canonical-only mixed form above and verify that
the saved interaction contains both canonical and compatibility
questions.

## Risks

- The creation API accepts a new input shape. Stored rows and answer
contracts keep the existing shape.
- The shared projection must preserve synthetic free-text option IDs.
Collision and native round-trip tests cover this behavior.
- Historical partial rows remain readable. New conflicting dual forms,
including written-answer mismatches, remain rejected.
- Existing pending cards retain the written-answer paths offered by
their stored options. Canonical text constraints still apply.
- Ordinary answers now enforce declared canonical constraints before
persistence. Invalid answers leave the card pending.
- Regex validation has a one-second deadline and a four-worker capacity
limit. A complex pattern or capacity error leaves the card pending with
a validation error.
- No database migration or change to company authorization is required.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The session exposes the GPT-6 model
family; its exact runtime model identifier and context window size are
not exposed. Used reasoning, 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 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 14:21:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 018993140f feat: let agents name prompt-only tasks (#14761)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Users create tasks with a title and a description.
> - A required title adds work when the prompt already explains the
request.
> - An agent can name the task once it reads that request.
> - This pull request accepts prompt-only tasks and starts them with a
short prompt slice.
> - A scoped title tool lets the assigned agent replace that slice early
without changing execution state.
> - A live browser eval checks the real agent call, saved title, audit
entry, and preservation of user titles.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: task creation, shared contracts, database, server, runner
tools, and board UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Users must currently write a title before they can submit a detailed
task prompt. The agent has enough context to write a useful title
itself.

**Proposed solution**

Make the title optional when a description is present. Save the first
120 characters of the normalized prompt as a provisional title. Ask the
assigned agent to call `set_task_title` early. Use an atomic
provisional-title guard to preserve titles supplied or edited by users.
Keep explicit titles supported.

Related: #14543 and #14556 concern empty-title submission. This change
intentionally enables that submission when a prompt is present, instead
of requiring a title.

## What Changed

- Add the `titleNeedsGeneration` field with an idempotent migration.
Keep existing titles unchanged.
- Add `PUT /api/issues/:id/title` and the native and legacy
`set_task_title` tool. Enforce company access, active-run ownership,
shared, bounded retry receipts across native/HTTP calls, and
transactional audit logging. Refresh external-object links after commit,
with the same feature gate and plugin detectors as ordinary title edits.
- Add early naming guidance in Standard, Ask, and Plan task context.
Preserve the description, status, and assignment.
- Allow prompt-only root and child task creation, plus draft restoration
in the New Task dialog. Keep user titles supported.
- Add an opt-in Product E2E suite for prompt-only Standard and Ask
tasks, plus an explicit-title control. It checks actual provider calls
within the first five tools, persisted state, audit attribution, and the
reloaded UI.
- Preserve a closed vocabulary of API key maintenance phrases in
declared prose while rejecting opaque credential suffixes. Add one
bounded naming retry after wording is rejected, without treating the
rejected call as a saved title.
- Repair the native cleanup receipt check exposed during full
verification: accept matching input digests, retain legacy input checks,
and reject conflicting receipts.

## Verification

- Live Product E2E on `f43478473800e3a46b85c5ee79677efdb15108e7`: **3/3
passed** with native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`, first attempts only,
automatic retries disabled. Standard and Ask each saved “Rotate expired
API key” on their first tool call, with matching persisted state and a
single same-run audit entry. The explicit-title control retained its
user title with zero title writes. All three verified the reloaded
browser UI.
- Campaign: `local-2026-09-30T21-30-11-021Z`. Earlier failed campaigns
are retained separately; they exposed credential-prose handling and
prompted the naming recovery fix. No failed result was regraded or
deleted.
- Reproduce with `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-standard --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.prompt-title-ask --id
task-titles.runner-codex-mini.local.preserve-explicit-title
--max-automatic-retries 0` and an authorized provider key.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the latest commit.
The runner build used the configured external eval source tree.
- Product E2E unit suite: **61 files, 818 tests passed**; E2E typecheck
and UI token gates passed.
- Title API/native regressions cover prompt-only and explicit child
creation, user edits, ownership/company isolation, external reference
refresh, cross-surface retry replay, and the 64-key limit without
receipt eviction. All passed. Prompt-context coverage: **44 tests
passed**.
- Rust credential regressions: **35 tests passed**, including benign
maintenance qualifiers and opaque credential rejection in every declared
prose field. Catalog/report reconciliation: **28 tests passed**. Native
recovery: **560 tests passed**.
- Broad local `pnpm test:run`: **14,555 tests passed** in the general
server group; two suites failed to initialize embedded PostgreSQL and
the existing 40,000-file Git streaming stress test exceeded its
300-second macOS timeout. All three suites then passed in isolation (**5
tests passed**) without code or timeout changes. The original full local
command exited nonzero and is not being represented as a clean full run.
- Latest-head GitHub checks are green: **53 passed, 4 skipped, zero
failed or pending**, including all test shards and the canary packaging
dry run. Greptile reviewed the same commit at **5/5**, with zero
unresolved review threads.

## Risks

- The additive database field must reach the server and UI together. The
migration uses `IF NOT EXISTS` and defaults existing tasks to a final
title.
- Title generation depends on the assigned agent running. Tasks without
a run keep their provisional title.
- Live qualification covers the native Codex path in Standard and Ask
modes. API/legacy and Plan behavior have deterministic coverage.
- The credential-prose exception validates the entire suffix against a
closed maintenance vocabulary. Unknown suffixes, assignments, quoted
values, credential prefixes, and diagnostics retain strict checks.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact deployment ID and context window are not exposed in
this session. The live eval uses the native Codex `gpt-5.4-mini`
profile.

## 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>
2026-09-30 16:48:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3c561642b4 fix(chat): resolve approvals and preserve unanswered questions (#14613)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents ask for decisions and optional details through cards in chat.
> - A clear approval in a message can leave the matching card pending.
> - An unanswered question can also block an unrelated later reply.
> - Decisions need a saved source message, while optional questions need
to remain answerable in history.
> - This pull request records conversational decisions and lets users
move on from questions and answer them later.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Native Claude and Codex could act on approval in chat while the original
approval card stayed pending. Pending question forms stayed above the
composer, were absent from history, and could suppress later chat
replies. A late native question answer could wait for a finished run to
reconnect.

**Expected behavior**

The active agent records a clear approval or refusal against the exact
card and user message. Ambiguous replies do not grant consent. Users can
send another message without answering a question. The question remains
pending in history and can be reopened and answered later. The saved
answer reaches the agent.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Ask an agent to propose work with a confirmation card, then approve
it in chat.
2. Check that the original card records that approval before work
starts.
3. Ask an interactive question, send an unrelated message, and reload.
4. Open the unanswered question from history and submit an answer.

Related work: #14408 added completion delivery. #14607 tests completion
reporting turns. Neither records conversational answers on approval
cards.

## What Changed

- Add a confirmation endpoint backed by a user comment, with schema
validation, OpenAPI discovery, and native Plan-mode access. Ask mode
remains read-only.
- Check company, active run, actor, current session, message provenance,
revision, and resolver policy. Save the decision and audit in one
transaction. Retries do not repeat effects. Emit resolution telemetry
after commit.
- Give fresh and resumed chat turns the actual pending confirmation
identities. Teach agents to save clear conversational decisions before
acting and to clarify ambiguity.
- Keep unanswered Agent Chat questions as compact history entries. A
newer user message closes the old form. Question cards never contribute
to composer pending counts or navigation, including after dismissing a
fresh form. The history card is the sole reminder; clicking it restores
that exact form and draft.
- Preserve Agent Chat questions when later messages or questions arrive.
Historical ordinary inputs no longer gate later chat replies.
Current-run requests, task execution, and governed approvals keep their
gates. Remove the special acknowledgement-publication proof helpers that
this rule replaces.
- Route answers to finished native runs through durable fresh-wake
delivery, with existing idempotency and source-question context. Settle
late replies against contiguous completed conversation turns and freeze
their history replay; failed, unhandled, and newly arriving messages
remain actionable.
- Add real-component Storybook scenarios, database and UI regressions,
and a three-turn native Claude/Codex E2E case. Capture distinct,
UI-ready screenshots and report the individual assertions.

## Verification

- Focused decision/publication/UI regressions after merging master: 288
passed; subsequent UI draft, failed-send, and conversation checks: 199
passed.
- Native question and durable delivery regressions: 106 passed,
including all four terminal run states and exactly-once late delivery.
Seven targeted regressions fail against the original implementation and
pass with the fix.
- Latest conversation/decision/native-delivery regressions after the
master merge: 121 passed. Covers completed progress, missing or failed
intervening turns, new messages during a late reply, stale sessions, and
frozen retry/replay boundaries. Four new assertions fail before the
ordering fix.
- E2E support suite after the master merge: 792 passed. Negative
controls reject expired cards, wrong questions/answers, stale or missing
replies, unrelated clarification forms, and unexpected tasks.
- The embedded-browser walkthrough caught one additional defect:
dismissing a fresh question still showed a composer badge. Both Cancel
and close-button regressions failed before the fix. The fix at
`65f2ade12` passes 170 chat-thread tests and 792 E2E support tests.
After merging master, 232 chat-thread/confirmation tests, server/UI
typechecks, and token gates pass. The preview and two-provider live E2E
pass at `e5512a206`; Greptile is 5/5 with zero unresolved threads at
that commit. All 55 checks are now successful at `e5512a206` (four
conditional checks skipped), including the aggregate verification gate
and clean-install canary test. The first attempt was interrupted by
simultaneous CI worker shutdowns; one failed-job rerun passed without
code changes.
- [Published
Storybook](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/storybook/branches/codex~2Fchat-approval-resolution/?path=/story/chat-comments-agent-chat-unanswered-questions--moved-on):
nine real-component scenarios. Manually exercised move on, reopen,
preserve draft, answer later, answer one of multiple questions, and a
custom mobile answer in the embedded browser. Retested fresh Cancel and
close-button dismissal in the updated build, then reopened and submitted
the preserved Green selection and inspected its answered receipt. Static
preview has no live model/backend; its callbacks are fixture responses.
- [First live
campaign](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36714504406-1/)
reproduced the late-answer completion-state defect on both providers
despite correct saved answers and acknowledgements. It also exposed a
valid imperative clarification rejected by the old oracle. Both issues
are fixed with regression controls; this failing run is retained as
evidence.
- [Four-cell
qualification](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36717804064-1/)
passed 4/4 at `2bf8a1009`: unanswered-question return and ambiguous
confirmation, each on native Claude and Codex. Inspected saved state,
source-message decisions, visible cards, and agent replies. Both
late-answer chats settled to waiting; no unrequested tasks were created.
[Final branch
rerun](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36719666238-1/)
passed 2/2 at `142630720`: the same unanswered-question journey after
merging master, plus an additional screenshot and browser assertion for
the actual late-answer acknowledgement.
- [Composer-reminder
E2E](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36727006818-1/)
passed 2/2 at `5b62c52d9`: native Claude and Codex, three turns each,
with explicit no-badge assertions before and after reload. Inspected
saved pending/answered state, both screenshots with a clear composer,
and actual Blue acknowledgements; all five behavioral matchers passed
per provider and neither created tasks. Cost coverage is partial; this
is bounded workflow qualification.
- [Fresh-dismissal
E2E](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36742773318-1/)
passed 2/2 at `e5512a206`: native Claude and Codex, including fresh
Cancel, clear composer, reopen, unrelated message, reload, late Blue
answer, and actual agent acknowledgement. All five behavioral matchers
pass per provider. Inspected the fresh-dismissal screenshots and saved
pending/answered identity; neither created tasks. Cost coverage is
partial (4/6 runs).
- Prior evidence remains available in [the earlier
campaign](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-36642252725-1/).
Its early loading screenshot and overwritten final capture prompted the
UI-ready, distinct screenshot fixes.

## Risks

- The model interprets intent. The server verifies permission and
provenance; it does not infer consent from text. Ambiguous and unrelated
replies are not approvals.
- Historical questions can accumulate. They remain visible, pending, and
answerable; no automatic answer or expiry is invented.
- The change to completion gates is scoped to Agent Chat and ordinary
historical inputs. Current-turn and governed approvals retain their
existing controls.
- Live qualification is limited to the selected stories. Broader native
onboarding finalization remains separate work.
- No database migration. Telemetry adds no fields or values; the
contract and README document the commit boundary. Privacy review was
requested on the PR.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser-test orchestration. The exact model ID and
context-window size are not exposed to this session.

## 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>
2026-09-30 11:46:46 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip d30b03bd8c test: add persistent E2E coverage for human blocker decisions (#14707)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - Agents use the coordination skill when work needs human authority or
a scope decision.
> - PR #14188 replaced automatic manager escalation with direct blocker
handling.
> - This behavior needs real browser, server, database, and provider
tests.
> - The test must verify saved human input, task ownership, and resumed
work.
> - This pull request adds six reusable Product E2E cases and improves
the skill examples that they exercise.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14188.

The merged change needs repeatable behavior coverage. The new suite
tests missing administrator access, missing hiring permission, and
requester scope questions. Searches found no duplicate blocker-guidance
suite. This extends the existing eval system described in ROADMAP.md.

## What Changed

- Add the explicit-only `blocker-guidance` Product E2E suite. It has
three local scenarios on legacy Codex and legacy Claude.
- Use the production UI and public APIs to create work, save a
human-only question or confirmation, answer it after reload, and resume
the same task.
- Check requester identity, ownership history, manager activity, hiring,
saved answers, and completion. Keep direct text input as a separate UX
result.
- Save pending and final screenshots, API checkpoints, skill hashes,
provider evidence, and billing data through the existing report
pipeline.
- Isolate the Claude fixture home. Verify the served skill bytes before
dispatch so an old installed skill cannot silently replace the evaluated
skill.
- Improve the coordination and hiring skill examples. Include the
human-only policy, requester address, wake behavior, and handling of
authorized scope changes.
- Grader v5 requires the exact approved public welcome note as a new
worker comment. Browser input checks reject unwritable scope cards
before clicking, and confirmation direction must be saved in the
resolution before the worker wakes.
- Add grader calibration and browser-input tests. Update the fixture
guide and generated capability inventories.

## Verification

- `pnpm build`: passed after rebasing onto current master.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 742 tests passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:browser-support blocker-input.spec.ts`: 10 tests
passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --list --suite blocker-guidance`: six cells
found.
- Capability inventory and generated-contract checks: passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/hiring-operational-examples.test.ts`: four tests
passed after synchronizing the generated API reference and section
anchor.
- Full general and serialized test suites: passed in CI on
`6652cee74517039676bad6a720f213625d265acd`. The redundant local `pnpm
test:run` was interrupted after complete CI coverage passed; it is not
claimed as a completed local full-suite run.
- Final GitHub checks: 54 passed, two optional Storybook checks skipped.
The runtime-exposure startup test hit a 10-second readiness timeout
once, passed a targeted local reproduction, and its CI shard passed the
single retry without code changes.
- Current-head Greptile: 5/5, clean check, zero unresolved threads.
- Historical live measurement on September 29 at
`4edc77ae2b95b10dd61426ce3f042bac00527ad9`: three independent six-cell
runs scored 5/6, 6/6, and 6/6. Claude Sonnet 4.6 passed 9/9. Codex
`gpt-5.6-sol` passed 8/9. These runs predate this rebase.
- Version 5 changes the scope answer to an exact approved publication
draft. The historical runs do not qualify that new requirement; the
two-provider scope pilot at `49a1f4eab369948b9e3b34a6ce436489e875e4ec`
passed Codex and failed Claude. Claude posted the correct salary-free
sentence but omitted its required reference line from that comment,
placing the reference in a separate completion message. The
`public-welcome-note` check correctly failed. An earlier Claude
database-startup failure was retained separately; its fresh-instance
retry reached the model. This pilot is not a six-cell qualification.
- The failed Codex scope case omitted `addresseeUserId`. The strict
routing check remains. All 18 attempts had clean evidence manifests and
passed cleanup.
- To repeat with provider credentials: `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite
blocker-guidance --max-parallel 1`. This is a paid, opt-in suite and is
excluded from `--all`.

## Risks

- The live suite measures variable model behavior. The retained 17/18
historical result and the current 1/2 scope pilot are not all-pass
qualifications. These paid cases are opt-in; their observed model
failures remain visible independently of deterministic CI checks.
- A separate generic task-replacement diagnostic still exposed a Claude
refusal. The ordinary cases use specific business decisions. The
diagnostic is not a standalone catalog case in this change.
- Earlier measurements included an old installed Claude skill and test
defects. Their grades remain retained and are not combined with the
three final repetitions.
- Skill examples can affect when agents ask for human input. Downstream
permission checks still apply.
- Native runners, Daytona, agent-requester routing, and real external
connection authorization are outside this suite.
- Raw provider traces and credentials remain private. No screenshots,
raw reports, secrets, workflow changes, or lockfile changes are
committed.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The exact deployed
variant and context window size are not exposed in this session. The
assistant used reasoning, repository edits, tool use, and shell
execution. The evaluated models were `gpt-5.6-sol` and
`claude-sonnet-4-6`.

## 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>
2026-09-30 07:56:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2de43fc909 fix(issues): keep agent mentions as context and defer personal app authorization (#14577)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Each task has one assignee. Explicit assignment and review requests
select who should act.
> - An agent mention started another agent on a task it did not own.
Native attachment staging then rejected that run.
> - Allowing that run through startup could also let two agents work on
the same task.
> - Mentions should identify relevant context. They should not start
work or forward comments to other tasks.
> - A personal app installed on a shared agent must also wait until tool
use to resolve the current user's grant.
> - This pull request removes mention dispatch and keeps missing
personal app credentials from blocking startup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A native agent mentioned on another agent's task failed with
`paperclip_runner_attachment_staging_not_authorized`. The source task
could already be complete. A nearby optional-app warning was a separate
problem: personal app tools were excluded when their shared health state
required attention.

**Expected behavior**

An agent mention is context only. It does not wake the agent, take
ownership, or copy a comment onto another task. Normal feedback still
reaches the assignee. Assignment and explicit review requests still
dispatch work. An unavailable personal app does not block startup or
produce a startup warning. Tool use requests the current user's
authorization and never uses another user's grant.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Assign a task to agent A. Post a comment that mentions agent B,
including a comment that closes A's task or references B's child task.
2. Confirm the comment retains its agent link and B receives no run or
deferred wake. A can still receive normal feedback.
3. Install an active personal MCP connection on B. Give only Alice a
grant and leave shared health at `error`.
4. Explicitly assign work to B for another user. Confirm it can finish
without using the app.
5. Ask B to use the app. Confirm its tool call shows an inline
connection request for the current user.

Related work: Refs #11144. This change uses the existing execution-time
personal grant resolution.

## What Changed

- Remove mention dispatch from standalone comments and issue updates.
Remove implicit forwarding of parent comments to a mentioned worker's
child task.
- Ignore new requests with the legacy mention wake reason before
creating a run or deferred request. Preserve already accepted queue
entries, which can combine assignments and feedback with a later
mention.
- Remove the native mention admission, staging, and finalization
exceptions from this PR. Native task ownership checks remain intact.
- Keep active, installed personal app tools available despite shared
health errors. Remove optional-app startup warnings. Tool execution
retains the current user's grant and policy checks.
- Update agent instructions and product/API docs. Refresh generated
capability source anchors.

## Verification

- Red: comment-route regressions reproduced extra agent wakes and child
comment forwarding. A separate regression proved that cancelling by the
last coalesced reason could drop an accepted assignment.
- Green: the targeted route, wake queue, heartbeat, workspace,
responsible-user, MCP discovery, and HTTP gateway suites passed. The
final queue and heartbeat rerun passed 104 tests, the restored queue
adapter passed 56, and both comment-route suites passed 135. These
include accepted assignment preservation, rejection of new mention
requests, and normal assignee feedback.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally. The full local
`pnpm test:run` attempt was interrupted for review/CI fixes, so it is
not claimed as a completed local pass. It exposed a cleanup timing race
in the concurrent-mention assertion, now fixed and verified across 10
repetitions. CI also exposed an obsolete test waiting for the removed
mention lookup; it was reproduced and fixed, then both comment suites
passed. Final full-suite verification is through CI.
- Final head `bd9ea4cb05a8f081c54e017760a8999f9ea6ef44`: 54 checks
passed, 2 Storybook checks intentionally skipped; no pending or failing
checks. Full CI includes general and serialized suites, all 8 browser
shards, runner verification, typecheck, build, and canary dry run.
Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit, with no unresolved findings.
- One unchanged Cursor adapter test hit its 10-second CI timeout. All 5
tests in that file passed locally; one retry of its CI shard passed all
674 tests (3 skipped). The aggregate verification gate then passed. No
code or timeout was changed for that retry.
- Live browser check: inserted a structured mention with the picker on a
human-owned task. The saved link remained visible. Database checks found
zero new runs and zero wake requests.
- Live Codex runner check: explicitly assigned that task with the
unavailable personal app attached. The run succeeded and committed
completion without using the app or creating a connection card.
- Live browser follow-up: asked the assignee to call PostHog and
mentioned another enabled agent as context. Only the assignee ran. It
succeeded and displayed the existing inline connection card. Only
Alice's grant existed; the run belonged to a different user.
- The HTTP regression covers tool discovery with no provider calls or
connection cards, first use returning the current user's authorization
request, and successful retry after that user's grant exists.
- App checks use an isolated local fixture and a fake MCP provider. They
do not use production app credentials.

## Risks

- Intentional behavior change: workflows that used mentions to wake
agents must use assignment, a bounded child task, or an explicit review
request.
- Already accepted queue entries retain their prior rules. An old entry
can combine assignment or feedback with a later mention; its last reason
cannot safely identify mention-only work. New mention requests create no
run or deferred wake.
- Personal apps with a shared health error remain discoverable. Actual
tool use still requires the responsible user's grant and existing policy
gates.
- No database migration or public API schema change.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser testing. The exact serving model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.
- Live native-run verification used `gpt-6-astra` through the Codex
provider.

## 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>
2026-09-29 12:49:01 -05:00
DottaandFry 3ca196b0a6 feat(agents): persist agent files across tasks without revision history (#14420)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - An agent needs personal files across tasks and sessions.
> - AGENTS.md is one file in that directory. Supporting files need the
same persistence.
> - The Instructions Editor and agent runs must share one current
directory.
> - Concurrent runs should apply only the files they change. The last
sync of the same file wins.
> - This pull request uses existing file transport and removes temporary
copies after sync.
> - Old instruction-only sessions keep their restore contract. New saves
do not create revision history.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #14325. This replaces its revision-oriented design with persistent
agent files. Keep #14325 unmerged.

Transport prerequisite #14416 merged first at
`d172197117a14b80a1eb2d2835a0e7cce2679656`. This PR now targets master
and remains below 100 changed files.

Related work: #4513 and #8798 cover instruction tooling. This change
handles run synchronization, cross-task personal files, browser editing,
and old-session restoration.

## What Changed

- Keep one current directory per company and agent. Point AGENT_HOME at
a temporary working copy for each active run. Keep task files and
provider HOME separate.
- Restore text, binary files, and nested folders through workspace
transport. Exclude remote agent files from task Git snapshots with a
self-ignoring file inside the reserved runtime directory; never write
through repository-controlled Git metadata.
- Collect after the provider and child processes have stopped. Keep
resumable conversation state.
- Apply changed and deleted files under the agent lock. The last sync
wins for the same file. Unrelated concurrent changes survive.
- Remove temporary copies after successful sync, rejected sync, and
staging failure. Register ownership before copying so restart recovery
can remove interrupted preparation. Retry transient synchronization up
to three times. Preserve the original remote lease reference until
deletion succeeds; restart cleanup never acquires a replacement sandbox.
Do not create captured directories or a conflict-review queue for new
runs.
- Keep browser editing, stale-draft protection, and streaming binary
downloads. Keep the instruction entry and text editor limited to 1 MiB.
- Keep historical agent-folder sync failures on their affected runs
instead of repeating them above current saved instructions. Preserve
legacy candidate review and current browser-save errors. Avoid duplicate
quota warnings while retaining separate sync failures when they describe
a different problem.
- Require target-scoped caller grants for peer instruction access, while
preserving self edits, responsible-user checks, and protected-change
consent.
- Treat full storage as a nonblocking run warning, never an agent pause
or run-admission failure. Restore already-over-quota saved folders so
ordinary agent cleanup can recover; warn on each run until cleanup. The
run detail view shows the warning.
- Allow 256 MiB per file, 2 GiB per directory, and 100,000 entries. Hash
large files as streams. Check editor-save quotas with metadata instead
of hashing unrelated files.
- Preserve old native inputs, instruction-only copies, paths, digests,
and pending legacy candidates. Adopt old revision heads once. New writes
do not append history rows.
- Add idempotent migration 0287 and verify upgrades from the preview
tables and receipts.
- Add nine interactive stories under **Agents / Persistent files**,
including automatic incoming edits, stale browser drafts, and
storage-limit diagnostics.

## Verification

- Merge candidate: `4f5390107ec6ffd80a76d1d2e85530e66f21d079`, after
merging current master and the landed transport prerequisite.
Integration required no manual conflict resolution; the feature remains
99 changed files. Full workspace typecheck, production build, token
gates, and 715 focused tests passed on this merge candidate. Fresh
Greptile review is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. All 55 checks
passed, with four conditional skips, including the build, typecheck,
browser E2E, and canary dry run. A single retry recovered four jobs
interrupted by runner shutdowns; no source changes were required.
- Historical-warning UI fix: all 6,834 UI tests across 640 files passed,
including regression coverage for three old failures, legacy preserved
edits, and warnings scoped to the affected run. Full workspace
typecheck, production build, Storybook build, and token gates passed.
Browser-verified Storybook playtests passed for Historical Failures
After Successful Save, Storage Limit, and Full Storage Run Warning.
- Review follow-ups at `4e20c9fb2`: all 18 focused tests passed,
including external Git directories, linked worktrees, symlinks,
hardlinks, and distinct I/O failures alongside storage warnings. Server
and UI typechecks, token gates, and the production build passed.
- Storage warning regressions at `0724f3012`: all 33 directory tests and
all five heartbeat-list tests passed, with no skips in their successful
runs. They cover repeated runs while full, an already-over-quota saved
folder, cleanup, warnings retained after unrelated save failures, and
bounded warnings in large result JSON. Server typecheck passed after the
final warning fixes.
- Full workspace typecheck, production build, and token gates passed
during this follow-up. Product E2E harness: 631 tests passed across 52
files; harness typecheck passed. Earlier native session/context and
directory/legacy collection suites passed 537 tests; Runner
unit/transport suites passed 329 tests.
- **Real E2E at `0724f3012` (before this follow-up):** legacy local
Codex and native Daytona Codex each passed six tasks, one server
restart, seven independent assertions, and cleanup verification. Both
prove browser-to-agent edits, agent-to-browser edits, nested/binary
restoration, per-file last-sync-wins, a successful run after an
oversized save rejection, and cleanup clearing the warning.
- Native local Codex also passed the six-task quota flow before the
final warning-retention fixes. That pass began at `918d1ed02` while the
bounded-result warning fix was being edited, so it is not claimed as
exact-final-head evidence. Its final-head rerun failed during embedded
PostgreSQL bootstrap before any provider run: the macOS host had 87,365
of 87,381 SysV semaphores occupied. No unrelated services or kernel
limits were changed.
- The final-source report intentionally records **2/3 cells passed**,
preserving the blocked native-local attempt:
`tests/runner-e2e/results/agent-files-quota-final-20260928-report/`.
Earlier failed attempts and provenance notes remain under
`tests/runner-e2e/results/agent-files-quota-final-20260928-input/` and
the original campaign directories.
- Daytona used immutable image
`ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:5643f0d801417cae3581833a1a3bc6715b325e028602738d2652c44cac5dc6bf`
and its exact Linux runner binary. Controller source is `0724f3012`;
image source is recorded separately.
- Legacy-session compatibility and all three ACP Stop/resume browser
regressions passed on the prior validated feature head
`169fab46d5af21caa2269b4c1b29b69c933a6951`. They assert the same
provider session is retained and interrupted writes are not replayed.
Migration upgrade tests also passed earlier.
- Nine interactive stories are under **Agents / Persistent files**,
including **Full Storage Run Warning**. Its playtest and visual browser
inspection passed; the warning states that runs continue and the editor
remains available.
- Prior-head checks on `4e20c9fb2`: 55 passed, two conditional jobs
skipped, no failures or pending checks. All eight browser E2E shards and
their aggregate passed. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with no findings;
all review threads are resolved, the security scan passed, and GitHub
reports no merge conflicts.
- The broad local follow-up test run was interrupted after host
semaphore exhaustion affected isolated PostgreSQL instances. It also
encountered the existing macOS long-path fixture failure and two timeout
failures. This is not a claim that the full local suite passed. Logs are
retained; focused storage/warning tests passed.

## Risks

- A later sync can overwrite an earlier edit to the same file, including
a saved browser edit. There is no text merge or retained version. This
is the intended last-sync-wins policy.
- A save that exceeds a storage limit is rejected and its temporary copy
is discarded. The run itself continues normally, and later runs restore
the last saved files with a warning until cleanup. Transient sync
failures get bounded retries. An I/O failure partway through a sync can
leave some files updated; a failed receipt does not claim whole-folder
success.
- Larger folders increase copy time, network traffic, and temporary disk
usage. Active runs still need working copies. Terminal runs do not
accumulate archives. Operators must provision disk for agents and
configured concurrency; these limits are not company-wide quotas.
- A restored old native session remains instruction-only until a fresh
session starts. Its original conflict fence and existing pending
candidates remain compatible.
- Provider processes close at the collection boundary. Conversation
resume remains available, but warm process reuse is lost.
- Backups must include the instance filesystem and database. External
bundles keep their existing behavior until explicitly moved to managed
storage.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The session does not expose a more specific
model ID or context-window size. Reasoning, code execution, and browser
tools assisted this change. Real provider E2E uses `gpt-5.6-sol`.

## 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: Fry (Paperclip) <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-29 08:25:56 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3447609d22 fix(runner): stream and page large API responses within capture budgets (#14301)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use governed API tools to inspect task evidence.
> - Large API results become saved assets with short previews.
> - Reading an asset through the same tool used to create another asset,
so the agent could not reach the rest of the evidence.
> - The 10 MiB response cap also blocked useful large results. Removing
all bounds allowed excessive disk use.
> - This pull request streams responses up to 1 GiB and makes saved text
readable in bounded pages. It adds durable run budgets and capture
admission limits.
> - Agents can inspect complete evidence while tool results, memory use,
and capture work stay bounded.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
A large response became an asset. Reading that asset returned another
asset and the same preview. Responses above 10 MiB failed before the
agent could read any page.

**Expected behavior**
The agent can fetch a large response and read its saved text to EOF.
Each page stays bounded. New snapshots have a generous finite limit and
a durable run budget. Existing larger assets remain readable through
byte ranges.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Call a GET operation that returns more than 10 MiB of text or JSON.
2. Before the fix, the tool returns `api_transport_failure`.
3. With this change, responses up to 1 GiB become streamed snapshots
with artifact references.
4. Read `GET /api/assets/{assetId}/content` with `responseText:
{offsetBytes: 0, limitBytes: 8192}`. Follow `nextOffsetBytes` until
null.

Related work: #14186 added the API fallback tools. #14218 bounded API
discovery.

## What Changed

- Add authenticated UTF-8 text windows to `call_api`, with byte offsets
and total size. Keep each page at or below 24 KiB.
- Stream new responses above 24 KiB through private temporary files into
company-owned assets. Bound each capture to 1 GiB of decoded bytes.
Reject oversized declared lengths before reading and count streamed
bytes before writing.
- Reserve capture budget in the run record before spilling. Allow 4 GiB
per run. Settle successful captures to their actual size. Failed or
interrupted captures retain their full 1 GiB reservation. Run restarts
do not reset the budget.
- Enforce a 20 GiB company snapshot quota with database reservations.
Count legacy snapshots and unfinished storage work across runs and
processes. Asset deletion frees quota.
- Limit large captures to two per company and four per server process.
Hold slots through storage upload and temporary-file cleanup. Use a
10-minute download deadline and 30-second connection/idle-read timeouts.
- Return explicit size, budget, busy, and timeout errors. Preserve
unknown outcomes for mutations whose response cannot be captured.
- Read saved assets through authenticated storage ranges, with at most
two extra bytes for UTF-8 and EOF handling. Unpaged reads return the
existing asset and digest with a bounded preview. Reads create no copies
and do not consume capture budget.
- Keep existing assets above 1 GiB readable in pages. Use safe integer
offsets and PostgreSQL `bigint` asset sizes.
- Stream large S3 uploads through ordered multipart requests. Abort
failed uploads and remove partial local files.
- Revalidate run authority during downloads. Keep company authorization,
GET-only text paging, redirect denial, and mutation replay receipts.
- Document the separate 10 MiB upload limits. This PR does not raise
memory-buffered attachment ingestion limits. Future large video uploads
need streamed ingestion and storage quotas.

## Verification

- Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass after
rebasing on master.
- Focused API and response tests: 1,761 pass. Cover declared and chunked
oversize responses, incorrect Content-Length, exact-limit success,
active-stream deadline, cancellation, cleanup, concurrency admission,
and mutation outcome handling.
- Real HTTP integration: 28 tests pass, including runnerd → PRP →
authority → HTTP, a 12 MiB snapshot, final-page/EOF reads, cross-company
denial, a persisted 3 GiB sparse asset, and large mutation receipt
replay.
- The HTTP suite verifies durable run-budget accounting, simultaneous
runs competing for company quota, legacy snapshot accounting, deletion
refunds, failed-storage reservations, cleaned-failure refunds,
metadata-rollback cleanup refunds, preservation after a lost commit
acknowledgement, and small/saved reads after capture-budget exhaustion.
- A standalone proof streams exactly 1 GiB through the production
capture helper, verifies the final bytes, and removes its temporary
file. It uses repeated 256 KiB chunks and records a peak process RSS of
191 MiB.
- Earlier storage verification covers exact S3 multipart boundaries,
cleanup/abort failures, and a 17 MiB transfer through the real AWS SDK
to a local HTTP S3 endpoint. No cloud S3 qualification was run for this
follow-up.
- The local full test run was interrupted for the company-quota changes.
A later targeted run hit exhausted macOS shared-memory slots before
tests started; two unattached PostgreSQL segments with dead owners were
reclaimed before retrying. All 55 current-head checks pass at
`aebb80ceeeee77d5a56b67bfffd835f2f846878c`, including the full CI test
suite, typecheck, build, browser suites, security scan, and Greptile
(5/5). There are no unresolved review threads. The combined rebased test
catalog also passes (48 tests).
- Earlier paging acceptance passed Daytona and separate staging at
`7739879e9`. Those runs predate the streaming and budget changes.

## Risks

- The 1 GiB response cap and 10-minute active-download deadline are
intentional product limits. Larger live results must use endpoint
pagination or a direct file workflow. Existing larger assets remain
readable through bounded ranges.
- A durable 20 GiB company snapshot quota counts stored runner-api
assets and active/orphan reservations across runs and processes. The
operator can set PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_API_COMPANY_CAPTURE_MAX_BYTES to a
finite value of at least 1 GiB. Deleting snapshots frees capacity;
possible orphan storage must be reconciled before releasing its
reservation.
- A failed capture uses its full reservation. A new large capture needs
a full 1 GiB available, even if it later completes at a smaller size.
Small reads and existing asset pages remain available.
- Concurrency limits apply per server process. The run byte budget is
shared through the database.
- The `integer` to `bigint` migration rewrites asset metadata and takes
an exclusive table lock. File bytes stay in storage.
- A live endpoint is fetched once before returning its snapshot.
Continue reading the saved artifact for stable pages. Mutations may
commit before any size or transport error; inspect state before
retrying.
- Attachment uploads and native file handoffs still default to 10 MiB.
Raising buffered ingestion paths to GiB sizes is separate work.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code execution and repository tools.
The runtime does not expose an exact serving model variant or
context-window size. The earlier paging work also used browser testing
and subagents.

## 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>
2026-09-28 10:36:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip bacc0e6a98 docs: remove automatic agent escalation from coordination skill (#14188)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages work for AI agents.
> - The coordination skill tells agents how to handle blocked work.
> - The skill directs blocked work to managers and other agents.
> - Those agents may lack the same access or authority.
> - These extra assignments delay the required human action.
> - This pull request removes automatic escalation advice.
> - Agents must identify the missing capability and use the correct
approval or human-input path.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Incorrect information.

**Where is the issue?**

The critical rules in `skills/paperclip/SKILL.md` and blocker guidance
in `skills/paperclip/references/api-reference.md`.

**What's wrong?**

The skill tells agents to escalate through `chainOfCommand`, ask another
agent for help, and avoid human help. A manager title does not grant
permission to fix a connection or complete an administrator action.

**Suggested fix**

Remove blanket escalation and agent-first rules. Keep normal delegation
when the recipient has a concrete capability for a bounded task. Use
saved human-input interactions or existing connection and approval flows
for human-only actions.

Searches for open PRs with “escalation”, “chainOfCommand”, and “ask
another agent” found no duplicate skill change. Recovery-routing PRs
change server behavior, which is outside this change.

## What Changed

- Remove the chain-of-command escalation rule and both repeated
agent-first directives.
- Replace manager handoffs in the API reference with direct blocker
handling.
- Keep reporting fields, normal delegation, approval gates, and the ban
on bypassing permission denials.
- Keep the ban on cancelling cross-team tasks. Request a decision
instead of automatically assigning the task to a manager.

## Verification

- Final head `1483e82cc3fe10a7c910230b3779635d6d54c162`: Greptile 5/5,
no outstanding findings, all CI checks pass (optional Storybook jobs
skipped).

- Created a fresh worktree at `.worktrees/skill-blocker-guidance` from
the current master commit.
- Ran `git diff --check`: passed.
- Ran Node assertions against both documents: passed. Removed directives
are absent. Human-input and capability-based delegation guidance is
present.
- Checked that checkout conflict, approval, dependency, and normal
delegation instructions remain.
- Attempted `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build`. None
could run because this environment has no `pnpm` executable.
- Refreshed both generated capability inventories and their derived
contract after skill heading positions changed. Both generator and
live-inventory checks pass. The eval and MCP baselines remain unchanged.
- Ran `node --test
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/check-capability-inventory.test.mjs`:
all four tests pass.
- Ran `node
packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/check-capability-inventory.mjs` and
`node packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/generate-capability-contract.mjs
--check`: both pass.
- Added explicit requester routing for agent and human scope questions.
Focused Node assertions pass.

## Risks

- Agents can request human input earlier for actions that require human
authority.
- Existing runs or installed copies can keep old skill text until
refreshed.
- This change does not alter server recovery routing or permission
checks.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and shell execution. The runtime
does not expose a verifiable exact model ID or context window size.

## 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>
2026-09-28 08:37:26 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7944ed3d97 fix(runner): preserve hire runtime safety and first-activity timing (#13852)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane for companies of AI
agents.
> - Native runner agents need governed tools, durable runtime state, and
useful execution evidence.
> - A first activity trace waited 53.467 seconds even though tool
activity took 6.274 seconds; provider input arrived before the server
API call executed.
> - Native agents also need a safe way to hire teammates without asking
the model to rebuild runtime configuration.
> - This pull request separates the observed ACP input-stream window
from the actual server `tool.execute` span and adds a server-owned
native hire contract.
> - The benefit is clearer latency evidence and safer native teammates
with existing approval, auth, and company boundaries preserved.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related Daytona provenance work is in
[#13814](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13814). No
duplicate public PR was found for this combined timing and native-hire
change.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Native runner agents can use governed tools and request hires. The
server did not expose a safe native hire operation that reused the
caller's validated runtime settings. First-activity traces also mixed
provider input timing with server tool execution timing.

**Current behavior**

A native hire must construct a separate runner configuration. Full
configuration copying could expose paths, instructions, secrets, or
sessions. Timing evidence could make a provider or MCP identity join
appear proven when the trace did not contain that join.

**Proposed behavior**

The native `hire_agent` operation accepts identity and persona inputs.
The server sends `adapterType: "paperclip_runner"` with
`inheritRuntimeFrom: "caller"`, then copies only validated provider,
model, permission, lifecycle, and bounded execution settings. It
inherits and validates the default environment, derives the managed AI
binding through existing normalization, preserves approval and
permissions, and creates fresh child instructions. Caller secrets,
paths, prompts, and sessions are excluded.

Provider events now include the optional boolean `inputUpdated`, with
Rust forwarding support. Timing evidence separately records the ACP
input-stream window and the actual server `tool.execute` activity. It
does not claim a provider or MCP join without matching evidence.

**Reason and benefit**

Native agents can hire teammates that start with the caller's approved
execution policy. Operators retain company boundaries, auth rules,
approval gates, and requalification. Reviewers can distinguish provider
streaming time from server API execution time when diagnosing
first-activity delays.

**Breaking changes**

None for existing hires or tool calls. `inheritRuntimeFrom` is optional
and only applies to same-company native agent callers. Conflicting
explicit runtime settings are rejected. The provider event field is
optional for existing producers.

## What Changed

- Added the native `hire_agent` protocol action, catalog entry, API
contract, and runner authority checks.
- Added `inheritRuntimeFrom: "caller"` validation and a closed native
runtime inheritance allowlist.
- Preserved managed AI binding normalization, default-environment
validation, approval snapshots, permissions, requalification, and fresh
child instructions.
- Added provider `inputUpdated` schema support and Rust forwarding.
- Added first-activity and server tool timing evidence with conservative
identity-join handling.
- Added route, authority, provider-event, sidecar, API, catalog, and
Rust-focused tests.
- Kept private Honeycomb links, raw traces, and local result paths out
of this description.

## Verification

Focused checks passed:

- 458 timing/session checks.
- 61 native hire inheritance checks.
- 20 hire authority checks.
- 1,741 API checks.
- 106 catalog checks.
- 54 provider sidecar checks.
- 12 Rust provider checks.

Live R2 and R3 each passed 45 checks across 6 runs (361,135 ms for R2).
R1 stopped at missing Docker image setup. The final trace is available
at
https://ui.honeycomb.io/paperclip/environments/test/datasets/paperclip/result/BiMypLNvmiB?tab=traces.
Latest-head CI passed all required build, typecheck, Rust, static,
Vitest, serialized-server, workspace, chat, and E2E jobs. The focused
local checks listed above passed; the broad local suite was not run
before the live evaluation, while CI provides the full repository
verification.

## Risks

- Timing fields describe separate observed windows. They do not prove a
provider or MCP owner without a valid trace join.
- The inheritance allowlist must stay synchronized with native runner
configuration fields.
- Approval snapshots include resolved safe inherited settings and should
be reviewed when native configuration fields change.
- The focused local suite is narrower than the full repository suite;
latest-head CI covers the broader repository checks.

> Roadmap review: `ROADMAP.md` places this work within Paperclip's
bring-your-own-agent direction. It extends existing native runner hiring
and observability behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (exact serving model ID is not exposed), with extended
reasoning and repository tool use; GPT-5.6 Luna assisted with focused
implementation and verification work.

## 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 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>
2026-09-22 23:16:11 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0f5fafe16b fix(runner): preserve task replies and warm process continuity (#13738)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work.
> - The Runner connects provider sessions to task state, replies, and
delegated work.
> - Full-stack tests found lost final replies, rejected helper calls
that stopped the parent, and unnecessary process restarts.
> - A completed child could also receive a new assignment wake that the
scheduler then cancelled.
> - This change fixes those boundaries and gives agents clearer teammate
instructions.
> - The tests retain strict completion and process-continuity
requirements.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A generated attachment comment could suppress an agent's final reply. A
known Codex helper could stop its parent when it requested a Paperclip
tool. Native Daytona processes restarted between turns because Paperclip
minted an unused GitHub broker token. Reassigning a completed child
queued a run that immediately cancelled. Revision instructions also
allowed agents to do work assigned to a named teammate themselves.

**Expected behavior**

Keep the final reply. Reject helper tool requests without borrowing
parent authority or stopping the parent. Keep an unconfigured sandbox
process alive between turns. Treat assignment-only changes to completed
tasks as metadata changes. Preserve explicit teammate assignments during
revisions.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the retained Runner E2E cases for file handoff, teammate reuse,
Daytona warm continuity, and Legacy Claude interview/plan acceptance.
The focused regression tests reproduce the reply, helper,
process-lifetime, and assignment-wake defects without provider calls.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The live lifetime and completion campaign used `db3857807`. This PR
replays the changes on master `c65fc9e3c`. See Verification for the
limits of that evidence.

**Deployment mode**

Isolated local instances and native Runner sessions in Daytona
sandboxes.

Related work: #13546 handles a different queued-run issue after an
issue-lock compare-and-set failure. This PR prevents the unnecessary
assignment wake earlier. #13410 covers retained user services; this PR
covers the provider process. No duplicate fix was found.

## What Changed

- Exclude generated deliverable-binding comments from final-reply
deduplication. Preserve the attachment and explicit user-facing replies.
- Reject Paperclip tool and input requests from known Codex helper
threads without terminating the parent. Keep unknown-thread rejection
intact.
- Explain how to hire or reuse a persistent teammate and preserve named
delegation on revisions. Update generated protocol fixtures.
- Use stable, token-free GitHub wrappers for unconfigured native
sandboxes. Preserve credential isolation, configured-account rotation,
and cleanup after partial staging failures.
- Do not queue assignment-only wakes for done or cancelled tasks. Keep
explicit reopening behavior.
- Make warm-continuity fixtures create real review cards. Read the
persisted final response selected by production presentation logic.
Missing selected evidence still fails.

## Verification

- Before rebase: 560 focused route, native-executor, and launcher tests
passed. The new regressions were reproduced before their fixes.
- Live E2E: Legacy Claude interview/plan acceptance passed 3/3
repetitions. Daytona warm continuity passed 2/3 full repetitions. Each
successful run retained one process and provider session for all three
turns.
- The remaining Daytona repetition stopped after a same-URL browser
reload left the page blank. Both completed turns retained the same
process. Its failed verdict remains unchanged; this PR does not claim
the blank-page cause is fixed.
- Reports:
https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-lifetime-race-20260920/investigation.html
and
https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-behavior-followups-20260919-results/investigation.html
- Post-rebase `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. All 414
Runner E2E harness unit tests and its typecheck passed. Codex protocol
tests: 88 passed, 2 ignored.
- Latest-head CI: 55 successful checks and 2 intentional skips.
Greptile: 5/5 with no review threads. The unchanged workspace exposure
tests hit a fixed-port collision on the first CI attempt; their local
suite passed (25 tests, 3 platform skips), and the CI shard passed on
one retry.
- The duplicate local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the full hosted
general and serialized test shards passed. It did not finish locally and
is not counted as a local full-suite pass.

## Risks

Configured GitHub accounts retain run-scoped credential rotation and can
still restart warm processes. That limitation requires a separate
design. Known provider helpers cannot use Paperclip coordination tools
directly; they must return findings to the parent. The delegation prompt
is an instruction, not an enforced guarantee; Codex Mini hiring/reuse
failures remain open. No schema or workflow changes are included.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel coding agents. The exact deployment suffix and context-window
size are not exposed in this session.

## 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 issues and shared reports)
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run focused tests locally and they pass; full hosted test
shards also 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>
2026-09-21 08:56:35 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7bc03e0acd feat(runner): default harnesses to full auto and support task reassignment (#13686)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work.
> - Agent Chat uses native runners to save plans and coordinate tasks.
> - Provider defaults differed across harnesses and could stop
unattended work at a second permission gate.
> - Agents also lacked a dedicated tool to move existing work to another
agent safely.
> - This change defaults native providers to full automatic permission
for provider tools and connected tools.
> - A guarded reassignment tool preserves task identity, stops the
previous run, and schedules the new owner once.
> - Codex and Claude chat acceptance tests now use production permission
defaults.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Native runner, ACPX Claude permission policy, task authority, and Agent
Chat acceptance tests.

**Problem or motivation**

A user can authorize an agent to save a plan or create a task, but
Claude's default provider gate can still stop that action. Reassignment
needs a dedicated operation that preserves context and avoids concurrent
owners or unintended recovery runs.

**Proposed solution**

Default Claude/ACPX to `approve-all`, OpenCode to `allow`, and Codex to
`never`. Apply the defaults at configuration, execution, fresh-session,
resume, driver, and proxy boundaries. Keep explicit permission settings
and server-side company, claim, task-mode, and approval checks. Add
`reassign_task` with version checks, durable idempotency, audited
cancellation, and guarded successor scheduling.

**Alternatives considered**

A Paperclip-only allowlist still blocks provider tools and other
connections during unattended work. Full automatic permission is the
requested product default. Recreating a task discards its identity and
history. Updating assignment without stopping the previous run can leave
two agents working on the same task.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing planning, delegated work, governed tool
access, and recovery features. It adds no new service or schema
migration. Recent related tasks and open PRs were checked for duplicate
work.

**Additional context**

Related: #13678 (Agent Chat tools and recovery), #13677 (remote runner
startup). The stacked legacy-adapter companion is #13693. This also
fixes the deployed-server artifact fallback needed to stage the current
runner binary.

## What Changed

- Default Claude/ACPX to `approve-all`, OpenCode to `allow`, and Codex
to `never`, including missing settings at direct driver and proxy entry
points. These defaults cover provider tools and connected tools.
Preserve explicitly configured restrictive modes.
- Include assigned approval reads using canonical side-effect
classifications, so verifying a recorded approval does not trigger
another provider gate. Paperclip approval decisions still enforce
controller authority.
- Carry the new permission mode through server configuration, execution
contracts, recovery identity, TypeScript, and Rust. Keep
`approve-paperclip` as an optional restricted mode, with exact SDK rules
and closed unknown requests. It is not a default.
- Add `reassign_task` to the semantic catalog, controller, mock
authority, and generated contracts.
- Guard reassignment with company authorization, expected owner and
version, protected-state checks, and durable retry receipts.
- Honor explicit backlog task creation atomically with the initial plan,
without scheduling a wake. Preserve backlog holds regardless of
dependency readiness.
- Stop active work before changing ownership. Restore the prior owner
through a guarded, idempotent wake if final handoff validation fails.
Keep intentional reassignment stops out of failure recovery. Preserve
backlog and blocked states without waking them early.
- Add authorization, concurrency, replay, stop, and permission boundary
regressions. Add Codex and Claude chat reassignment cases and run native
chat cases with production defaults.
- Clarify shared runner guidance: save plans and Paperclip documents
directly with `write_document`; create and register a local file only
when a downloadable file is requested.
- Document provider defaults and the operator choices for existing
agents.

## Verification

- Current head `d82fbb0f03546d27cecf072250e4172e0b1ee662`: **55 checks
passed**, with two intentional skips. [PR
checks](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13686/checks).
- Greptile reviewed that exact head at **5/5**. The security reviewer
acknowledged the intended full-auto default, and the acknowledged
discussions are resolved.
- Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed locally
after rebasing onto current master. Targeted adapter/server, runner,
API, default/resume, and heartbeat configuration tests passed.
- **All six real-provider acceptance cases passed on their first
attempt, with cleanup passing:** plan handoff, task reassignment, and
backlog creation/status, each on native Claude and Codex. Evidence
records Claude's effective `approve-all` mode. [Campaign and
downloadable
evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35469926548).
- The live campaign tested combined revision
`a37881c824dcd7170380fc4b788732fc743e5da7`. The final PR heads add only
a heartbeat test expectation correction; application code is unchanged
from that live-tested revision.
- The campaign's result-enforcement job passed. Its separate report
publisher failed because the trusted workflow's `patchedDependencies`
configuration differs from its frozen lockfile. All six results and
screenshots remain available as GitHub artifacts. The overall manual
workflow is red for this publishing failure.
- Full-suite coverage is supplied by the passing CI partitions. The
separate unsharded local run was stopped after the corresponding CI
partitions passed; it is not counted as a completed local run.
- Reassignment tests cover stale state, cross-company access, denied
authority, cancellation failure, compensating wake, and idempotent
retries. Backlog tests verify the original creation audit, saved plan,
exact task count, and absence of task-bound runs.

## Risks

- Agents with no explicit permission mode now receive full provider tool
permission, including connected tools. This is a deliberate broad
default. Existing explicit restrictive modes still apply. Controller
authorization, company isolation, workspace boundaries, and Paperclip
governance remain in force.
- Reassignment crosses run cancellation and task ownership transactions.
Durable stop intent, revalidation, audit receipts, and guarded queue
dispatch cover interruptions and retries.
- The new permission enum requires a current runner artifact. The remote
artifact fallback uses the same resolved controller binary for upload
and execution.
- Live provider behavior remains subject to the selected model. Targeted
live results do not qualify the full catalog.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with code execution and repository tools.
The exact deployment model ID and context-window size are not exposed in
this session.

## 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>
2026-09-19 16:49:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 36dbb7ed1c fix: harden agent chat runner tools and recovery (#13678)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent Chat turns discussion into plans, tasks, reviews, and hires.
> - These workflows need reliable tool results and task context on the
native runner.
> - Live Claude and Codex tests exposed lost retry requests, invalid
project inputs, and a child startup crash.
> - Recovery also exposed a misleading retry action and missing child
task context.
> - This pull request fixes those paths and adds regression coverage.
> - Agents can continue the original request and operators can inspect a
stopped run.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A failed Agent Chat retry could lose the user's question. Project
creation accepted unsupported icons in its tool schema. Codex could stop
when a helper's MCP startup event arrived before its thread lineage. A
stopped task offered Retry even when the server required execution
reconciliation. Resumed agents could miss existing delegated tasks.
Hiring and review instructions did not describe the native runner's
available tools and source requirements.

**Expected behavior**

Retries retain the selected request. Tool schemas match the API. Child
startup information does not gain authority over the parent or stop it.
Recovery actions match the server's requirements. Task context exposes
existing child work. Handoffs contain the material the assignee needs.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable experimental Agent Chat in an isolated development instance.
2. Configure native Codex and ACPX Claude agents on Paperclip Runner.
3. Ask for a plan, revise it, approve task creation, and request a hire
and status report.
4. Retry a failed chat turn and check that it answers the original
request.
5. Start a Codex helper before its thread lineage arrives.
6. Resume a delegated task and inspect its existing children and saved
output.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The live failures were found at `f2c5e54dc`. This branch is rebased onto
`86b7ee992`.

**Deployment mode**

Isolated local development instance with native Codex and ACPX Claude.
No database migration or default permission change.

Related work: Refs #13284 for Agent Chat. Refs #13438 for the
server-side API receipt fix, which this branch preserves. The transport
also accepts the earlier HTTP receipt format. Refs #13655 for the
current Codex continuation and helper lineage handling, which this
branch also preserves.

## What Changed

- Preserve failed Agent Chat wake-comment IDs and session generation
from the authorized source run. Reject pre-reset retries.
- Wrap API receipts with the correct semantic call identity. Test
current and earlier receipt formats through real HTTP and runnerd.
- Classify early child MCP startup notifications as information. Keep
foreign completion and result events rejected.
- Constrain project icons on both tool surfaces and regenerate the
protocol contracts.
- Include bounded, company-scoped visible direct child tasks in task
context. Filter hidden tasks before applying the limit.
- Replace the rejected Retry action with Inspect run for native
continuation reconciliation.
- Update hiring, review handoff, status reporting, and development
guidance.

## Verification

- Live tests covered Claude and Codex questions, plan revisions,
approval, task creation, hiring, status, chat reset, failures, and
recovery.
- The recovered task produced its saved checklist and example. A later
follow-up read the existing child tasks and document without creating
more work.
- Full build, repository type checks, token gates, 142 focused tests,
188 runner TypeScript tests, and the Rust notification/descendant
regressions passed after rebase. The separate local full-suite run was
stopped after the complete CI suite passed.
- Review fixes passed the updated route, tool-authority, and icon
regression tests plus server type checking.
- Required commands: `pnpm build`, `pnpm -r typecheck`,
`PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=false pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm
check:token-gates`.
- At `4ce8047b0`, all 55 applicable GitHub checks pass (two Storybook
checks are intentionally skipped), including the complete
general/serialized test matrix, runner tests, browser tests, build, type
checks, Docker checks, and canary dry run.
- Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on `4ce8047b0`; all three findings were
fixed with regressions and there are no unresolved review threads.
- Two initial CI service-startup timeouts passed unchanged in local
reproductions and in the latest CI run.

## Risks

- The new event classification is limited to MCP startup information. It
does not authorize foreign task completion, results, or tool requests.
- Task context returns at most 100 direct child tasks and reports
truncation. It excludes hidden tasks and other companies. This improves
delegation context but does not enforce semantic duplicate detection.
- Native reconciliation still requires an operator to inspect and record
prior outcomes. The new link does not replace the recovery API.
- API tools remain opt-in. Claude permission choices remain explicit. No
default permission, schema, or workflow changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, code
execution, API tools, and browser testing. The exact deployment
identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Live
acceptance agents used OpenAI `gpt-5.6-sol` and Anthropic
`claude-sonnet-4-6`.

## 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>
2026-09-19 09:11:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 43acbcc398 fix(runner): preserve sessions and complete question and approval continuations (#13655)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runner connects task state to provider sessions.
> - Follow-up turns must retain provider memory and carry new user
direction.
> - Lost session IDs caused repeated context and extra input tokens.
> - Native question answers and approval races could leave valid work
blocked.
> - This pull request repairs those paths and adds regression coverage.
> - Agents can continue accepted work without repeating the conversation
or losing the user's answer.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13574. That merged PR shortened continuation prompts and moved
question instructions into tool documentation. This change preserves
sessions and fixes failures exposed by broader testing. Related runtime
work: #13408 and #13410.

**What happened?**

Native follow-up turns could lose the provider session ID. Completion
guidance could replace the original task with its latest comment. Claude
native questions could remain pending after the user answered. Approval
during a running tool call could suspend the run before the tool
response arrived. Onboarding and chat handoff instructions also caused
repeated planning or missing plan documents.

**Expected behavior**

Reuse a valid provider session. Send only new events when that session
already has the history. Preserve the task requirements and apply later
user direction. Store the question answer and deliver it to the waiting
run. Finish governed tool responses before suspending. Execute the
accepted plan without asking for the same approval again.

**Steps to reproduce**

Run the continuation, local-session-integrity, first-task, and
agent-chat suites with native Codex and Claude. Include
provider-question-bridge, accept-while-running, and plan-handoff.

**Paperclip version or commit**

This branch is based on master d54b75011. The active full catalog run
tests 4e75881db. Later review fixes have separate regression coverage.

**Deployment mode**

Isolated local instances and Daytona sandboxes in the existing Runner
full-stack E2E harness.

## What Changed

- Retain provider session identity across turns and late usage
snapshots. Send new continuation events on session reuse, with full
context available for a fresh session.
- Preserve task requirements and later direction in completion guidance.
Return the current contract revision after a stale completion
submission.
- Bridge native Claude questions to saved Paperclip cards. Submit
answers through the saved card and resume the same run.
- Delay governed suspension until tool results settle. Add a
deterministic test barrier for approval during an active run.
- Clarify free-text question examples, explicit onboarding plans, and
execution of accepted chat plans.
- Fix continuation readiness, verified output evidence, and declared
screenshot collection.
- Qualify the legacy Claude test CLI at 2.1.277. The old 2.1.19 CLI did
not discover mounted skills. Update the existing workflow pin and
isolated launcher together.
- Refresh the Daytona image lockfile integrity pin after reviewing
master patch updates.
- Carry continuation mode as runtime metadata instead of inferring it
from user-visible text. Install the test Claude CLI without lifecycle
scripts.

## Verification

- Targeted paid verification: 20/20 cases passed across
local-environment campaigns before the rebase.
[Report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-seven-fixes-35397904249/).
- Harness checks: 379 unit tests passed; harness typecheck passed.
- Latest-head PR checks: 55 passed, two intentionally skipped. Greptile
is 5/5; the security scan passes.
- Review regressions: 350 executor tests and 204 session/driver tests
passed. A script-free Claude install was verified with the actual CLI.
- Full catalog, including the explicit-only everyday suite: [run
35417932353](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35417932353).
Completed: **164/205 passed; 41 failed**. [Full dashboard and failure
investigation](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-full-catalog-35417932353/).
Includes 204 case artifacts and one pre-case GitHub authorization
timeout; missing evidence is not scored as a pass. The full run tested
`4e75881db`; Final-head metadata/CLI smoke cases both passed. In the
separate [six infrastructure
retries](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35419769343),
the GitHub timeout case passed and all five Docker preflight failures
repeated. [Follow-up
dashboard](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-full-catalog-35417932353/follow-up/).
- Full local typecheck and build passed on the rebased branch. The full
local unit run completed with 657 passing files, two test timeouts and
one suite setup timeout. All three affected files passed when rerun in
isolation (84 tests). The first full local run was not clean.
- Focused regression coverage includes the live question bridge,
same-run response delivery, UI routing, stale revisions, approval
overlap, and session reuse.

## Full-catalog follow-ups

- Test infrastructure: 14 Claude everyday cells probe an absent host
CLI; six cells failed pre-task GitHub/Docker qualification (GitHub
passes on retry; all five Docker cases repeat; the workflow preflight
allowlist omits their case IDs); five ACPX Codex cells cannot create
sandbox namespaces.
- Runtime: four OpenCode completion-criteria mismatches masked by
shutdown errors, one service-approval suspension failure; three Daytona
recovery failures encounter existing skill files; one duplicate
completion wake.
- Confirmed test defects: question pagination and a noncanonical plan
document key.
- Product/behavior: mismatched visible/required question sets, an
attachment instead of the requested task document, one lone-option
onboarding question, early completion instead of review, and a Codex
Mini completion-schema failure.
- The report job itself fails on trusted master’s stale patch/lock
configuration. The linked report is rebuilt with the shared renderer
from original cell results and public fixture screenshots; it excludes
private snapshots, logs and traces.

These are investigated follow-ups, not silently regraded passes.
First-task passed 51/52. The PR checks are green independently of the
broader catalog’s behavioral/infrastructure failures.

## Risks

- Session reuse depends on a valid provider identity and context
coverage. Fresh-session fallback and reset tests cover this boundary.
- Native question delivery spans saved interaction state and a live
provider run. Tests cover duplicate events, closed runs, and same-run
answers.
- Provider behavior varies. The full paid catalog may expose failures
beyond these targeted fixes; those results will be reported without
relaxing valid approval or output checks.
- The legacy Claude version update is limited to test infrastructure. No
database migration is included.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository inspection, code execution,
and browser/E2E tools. The exact runtime model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## 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 (targeted checks and all
three timeout-file reruns pass; full-run timeout caveat above)
- [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>
2026-09-19 07:42:57 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e26d787928 Shorten continuation prompts and verify question tool guidance (#13574)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents must continue tasks using user answers without losing earlier
requirements or approval gates.
> - The wake prompt mixed human decisions with prior tool evidence and
repeated detailed question instructions.
> - Those instructions belong with the question tool, with a short
routing hint in the wake.
> - The Runner evals need to prove that answers, approvals, and
completed work survive later turns.
> - This PR shortens the prompts, separates authenticated answers, and
adds continuation tests with useful screenshots.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13517. This is a follow-up to the merged onboarding skill and
Runner E2E work. Related #13539 covers responses received while a run is
active; this PR preserves its cases and adds continuation coverage.
Existing continuation/recovery and question PRs were searched; none
covers this prompt/documentation and eval change.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The instructions sent when an agent continues a task, the native
human-input tool documentation, and the evidence captured by Runner
full-stack E2E.

**Current behavior**

The wake repeats a long question-tool guide. Human answers appear
alongside untrusted prior results. Screenshot capture can finish at DOM
load while the task still shows a spinner, even when backend behavior
checks pass.

**Proposed behavior**

Keep earlier requirements unless the user changes them. Treat
clarification as distinct from approval. Give authenticated human
responses a scoped field. Keep tool and agent results as evidence. Put
detailed question behavior in the tool descriptor and retain one routing
sentence in the native wake. Wait for the correct task and loaded
conversation before taking screenshots.

**Reason and benefit**

Reduce repeated prompt text and make authority boundaries clear. Test
that real question cards, later answers, approval gates, and completed
child tasks still work. Make screenshots useful for human review.

## What Changed

- Shorten shared continuation instructions for legacy and native
runners. Separate authenticated user responses from tool results and
agent summaries.
- Remove the detailed question guide from native wake prompts. Keep its
behavior in the canonical `request_human_input` descriptor and existing
payload schema. Regenerate semantic contracts and fixture hashes.
- Add five continuation cases across four local profiles. Add a
dedicated choice-then-text case for native Codex and native Claude. All
22 cells join the shared full E2E campaign.
- Cover revised scope, clarification without approval, hostile
instructions in a handoff file, and reuse of a completed child after
restart. Keep production instructions and fixed user facts.
- Capture continuation screenshots only when the intended task and
conversation have rendered. Add provider-free browser regressions for
loaders and wrong-task capture.
- Preserve current master’s extra tool and onboarding cases. The default
campaign now contains 166 cells; 35 manual everyday cells remain
separate.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed after replay on current master.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 340 passed. Harness typecheck passed.
- `PAPERCLIP_PLAYWRIGHT_CHANNEL=chrome pnpm
test:e2e:runner:browser-support`: 4 passed. These tests failed against
immediate screenshot capture and passed after the fix.
- Focused continuation and native-input tests: 36 passed locally. The
tool-authority suite could not initialize embedded PostgreSQL locally,
including one isolated retry; its 17 assertions did not run locally. The
full remote server shards passed on this PR commit.
- `pnpm build`: passed after replay on current master. `pnpm test:run`
was attempted locally but hit the same embedded PostgreSQL
initialization failure; the remaining local run was stopped after
complete remote CI passed. This is not claimed as a full local test
pass.
- [Full PR
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35232755685):
passed on `6a22128c14f4552d0613a6d9a25955db4a1ed02f`. All
server/chat/workspace/serialized shards, browser shards, Runner checks,
typecheck, build, canary and policy checks passed. The isolated native
Runner build and security checks also passed: 57 successful checks, with
two expected Storybook skips.
- Greptile reviewed the exact PR head at 5/5, with no findings or
unresolved review threads. The PR has no merge conflicts.
- [Live question-docs
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-question-docs-35227647794/):
3/3 passed at source `83dd132f2` before replay on master. Native Codex
and Claude each asked a choice, waited, asked a text question, and saved
both answers. Claude also passed a completed-child restart case. All
three native turns are checked for absence of the old question block.
- [Earlier continuation
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-continuation-35154943615/):
all five continuation cases passed on native Claude. The report retains
campaign and revision provenance and separately shows two unresolved
onboarding behavior failures.
- [Before/after prompt
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-prompt-comparison-20260917/):
full text, current recorded Claude inputs, and reproducible
reference-token counts. The controlled wake comparison removes 401
reference tokens; the net counted input reduction is 339 after charging
the larger tool description. These are text-size estimates, not measured
billing savings.

## Risks

- Prompt wording affects model behavior. Live results cover the stated
cases, not every provider or conversation. Legacy profiles are
registered but were not rerun for this change.
- The optional continuation field changes prompt data only; there is no
database migration or new production API.
- Authenticated answer projection excludes generated summaries and
agent-resolved interactions. It preserves the answer’s question or
approval scope.
- The screenshot guard can expose UI loading failures that earlier runs
hid. Backend grading alone no longer makes those captures valid.
- The two prior onboarding failures remain separate product issues: work
before acceptance and a missing saved plan. This PR does not claim the
entire onboarding suite passes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and browser verification. The exact deployed model identifier and
context-window size are not exposed in this session.

## 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 — targeted tests above; the
full local database-startup limit is documented
- [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>
2026-09-17 09:32:54 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 11921075a4 Add first-task onboarding skill and Runner E2E coverage (#13517)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The first task helps a new user define and approve useful work.
> - That workflow needs reusable instructions and tests against the
production experience.
> - Native Codex and Claude must load the assigned skill, including
after resume.
> - Maintainers need recorded conversations and precise failed checks to
judge regressions.
> - This pull request adds the first-task skill and a suite in the
shared Runner E2E harness.
> - It keeps behavior results separate from informational quality scores
and incomplete recordings.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The first onboarding task and the Runner E2E report used to review it.

**Current behavior**

Onboarding embeds its policy in a hidden brief. Native Codex drops the
skill-instructions setting at the Rust boundary. The shared E2E harness
has no onboarding suite or full conversation view.

**Proposed behavior**

Assign and invoke `/first-task` for the onboarding task. Send selected
Codex skills as structured protocol inputs. Run twelve scenarios across
legacy Codex, legacy Claude, native Codex, and native ACPX Claude.
Include all 48 cells in full campaigns. Show recorded chat, question and
approval cards, exact checks, instructions, and billing in the shared
dashboard.

**Reason and benefit**

Measure the real onboarding experience before changing prompts.
Distinguish infrastructure failures, behavior failures, and unexercised
journey steps.

**Breaking changes**

No database migration or production API change. First-task instructions
now live in an assigned skill. The user-edited persona is preserved; the
skill includes the maintainer-approved proposal-mode mapping and
saved-plan requirement.

Related: #11043 is earlier onboarding work. #13422 already fixes native
Claude model pinning, context delivery, and read permissions on master;
this branch includes those fixes through its base. The new Claude
recovery test supplements them.

## What Changed

- Extract and assign the first-task skill while retaining the production
greeting and opening question.
- Carry the Codex skill-instructions flag through thread start and
resume. Resolve explicit task skill references only against assigned
skills and send native skill inputs.
- Invoke an unambiguously selected assigned skill through Claude ACPX’s
native slash-command parser on initial and resumed turns, retaining the
entire task/wake envelope as its argument. Do not carry that invocation
into ordinary tasks.
- Restore the saved single-task proposal modes: confirmation card, or
saved plan with revision-targeted checkbox approval. Explicit plan
requests also require a saved plan.
- Add first-response and complete-journey cases with fixed user facts,
acceptance checkpoints, durable outcome checks, and accounting for child
runs.
- Fail the eval when choice questions have fewer than two real options.
Recognize planning documents without treating them as completed work.
- Add optional, bounded quality judging as explicit post-processing.
- Render full conversations and static interaction cards in the shared
report. Conversations start folded. Show original and regraded results
and incomplete journeys distinctly.
- Keep credential-persistence scanning outside the first-task behavioral
suite; retain public evidence redaction.
- Refresh generated capability references after the API-reference edits.
- Correct shared native question guidance and tool schemas: choices need
at least two meaningful options; open-ended questions use canonical text
fields with the required compatibility payload. Verify both formats
through real tool-authority persistence.
- Disable announcements automatically for every isolated Runner E2E
process and label the gallery environment/provider/target explicitly.
- Remove CI races in the GitHub connection browser test and native
session recovery test by waiting for the actual async work before
asserting its results.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/services/onboarding-first-task-assets.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-onboarding-first-task-routes.test.ts`: 19
passed.
- `pnpm --dir packages/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/drivers/acpx/runtime-host.test.ts
src/drivers/acpx/native-skill-prompt.test.ts
src/cli/acpx-runtime-sidecar.test.ts`: 70 passed. Native command
forwarding and the 1 MiB input boundary both failed before their fixes
and passed afterward. Coverage includes changed skills on reopen,
approval context, and an ordinary subsequent task.
- Runner E2E unit suite: 306 passed. Harness typecheck passed. The 64
first-task fixture and grader tests also pass.
- Full repository typecheck and build passed locally. Server typecheck
and Runner build passed again after the native-command change.
- Full GitHub Actions CI passed on `23e56447b`: all
server/workspace/browser shards, Runner verification, typecheck/release
registry, build, canary, policy, and Docker checks. Greptile reviewed
this exact head at 5/5 with no unresolved threads. The earlier broad
local run had database startup/timing failures that passed isolated
retries; the complete remote suite is green.
- Merge verification against current master: 312 harness tests and 13
native recovery tests passed. Regenerated semantic contracts and fixture
hashes pass their consistency check. Full local typecheck and build also
passed on the stacked queue branch. After merging the latest master and
preserving the GitHub setup timing regression in the split browser
suite, both focused GitHub browser tests passed. Three CI timing/startup
flakes passed local verification and one remote retry; all latest-head
checks are green.
- Real pinned Claude SDK and Claude ACP JSON-RPC probes against a local
mock API confirmed that `/skill-name` expands the assigned skill body
before the model request and retains the task arguments. A prose mention
does not. The probes made no paid model calls. The ACP probe used the
current first-task skill body and retained the wake arguments.
- [Full 48-case campaign and
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-35053063880/):
44 passed after three interrupted Codex cases completed in targeted
reruns. Original results, regrades, and all 51 executions remain in the
report provenance.
- [Claude campaign after the shared-question
fix](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35099525201/):
10/12 passed with zero single-option failures. All 12 recorded the
current assigned skill and corrected guidance. The failures exposed
skipped skill invocation and a missing saved plan. This PR adds native
command invocation and explicit saved-plan instructions; the subsequent
report below still shows behavior failures.
- [Fresh 12-case Claude
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/runner-e2e-first-task-claude-35102737804/)
at `78452129e`: 10/12 pass after correcting two false proposal-matcher
failures. The recordings said “Here is the task I will create and
run/complete” in approval cards; the old matcher missed that word order.
Regression tests failed before the fix and pass after it. Original
results and offline regrade provenance remain linked. No agent rerun was
needed. Zero single-option-question failures; two behavior failures
remain: direct work before acceptance on a plain first message, and an
explicit plan request without a saved plan. Neither check was relaxed.
The follow-up `82087ac7e` fixes command-prefix size accounting;
`94aefb1f3` fixes only that proposal matcher.
- Report browser checks confirm folded conversations, rendered cards,
explicit Local/Daytona labels, and no page errors. The published-object
audit scanned 1,306 text files across 2,154 objects with no
credential-format findings or prohibited files. Image pixels and unknown
token formats are outside that scan.

## Risks

- Model behavior is nondeterministic. One campaign is evidence, not a
guarantee. The two remaining Claude behavior failures are visible in the
report and require further product work; this PR does not claim all
onboarding scenarios pass.
- The suite checks persisted Paperclip effects. It cannot prove the
absence of arbitrary external effects.
- Historical recordings can miss later journey steps. These remain
incomplete, never passes.
- Native profiles switch runtime after the production onboarding wizard
because it does not yet expose a native option.
- Quality scores are informational and cannot override behavioral
failures.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools, and code
execution. The exact deployed model identifier and context-window size
are not exposed in this session.

## 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>
2026-09-16 14:24:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9fd2e50310 feat: create company skills from runner tasks (#13538)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The Runner gives agents tools to change company resources.
> - Users need agents to save reusable skills during a task.
> - A saved skill needs a visible result that users can inspect and
edit.
> - This pull request adds `create_skill` and a task feed card linked to
Skill Studio.
> - Users can open the saved skill from the task and edit the same
resource.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Runner tools, company skill storage, task feed, and Skill Studio.

**Problem or motivation**

The Runner has no dedicated tool to create a company skill. A user
cannot follow a creation result from the task feed to the saved skill.

**Proposed solution**

Add a company-scoped `create_skill` tool. Save the skill with the
existing company policy. Add one creation card to the task. Open a named
sidebar tab from that card. Let the user open the same skill in Skill
Studio.

**Alternatives considered**

An agent can write a local file, but that file is not a company skill. A
second document copy in the task would become stale after a Studio edit.
The sidebar therefore reads the saved skill directly.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the shipped Skills Manager, Skill Studio, and Skills Store
milestone. The maintainer requested and approved this scope. Search
found no duplicate `create_skill` PR or issue. Related UI validation
work: #8715. This PR does not change that validation display.

## What Changed

- Add the real Runner tool, its contract, and its mock implementation.
- Validate the complete SKILL.md and derive company, task, agent, and
run identity from authentication.
- Apply the existing company skill policy. Do not assign the skill to an
agent.
- Make keyed retries return one skill and one creation event. Reject
conflicting retries.
- Make concurrent file creation safe. Never replace an existing
published skill during creation.
- Add a creation card, a named sidebar tab, and an Open in Skill Studio
action.
- Show saved Studio edits when the user returns to the task.
- Add storage, policy, mode, retry, UI, and Product E2E tests. Document
the tool.
- Fix deleted-name reuse, onboarding panel persistence, immediate feed
refresh, and mock validation parity from review.
- Serialize Studio file edits and renames with skill deletion and
recreation. Reject stale editor requests before they can change a
replacement skill.
- Generate the standalone mock parser and validator from the production
contract. Use portable UUIDs so the browser scenario bundle builds.

## Verification

- All latest-head PR checks pass on `145dd76a5`, including all server
shards, browser E2E, Runner verification, build, typecheck, and release
dry run. Greptile: 5/5 with no open findings. An interrupted CI runner
was retried successfully.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- Review regressions: 73 storage tests, 6 real API tests, 63 UI tests,
and 61 semantic runtime tests passed. Parser synchronization passed.
- CI exposed existing fire-and-forget Sentry test races. Reproduced the
resumption race locally, then synchronized the related sweep and
finalizer assertions on the actual report; all 27 tests across the three
affected files pass.
- Runner scenario browser build and strict content-security-policy
check: passed.
- Runner suite: 2,012 tests passed; 10 skipped.
- `pnpm test:run`: the general-server batch had 12,416 passes and two
failures. The old tool-count assertion was fixed; all 16 authority tests
then passed. The chat webhook test had a socket error; it passed four
isolated reruns.
- Both workspace test groups passed. The isolated route suites
completed. Two socket failures in the initial route batches passed on
individual reruns; all remaining 61 files passed.
- Product E2E `create-skill-studio`: passed with local Codex and local
ACPX Claude.
- Manual browser test: submit a task, observe the real tool call and
creation card, open the sidebar, edit in Studio, save, and return. The
task reached Done. The saved second revision and sidebar tab survived a
server restart.
- The new companion headless Runner Eval passed. Companion coverage PR:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/23. Daytona was not
run because no immutable runner image was configured.

## Risks

- Database writes and local file writes cannot share one transaction.
Recovery accepts only an exact file-for-file retry after a database
rollback. Conflicting files remain untouched.
- The sidebar displays the current skill. The feed card remains the
historical creation receipt.
- No database migration, dependency, or workflow change is included.
- Remote Daytona behavior still needs a run with a configured immutable
image.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) handled design, integration, review, and
browser verification. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` assisted with bounded
implementation and eval work. Both used code execution and tool access.
The host did not expose the context window size.

## 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>
2026-09-16 13:01:58 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 78ce96a48b fix(runner): restore native Claude context and read permissions (#13422)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runner supplies each agent with instructions, assigned
skills, and tools.
> - Native Claude lost its skill snapshot before provider launch. It
also changed exact model IDs to aliases.
> - The read permission mode denied ordinary Paperclip reads because
this runner has no interactive approval handler.
> - This pull request restores the missing context and permits only
assigned tools that Paperclip defines as reads.
> - Other requests that need approval stop with a clear action for the
operator. They do not retry automatically.
> - Agents can complete read tasks. Users can see why a restricted task
stopped.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Native Claude could not find assigned skills. The ACP layer could
replace an exact model ID with an alias and then fail identity
verification. The default `approve-reads` mode denied Paperclip read
tools. A denied write showed a generic transport failure.

The tool descriptions also called live operations “mock” operations. The
completion prompt said to call a completion tool once, although the
protocol can reject a claim and require a corrected call.

**Expected behavior**

Load assigned skills before launch. Keep the selected model ID. Allow
assigned Paperclip reads. Stop an operation that needs approval with
clear instructions when no approval handler exists.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Configure a native Paperclip Runner agent with ACPX Claude and an
exact model ID.
2. Assign a skill and ask the agent to use it.
3. Select the read permission mode and ask the agent to read task
context and list documents.
4. Ask the agent to write a document. Check the task state and recovery
message.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced from `d351e08deee1b49d3467a950d1a3f01131943441`.

**Deployment mode**

Local native runner with real Claude, Rust runnerd, the Paperclip
server, and embedded PostgreSQL.

Related: #13196 fixed remote skill staging in the legacy `claude_local`
adapter. The native runner uses a separate path, which this pull request
fixes.

## What Changed

- Carry the runtime context through Rust and the ACPX sidecar. Load
assigned Claude skills after the provider lifetime lease is held.
Refresh the files on each open.
- Write the exact requested model ID into the isolated Claude settings.
- Grant exact MCP permissions for the intersection of assigned tools and
Paperclip's read catalog. Provider hints cannot grant access. Existing
task-control permissions stay in place.
- Stop requests that need an unavailable approval handler. Preserve the
typed error through the server. Show “Approval required” on the task and
require operator action without automatic retry.
- Label the setting “Allow Paperclip reads.” Remove “mock” from live
tool descriptions and regenerate the contracts.
- Change one completion-prompt sentence to require one accepted result.
Add regression tests and update the runner documentation.

## Verification

- Red/green regression tests cover read admission, unavailable approval
handling, server recovery, and the task error message.
- A real Claude read trial failed before the fix and completed after it:
[red
trace](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=95e6a326e24437f1),
[green
trace](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=85a1f347db5604d1).
- Full browser tests used real Claude and the production tool authority.
Reads completed. A write stopped with “Approval required.” No document
was created and no automatic retry was scheduled. All nine checks
passed: [events and
screenshots](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=1c4ff10be0d779cc).
- A separate full browser test assigned a skill, invoked it, and
completed with a marker absent from the task prompt: [skill
evidence](https://www.braintrust.dev/app/Paperclip/object?object_type=project_logs&object_id=fda74078-b00d-495a-90d3-ea1be019d71b&id=ba5fbcb29a60be52).
- Post-rebase checks passed: 128 targeted runner tests, 46 Rust tests,
27 sidecar/protocol contract tests, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm
build`. The server/UI red-green checks and `pnpm check:token-gates` also
passed. The full suite passed in CI, including all general and
serialized test shards, all three browser shards, and runner
`check:all`. The duplicate unsharded local full-suite run was stopped
after CI passed.

Braintrust links require project access. The traces contain
provider/runner events and app outcomes. They do not contain raw model
HTTP requests.

## Risks

- `approve-reads` now allows assigned Paperclip reads. Other operations
that need approval stop the turn. Users must review the operation and
change permissions before retrying.
- The Claude settings depend on the pinned ACP and SDK behavior.
Automated tests and real Claude trials cover this boundary.
- The native Codex path is unchanged. The ACPX Codex fallback shares the
clearer approval failure handling.
- Local execution was tested end to end. Remote execution was not run.
This change has no database migration.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The agent used reasoning, code execution,
and browser tools. The exact deployment ID and context-window size were
not exposed in the session. Live acceptance tests used
`claude-sonnet-5`.

## 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>
2026-09-14 10:56:24 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7e6d512597 fix(onboarding): make chief-of-staff hiring reliable (#13317)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The first agent helps the board define work and hire other agents.
> - That agent can have the general role while its instructions require
hiring skills.
> - Missing skills and blocked schema discovery make valid requests
fail.
> - Repeated confirmation and invalid waiting guidance can turn these
failures into extra runs.
> - This PR supplies the required skills, opens read-only schema
discovery, and corrects the guidance.
> - The agent can complete an authorized hire while company approval and
duplicate checks still apply.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13068 — the first-task onboarding flow that this change repairs.
Refs #12029 — related drift between the sandbox allowlist and bundled
hiring guidance. This PR adds schema access; it does not replace the
earlier hiring-route fix.

**What happened?**

A general-role onboarding chief received hiring instructions without the
core hiring skills. Sandbox requests to the documented OpenAPI endpoint
failed. The agent then guessed question and hire payloads. The persona
required new confirmation after validation errors and described waiting
states that agents cannot set.

**Expected behavior**

A direct request authorizes the requested hire. The chief asks only for
material missing details, uses valid API payloads, and completes the
task. Formal company approval gates still apply. A saved human-input
card gives the task a valid waiting state.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an onboarding chief with role `general` through the board.
2. Ask it to hire a friendly robot with a supplied name and
responsibilities.
3. Check its assigned skills, schema requests, question cards, hire
requests, and final task state.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on the first-task onboarding implementation after #13068. The
live local verification used this branch at `112f44610`.

**Deployment mode**

The original failure used a hosted sandbox with legacy Codex ACP. Live
verification used an isolated local instance and real `codex_local`
execution. Queue and HTTP/2 transport access is covered by automated
tests.

## What Changed

- Give board-created onboarding chiefs the existing core skills
regardless of role. Preserve explicit skill version pins, including
aliases. Keep ordinary general-agent defaults and authorization checks.
- Allow exactly `GET /api/openapi.json` through both sandbox bridge
transports.
- Publish validator-tested question, free-text, hire, and waiting
examples. Regenerate the runner API reference and capability inventory.
- Clarify direct authorization, material ambiguity, and correction of
confirmed pre-creation validation failures. Preserve uncertain-outcome
reconciliation, duplicate protection, and company approval gates.
- Align disposition instructions with agent permissions and the saved
human-input waiting path.

## Verification

- After rebasing onto current `master`: 69 targeted server tests, 110
queue/HTTP2 bridge tests, and 4 capability inventory tests passed. These
cover core skill defaults, version pins, actor restrictions, schema
access, published examples, hire validation, idempotency, and approval
gates. Waiting recovery tests and live question flows also passed before
the rebase.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed again after the rebase.
Frozen dependency installation and both generated capability checks
passed.
- Ran the full `pnpm test:run` suite. The initial run had 14 failed
server files due to local database resource limits, a missing built test
fixture, and socket failures. All 14 files passed after fixture repair
and isolated retries. UI, CLI, workspace packages, database tests, and
all 145 serialized server files passed.
- Real one-request hiring replay: one hire, one successful run, task
done in 2m16s. No repeated approval or recovery escalation.
- Real two-turn browser conversation: start with an unspecified hire,
then supply a name and friendly robot responsibilities. One
clarification card, one hire, two successful runs, task done in 3m27s of
execution. No failed writes, confirmation cards, or recovery actions.
- Assigned the hired robot a welcome-message task through the browser.
It produced a warm message under 100 words and finished in one
successful 66-second run, with no questions or recovery actions.
- The two-turn flow still asked an optional preferences question and
gave a technical final reply. These are remaining presentation limits.
- Greptile: 5/5 on `b71f83ba2`, with zero unresolved review threads.
Fixed its generator finding and passed 1,655 published-example/runtime
API tests plus server typecheck. All latest-head CI checks are green (32
passed; 2 unrelated Storybook checks skipped). The signoff-policy
browser test initially timed out while waiting for an approver run. Its
shard passed on one rerun without code changes. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34698211049).

## Risks

- Onboarding chiefs receive more default skills. Ordinary general agents
retain existing defaults, and explicit versions take precedence.
- Prompt guidance can affect model behavior. The live replays are
examples, not a guarantee that every model follows the guidance.
- Retry guidance applies only when validation confirms that nothing was
created. Uncertain outcomes still require checking existing agents.
- No database migration or new public endpoint. Existing company
boundaries, approval gates, and bounded recovery remain in force.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, model `gpt-6-astra`, with reasoning, tool use, code
editing, and live browser verification. The exact context-window size is
not exposed in this session.

## 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>
2026-09-12 12:59:42 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip ab15aff390 feat: add experimental persistent agent chat (#13284)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Conversations must use the same tasks, controls, and execution
history.
> - Users need an ongoing chat with an agent without managing task
properties.
> - Agents should clarify and plan work, then hand execution to assigned
project tasks.
> - This pull request combines the reviewed Agent Chat stack for one
squash merge.
> - The benefit is persistent conversation with normal task governance
and shared UI.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Task lifecycle, agent runtime tools, shared task UI, and browser/paid
runner tests.

**Problem or motivation**

Users need one persistent conversation with each agent. A separate chat
store or renderer would duplicate task behavior and bypass existing
controls.

**Proposed solution**

Use a task-backed chat per company, user, and agent. Reuse the task
composer and transcript. Clarify and plan in chat, then create assigned
project tasks with the relevant plan. Keep Agent Chat behind its own
disabled-by-default experimental setting.

**Roadmap alignment**

This implements the task-backed direction in [CEO
Chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#-ceo-chat).
Related proposals: #2504 and #9693. Related request: #7981. The
maintainer requested one squash merge of the complete stack.

Consolidates the reviewed runtime
[#13281](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13281), backend
[#13282](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13282), and UI
[#13283](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13283) layers
with this PR's E2E coverage. All four layers passed CI and received
Greptile 5/5 before consolidation. This PR targets master and includes
the complete feature.

## What Changed

- Add personal canonical chat tasks with ordinary company visibility,
immutable identity, idempotent first sends, and an idle waiting state.
- Process `/new` in queue order. Preserve history, release a chat pause,
and fence old provider context and delayed writes.
- Keep chat lifecycle rules across recovery, finalization, assignment,
task lists, and rollups.
- Support research and plan revision in chat. Hand plans to ordinary
assigned project tasks before execution starts. Reject new chat
subtasks.
- Add repository-aware project creation and discovery tools, including
multiple repository IDs and GitHub URLs, authorization, idempotency, and
durable project-created cards.
- Reuse task UI components for chat, with starred/recent agent
navigation and a separate `enableAgentChat` experimental flag.
- Add deterministic browser tests and 24 paid chat cells across four
Codex/Claude profiles, with validated reports and screenshots.
- Integrate current master recovery, controller lease, queued-message,
and task UI changes. Gate chat interruption and deferred promotion on
ownership/feature policy. Guarantee lease renewal and active controls
are stopped even if teardown fails.
- Preserve master's migration 0273 and generate chat migration 0274 with
idempotent replay for development databases.

## Verification

- Prior exact heads of all four PRs passed Linux CI, including build,
typecheck, general/serialized tests, and browser E2E. Each had Greptile
5/5 and no unresolved findings.
- Integrated local verification passed: full repository typecheck and
production build, Storybook build, token gates, 340 focused UI tests,
all 20 deterministic chat browser tests, two migration replay tests, 88
focused chat/queue/native/controller tests, and provider/session
regressions including real lease expiry. These include the three
lifecycle regressions for the final admission/teardown fixes; server
typecheck also passes. Current head
`1268eda16cc2af892055917e7292f068820be135` has Greptile 5/5 with no
unresolved findings and passing security scans. All final-head CI gates
passed: build, full Runner verification, typecheck/release registry,
canary, all general/serialized test shards, and all browser E2E shards
([CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34696739927)).
Local PostgreSQL startup contention required serialized retries; skipped
fixtures do not count as passing coverage.
- The earlier paid campaign passed all 24 chat cells and retained 32
screenshots:
[report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-34648511170-1/index.html?report=agent-chat#suite-agent-chat).
It tested `abacbdfd2f660709ec37312cdb758284c8399d04`; it is prior
evidence, not a paid run of this integrated head.
- Manual check: enable Agent Chat in Experimental settings, open an
agent, clarify and revise a plan, then hand off to an assigned project
task. Stop a reply, send `/new`, and verify fresh context with retained
history. Disable the setting and verify agent shortcuts/new chat turns
are blocked.

## Risks

- Queue/session integration can affect retries and delayed writes. Tests
cover ownership, cancellation, reset boundaries, idle recovery, and
ordinary task behavior.
- Migration 0274 adds conversation fields and constraints. Replay is
idempotent and preserves existing development chat history.
- This combines the previously reviewed stack at the maintainer's
request. Agent Chat remains off by default and is separate from
Conference Room.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 Astra (`gpt-6-astra`), with reasoning, code
execution, browser tools, and parallel review. The exact context-window
size is not exposed in this session. Codex and Claude also ran as test
subjects in the linked paid campaign.

## 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>
2026-09-12 08:56:04 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 889947c238 feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools.
> - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized
source.
> - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or
expose private data.
> - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data
contracts.
> - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable
control plane.
> - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery
in Paperclip.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs.
Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite
#13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below
the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML
galleries.

## What Changed

- Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat
connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental
chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its
normal setup path.
- Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind
each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks,
runs, permissions, and audit records.
- Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task
controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts.
Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel.
- Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials,
runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep
private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs,
credentials, or tool arguments.
- Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board
Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup
credentials in Paperclip secret storage.
- Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost
acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion
contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot
launch a provider.
- Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order.
Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the
selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo
unrelated access changes.
- Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain
with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority
without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable.
- Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout,
runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated
chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued
comments are adopted after Stop.
- Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run.
Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop,
agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a
false cancellation receipt.
- Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact
failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source
suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the
admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion
path.
- Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction,
simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact
durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation
through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the
accompanying deferred-wake merge.

## Verification

Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating
master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are
resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by
CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion
before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing
test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594)
is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable
findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341)
passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates.
Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the
remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no
human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of
September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified;
no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below
remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor.

- Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36
agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real
process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing
benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser
cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full
repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and
both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed
attempts remain recorded below.

- Latest test-only qualification: 141/141
route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with
plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite
passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A
controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching
ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome,
test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of
the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858)
passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser
aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the
skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail.
Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are
retained.

- Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all
995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is
observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves
its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL
execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts
remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes
remain frozen. The preceding [CI
attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777)
passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other
test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional
skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate
remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass.

- Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop
tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real
PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary
tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries,
stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained;
its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context
or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory
typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a
standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it,
and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics.

- The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed
[all 24 CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958)
and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review
prevented its normal merge before master advanced again.

- Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue
and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module
tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update
tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP
browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries
in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear.

- The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI
jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820),
including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the
original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture
pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and
required this reconciliation.
- Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter
tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI,
server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks
pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear.
- Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against
exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected
recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop
controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier
prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already
terminal run.
- Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats
both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual
local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips
or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree,
retained input, and no error toast.
- Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They
prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer
or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort
passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop
controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local
process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or
retries, on a fresh database.
- The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport
tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11.
Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local
serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked
helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency
evidence.
- Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings
regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending
state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests
do not prove live provider behavior.
- Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification
log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md).
The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds.
Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion,
deadline, or CI gate was weakened.

Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest
run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec
playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts
tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh
disposable databases. See the [browser
runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md)
for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps.

## Risks

- This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live
evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission
layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open.
- Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require
operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient
visibility.
- Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible.
Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and
quarantine during future changes.
- Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications
remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox.
- The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or
change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented
in the [temporary
handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md).

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and
review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does
not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are
included.

## 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>
2026-09-10 10:06:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 5bddff0920 feat(runner): add guarded API search and call fallback (#13003)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - The new runner gives agents dedicated tools for common tasks.
> - Some API operations and parameters have no dedicated tool.
> - Agents need a controlled way to find and use those operations.
> - This pull request adds API search and calls through the real server
routes.
> - Existing tools remain the preferred path. The new tools are disabled
by default.
> - Paired tests measure correctness, tool choice, cost and time.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Paperclip Runner contracts, production tool authority and the server API
catalog.

**Problem or motivation**

The runner cannot use much of the API described by the old Paperclip
skill. A generic HTTP client would also let agents bypass runner control
rules.

**Proposed solution**

Add `search_api` and `call_api`. Resolve calls from the mounted API
catalog. Use server-held, run-bound credentials. Preserve route checks
and runner lifecycle rules. Keep the tools disabled until an operator
enables selected companies.

**Alternatives considered**

A dedicated tool for every endpoint would add a large initial prompt. An
unrestricted HTTP tool would weaken authorization and replay controls.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the native runner tooling. The repository owner requested
this design and implementation. The roadmap and related open PRs were
checked. No duplicate API escape-hatch PR was found.

## What Changed

- Register two compact fallback tools in canonical contracts and
provider projections.
- Build deterministic API discovery from OpenAPI, mounted experimental
routes and the old skill reference.
- Execute bounded JSON, text, file and download requests through
authenticated HTTP routes.
- Recheck active runs, company access and work modes. Block runner
lifecycle, scheduling, credential and approval bypasses. Keep routine
annotation collaboration available.
- Retain mutation receipts. Report uncertain outcomes without blindly
repeating writes.
- Add a company rollout gate and a durable eval worker with complete
cost accounting checks.
- Record child-task creation in the activity log with the agent and run.
- Add contract, authorization, file, replay and real runnerd/PRP/HTTP
tests.
- Document rollout gates and paid coverage limits. The companion eval
repository retains immutable attempts and reports.

## Verification

- Final app commit `da58370524c3626a744eec20164397c5fb6ba9ef`: all 32
checks passed; the unrelated Storybook visual check was skipped.
Greptile 5/5; no unresolved review threads.

- Full Linux build and recursive typecheck passed. Repository tests were
run by project and serialized shard; all 143 serialized server suites
passed.
- Runner TypeScript: 1,599 passed, two skipped. Rust release: 451
passing test reports. Conformance and replay parity passed. The required
API check passed 837 tests, including runnerd → PRP → authority → real
HTTP.
- Bindings cannot enable API tools without the explicit deployment flag.
Unit and real-authority tests prove the default-off boundary.
- The standalone API check builds and stages its own binary. It passed
after existing staged and debug binaries were removed from the test
container.
- UI and CLI tests passed. Initial environment failures (missing jq,
Docker overlay file identity, and parallel linker memory pressure) and
focused passing reruns are retained. The macOS full runner suite has
platform-specific failures; Linux is the qualified full-check platform.
- Eval harness: 27 tests passed; existing CI discovery ran 86 tests with
two unrelated skips. Credential export rejection is tested against the
actual report command.
- Luna and OpenRouter Sonnet each passed 60 common-workflow runs: ten
workflows, three repetitions per arm, zero unnecessary API fallback.
- Sonnet passed 11 selected capability/contract cases after fixes.
Gemini passed three smoke cases. DeepSeek exceeded the 120-second limit
and remains unqualified.
- Luna's two cost flags received focused follow-up. The original flags
and a later n=1 latency flag remain visible. Sonnet had no cost or
latency increase above 20%.
- The catalog contains 785 entries; 58 were exercised across all stages.
Most operation probes remain unrun and some need additional fixtures.
Authored probes do not establish successful coverage.
- Total conservative accounted cost: $9.875960. Active paid-campaign
time: 88.16/90 minutes. No missing accounting. Later security and
harness fixes have provider-free verification; no paid validation is
claimed for those revisions.
- Inspect the [qualification
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/codex/seach-call-api-tools/evals/runner-api-tools/reports/2026-09-07-production/READINESS.md)
and [verification
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/blob/codex/seach-call-api-tools/evals/runner-api-tools/reports/2026-09-07-production/verification.json).

## Risks

- This is a broad authenticated API surface. Keep the default-off gate
until an operator selects initial rollout companies.
- Paid coverage is incomplete. Small regression samples do not prove all
workflows are unchanged.
- A timeout or server failure can follow a committed mutation. The
result reports an unknown outcome and requires state inspection.
- The new definitions add prompt tokens. The report retains cost flags
and cache variation.
- No database migration is required.
- Repository rules require code-owner approval before merge. Technical
CI and automated review are complete.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6 assisted with code, tests and review. The
exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed in this
session. It used reasoning, tool calls and code execution.

Eval models: `gpt-5.6-luna` with low reasoning,
`openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-5`,
`openrouter/google/gemini-3.8-flash`, and
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731`. Attempts retain runtime
versions, model identity, usage and source provenance.

## 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>
2026-09-07 14:14:43 -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
DottaandPaperclip 23048f1219 Add canonical semantic action catalog to Paperclip Runner (#12121)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Runner now has a durable PRP transport and a Codex
provider bridge.
> - Codex must use stable, provider-neutral action contracts before
Paperclip can grant run-scoped tool access.
> - A catalog must describe actions without granting permission to
discover or invoke them.
> - Generated inventory must stay synchronized with its TypeScript
source.
> - This pull request adds the canonical Codex-spine semantic action
catalog inside the runner package.
> - The benefit is a small review unit for schemas and inventory before
authorization and dispatch land.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting. This pull request extends private runner infrastructure
in `packages/paperclip-runner`.

**Problem or motivation**

The Codex provider bridge has no canonical description of the Paperclip
actions that a later authorization layer can project into a run.
Independent operation lists can drift in names, claims, task modes,
effects, and input bounds.

**Proposed solution**

Add one immutable v1 catalog for the first 27 Codex-spine actions. Give
each action a stable identifier, placement, effect, required claims,
supported task modes, and JSON Schema input and output contracts.
Generate a deterministic JSON inventory from that source and fail
package checks on drift.

**Alternatives considered**

The combined runner branch contains larger live and scenario catalogs
with authorization, bindings, labs, and other providers. That change is
too large for this review unit. A generic API escape hatch would also
bypass the operation-level boundary, so this catalog excludes it.

**Roadmap alignment**

This work supports the governed tool access direction in `ROADMAP.md`.
It does not add a tool gateway, application binding, server endpoint, or
production authorization decision.

**Additional context**

Refs #12111 and #11962. Pull request #12111 was squash-merged first.
This branch starts at the resulting `master` commit. Its delta is 10
files.

## What Changed

- Added 27 versioned, provider-neutral semantic action declarations for
the Codex spine.
- Added bounded JSON Schema input contracts and normalized operation
receipt output contracts.
- Added placement, effect, claim, mode, and role metadata.
- Added a deeply frozen public catalog and an operation lookup helper.
- Added a deterministic checked-in JSON inventory and generation
commands.
- Added a byte-for-byte drift gate to the package build.
- Added AJV schema compilation, mutation-bound, forged-field,
immutability, inventory, and non-executable-boundary tests.
- Exported only the catalog types and declarations from the existing
package root.
- Documented that catalog membership does not grant discovery,
authorization, dispatch, or application binding.
- Kept server code, UI code, other providers, scenario-only actions,
labs, generic API access, authorization, dispatch, and receipts
processing out of this pull request.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all` passes.
- TypeScript protocol tests pass: 8 Node tests and 49 Vitest tests.
- All package Rust tests and conformance and replay parity checks pass.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner
check:semantic-action-catalog` passes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes.
- `pnpm build` passes.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passes.
- Prettier and `git diff --check` pass for the changed source and
documentation files.
- The generated catalog matches its source byte for byte.
- The secret scan is clean.
- The delta against `master` is 10 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.
- `pnpm test:run` completed locally with 4,692 passing tests, 19 skipped
tests, and 24 failures in 8 unchanged server test files. The failures
reproduce the established local macOS path-alias, listener, and
workspace-runtime baseline. No changed-file test failed. Linux CI
remains the repository handoff authority.
- The full Linux PR workflow passes, including the aggregate `verify`
gate.
- Snyk, Socket, Superagent security, and supply-chain checks pass.
- Greptile is 5/5 with no actionable comments, recommendations, or
follow-ups.
- Storybook visual regression skipped by design because this pull
request changes no UI file.
- Browser and migration tests are not applicable because this pull
request changes no server, UI, database, or migration file.

## Risks

Production behavior is unchanged because no consumer projects this
catalog into a provider run. The main risks are contract drift,
unbounded mutation input, forged scope fields, accidental executable
authority, and generated inventory drift. Closed input schemas, explicit
bounds, a frozen catalog, tests, and the byte drift gate cover these
risks. The later authorization layer must still bind every action to the
active run and company before discovery or invocation.

I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This change is private contract infrastructure
for the governed tool access direction. It does not duplicate a shipped
or public product surface.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 was used. The exact serving model ID and context
size were not exposed. The model used high reasoning, repository tools,
GitHub tools, and local 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 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-08-24 16:26:21 -05:00