212 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
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
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 17fa718675 Retry transient disconnects in scoped read queries (#15248)
Apply existing bounded transient-disconnect retries to audited dashboard, heartbeat-list, and base issue reads. Rebuild each query per attempt and preserve authorization, company scope, enrichment, and final error propagation.

Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-05 10:58:56 -07:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 2e67ea8dc7 fix: renew explicit continuation authorization for bounded retries (#14987)
Preserve exact user-authorized continuation receipts across bounded retries and retain the task claim through owned retry admission. Stop, reassignment, superseding input, and active cleanup continue to block unsafe continuation.

Validation: exact-head Greptile 5/5, passing CI, no unresolved review threads, and a clean merge. Detailed verification and limitations are recorded in the pull request.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-05 10:57:57 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 994d6edcdd Fix Markdown in provisional task titles (#15047)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip uses issues to organize work for AI agents.
> - Paperclip creates a provisional issue title from the issue
description.
> - A description can start with a Markdown image or other Markdown
syntax.
> - The old title logic truncated the raw Markdown source.
> - This pull request parses Markdown before it truncates the title.
> - The benefit is a short and readable provisional title.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

When an issue description started with a Markdown image, Paperclip used
the raw image syntax and URL in the provisional title. Other common
Markdown markers could also appear in the title.

**Expected behavior**

Paperclip must remove Markdown syntax before it creates the
120-character provisional title. It must keep useful text, such as link
labels and inline code content.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an issue without an explicit title.
2. Start the issue description with a Markdown image.
3. Add Markdown text after the image.
4. Observe that the provisional title contains raw Markdown syntax or an
image URL.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The problem reproduces on `master` before this change.

**Deployment mode**

Local development with the embedded PGlite database.

## What Changed

- Parse the description and remove image nodes before title generation.
- Convert the remaining Markdown to plain text before the 120-character
limit.
- Keep link labels, inline code, and identifier punctuation.
- Use image alt text, or `Image`, for an image-only description.
- Fall back to a simple 120-character title if Markdown parsing or
conversion fails.
- Add regression tests for image and inline-code titles, parser
failures, and text-conversion failures.

## Verification

- `./node_modules/.bin/vitest run
server/src/__tests__/task-title-routes.test.ts`
- `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`
- Full GitHub CI matrix passed on commit
`663f3a0517c9e450f174b6c37970756457067ba5`.
- Greptile reviewed the latest commit with a 5/5 confidence score and no
unresolved findings.

## Risks

- Low risk. This change only affects generated provisional titles. It
does not change explicit titles or full issue descriptions.
- The implementation uses the Markdown parser and plain-text converter
that are already present in the server.

> This is a focused bug fix. It does not add planned core work from
`ROADMAP.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used reasoning, tool use, code
execution, and repository access. The runtime 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>
2026-10-03 21:19:55 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4039d4f06b fix(auth): allow scoped low-trust work and owner-chat instruction edits (#14870)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Low-trust agents must work within their assigned scope.
> - Task creation currently rejects these agents before checking
assignment permission or scope.
> - Persistent instruction saves also reject direct requests from
authorized chat owners.
> - This PR checks the requested action and its recorded authority
instead of denying all such work.
> - Agents can organize permitted work and follow their owner's
instruction-edit requests while outside work stays restricted.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Low-trust agents cannot create self-assigned tasks or subtasks, even
within their allowed scope. An authorized user also cannot ask an agent
in their own Agent Chat to update its managed `AGENTS.md`. Agent-folder
collection can hide the permission rejection behind a generic save
failure.

**Expected behavior**

Allow task creation when assignment permissions and project or root-task
scope permit it. Allow instruction self-edits during authenticated
owner-chat execution, subject to the user's current edit permission.
Outside tasks, subtasks, connector messages, and peer agents do not
inherit that instruction authority. Explain the actual denial when a
save fails.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Configure an active agent with `low_trust_review` and a project or
root-task boundary.
2. Ask it to create an in-scope task assigned to itself, or a subtask of
its own task.
3. As a user with permission to configure that agent, ask it in your
Agent Chat to update its managed `AGENTS.md`.
4. Observe blanket permission denials rather than action-specific
checks.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Rebased onto master at `8ec4b84e1`. This is a core authorization change,
independent of adapter choice.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated server. Regression coverage uses the server services, HTTP
routes, native tool authority, and embedded PostgreSQL.

Related work: #14775 adds human-directed task execution. #13599 concerns
instruction-path configuration; this PR leaves that configuration
restricted. #11988 proposes separate active-review instruction
protection. #10693 reports unclear authorization denials on a different
API surface.

## What Changed

- Apply task-assignment checks to both HTTP creation routes and native
task creation, including unassigned work. Preserve low-trust policy and
source attribution on the created task and its initial plan.
- Allow self-assigned decomposition within the permitted project or
root-task tree. Resolve workspace-derived project scope before
authorization, and reauthorize existing tasks before duplicate detection
returns them. Keep cross-project and peer-assignment checks.
- Derive instruction self-edit authority from the accepted run identity
and authenticated owner-message wake. Recheck current permissions at
save time. Bind retries to the same request and chat session.
- Reject inherited instruction authority from outside tasks, subtasks,
plugins, connectors, stale sessions, cancelled runs, and peer edits.
- Surface permission errors in instruction and agent-folder save
receipts. Tell chat agents to explain the rejected action and the
specific restriction.
- Update the low-trust policy and implementation documentation.

## Verification

- All 297 tests in 11 focused server suites pass after the rebase. These
cover owner-chat saves, private copies, warm agent directories, reset
and retry boundaries, permission revocation, task creation routes, and
native tool authority.
- After review fixes, all 126 tests in the four affected
authorization/chat suites pass. Workspace scope regressions and 146
existing creation/ownership/workspace-route tests also pass.
- The final duplicate-task and CI fixes pass all 39 tests across
chat-project tools, duplicate creation, environment-selection guards,
and assignee-invokability routes. The duplicate-task test reproduced an
unauthorized response before the fix and verifies denial plus permitted
reuse afterward.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes after rebasing;
`pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` also passes after
the review fixes.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passes.
- Final head `7e73270b86748792649e4ae6fbc6879f73b42b73`: all 54 checks
passed, with two expected skips and no pending or failed checks. This
includes builds, typechecking, the full test matrix, end-to-end tests,
runner verification, the canary dry run, and security scans.
- Greptile is 5/5 on that exact head, with no unresolved review threads.
This change has not been deployed to staging.

## Risks

This changes authorization behavior. The instruction exception must not
become an inherited task permission. The check uses server-owned
execution records, requires the agent's own chat and instructions, and
keeps normal protected-change and responsible-user checks. Saves fail
closed when current provenance or permission is missing. Owner chat
grants a turn-scoped capability; the server does not classify the
message intent or require approval of the exact new file bytes. Prompt
injection within an authorized owner-chat turn remains a model-level
risk. This is the requested owner-chat trust boundary, without a new
per-edit confirmation flow. No database migration or broad trust-preset
change is required.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code editing, shell tools,
and test execution. The exact runtime 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>
2026-10-01 15:42:40 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 0829d94af2 fix(auth): derive low-trust human direction from existing execution records (#14775)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Low-trust review contains work that may include hostile input.
> - Its default intake boundary currently blocks direct human chat and
tasks outside that boundary.
> - Human direction should authorize the assigned work while preserving
containment.
> - Existing conversations and execution requests already identify
direct human instructions.
> - This pull request derives exact-task authority from those records
and the current assignee.
> - The agent can perform that work without gaining access to unrelated
tasks or privileged tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A low-trust agent with a project boundary rejects its owner's direct
Agent Chat before provider execution. Human-assigned tasks outside that
project fail the same check.

**Expected behavior**

An authorized human can talk to the agent or assign it a task. The exact
task runs with its existing sandbox, credential, and tool restrictions.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable Agent Chat and isolated workspaces. Configure a sandbox agent
with low-trust review scoped to an intake project.
2. Send the agent a direct board chat message, or assign it a
projectless task.
3. Observe `low_trust_boundary_mismatch` before execution.

Related: #14766 adds private task directories for repo-free low-trust
execution. It is now merged into master and included in the branch base,
so CI and staging verify the combined behavior.

## What Changed

- Derive owner-chat access from existing conversation identity.
- Derive exact-task access from the existing human requester and
server-owned request origin, including coalesced requests. Plugin and
external sender attribution do not authorize work.
- Follow existing `retryOfRunId` database links for automatic
continuations, checking company, agent, and task throughout; cancelled
ancestors cannot grant authority.
- Require a live run and current assignment. Preserve sandbox,
credential, privileged-tool, responsible-user, and quarantined-output
checks.
- Retain board backlog assignments in existing request records without
starting execution. Reassignment cancels old human requests in the
common service transaction, including plugin writes; late settlement
cannot revive them.
- Add real database and HTTP coverage for request provenance, retry
ancestry, cancelled runs, concurrent reassignment, spoofing, and
containment. Document the rule.
- Preserve legacy board assignment requests through their existing
source, reason, and human requester.
- Use the existing wrapped-error helper for concurrent chat-question
idempotency; a deterministic race test reproduces the CI failure before
the fix and passes after it.
- No new schema, migrations, or user-identity fields. Existing requester
columns hold attribution.

## Verification

- Passed the focused database, policy-retention, HTTP, and reassignment
tests locally. The HTTP test creates a task through the real board route
and checks the resulting persisted wakeup before exercising agent reads,
comments, mutations, and review handoff.
- Database tests hold a reassignment transaction open to verify coherent
authorization before and after commit, with a two-connection pool. They
cover retries, coalesced requests, cancelled ancestry, invalid
cross-company/agent/task links, cycles, and forged attribution.
- Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on the final
commit (`d107c26df`). [Latest-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36815589542)
passed: 54 successful checks, two expected skips, including all eight
browser-test shards. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact commit with no
unresolved threads. Local tests were targeted; the full test suite ran
through CI’s test matrix.
- The revised HTTP suite passed all 13 tests; database authorization
tests passed all 11, including legacy compatibility and late watchdog
settlement; the backlog route contract passed all 3 tests. Another 102
tests covering durable chat admission, wake queues, and Cursor execution
passed.
- All 90 interaction-service tests passed with both create calls
deliberately held until their optimistic reads complete, forcing
duplicate-key recovery. That forced race failed before switching to the
shared wrapped-error helper.
- Previous staging proof covered owner chat and projectless task
persistence. The simplified revision has not been redeployed; that
earlier proof is not claimed for the new implementation.

## Risks

- This is an authorization change: only the live run's exact task
qualifies, and normal responsible-user restrictions still apply.
- Existing request and retry records are authoritative. Merely naming a
responsible/originating user or an external connector sender does not
qualify.
- Reassignment invalidates existing human request records
transactionally. A cancelled run or request cannot regain authority when
the task is assigned back.
- Ordinary task exceptions require server-owned origin or the legacy
board assignment source/reason/actor combination. Existing owner chats
use conversation identity.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and browser testing. The runtime does not expose a more specific 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>
2026-10-01 09:45:18 -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 1b48e73e0b feat(ui): add secondary navigation for agent chat (#14706)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent Chat already provides a persistent conversation with each
agent.
> - Its shortcuts share the primary navigation and do not give chats a
dedicated place.
> - People need to find agents, start a chat, and switch conversations
without moving the page layout.
> - This pull request adds a secondary chat sidebar and a landing page
around the existing chat surface.
> - The same conversation, composer, history, and context panel remain
in use.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #13283 and #13420. This extends the existing experimental Agent
Chat navigation after review of the component and page stories. It
supports the CEO Chat roadmap item through the existing task-backed
conversation model.

**Subsystem affected**

The board UI and the company-scoped conversation list API.

**Current behavior**

Chat shortcuts sit inside the primary navigation. There is no dedicated
landing page with a searchable conversation list. A separate landing
header also moves the sidebar when an agent is selected.

**Proposed behavior**

Show a Chat entry in primary navigation. Keep a searchable agent sidebar
beside the chat content. The plus button starts or reopens the current
user's single conversation with that agent. Keep the header and sidebar
in the same positions before and after selection.

**Reason and benefit**

People can find agents and return to persistent conversations without
leaving the chat area or creating duplicate chats.

**Breaking changes**

The experimental chat navigation changes. Explicitly adding a chat now
resolves its conversation immediately. Direct visits to unused agent
chat URLs remain read-only. The existing per-agent routes and message
contracts remain compatible. No database migration is required.

## What Changed

- Add an account- and company-scoped conversation list endpoint with the
existing access checks, feature gate, and OpenAPI entry.
- Add the live secondary sidebar, landing page, avatars, search, loading
states, errors, and retry controls.
- Make the agent picker wait for chat creation and display failures.
Existing agents reopen the same conversation. A dismissed selection
cannot close a reopened picker or navigate over a newer choice.
- Preserve recent-activity ordering and terminated agents’ chat history.
Scope live list refreshes to the current user’s conversation events. A
failed historical-agent lookup leaves healthy chats usable and offers a
focused retry.
- Keep the sidebar and header stable across chat routes. Keep mobile
selection in the navigation drawer.
- Use the production components in Storybook. Prepare the theme and
mobile viewport before mounting the page to avoid the startup flash.
- Update product documentation, the design guide, and navigation tests.
Replace old browser expectations for stars and recent shortcuts with
persistent conversation and layout coverage.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check:token-gates` pass
after rebasing onto master.
- Focused UI tests pass, including 105 sidebar, picker, and live-update
checks after review fixes. The 33 conversation service and route tests
and 10 OpenAPI checks pass, including ownership, feature gating, and
concurrent creation.
- The full local test run passed 14,163 server tests before three
environment or timeout failures. The embedded Postgres startup,
connector socket, and native runner failures all passed direct reruns.
- Browser test-drive verification covers a real provider reply, add and
reopen, persisted history after reload, no-match search recovery, mobile
drawer dismissal, and top-aligned context panels.
- Browser measurements confirm that the sidebar has the same position
and dimensions on the landing page and an agent conversation.
- Storybook builds and its add-and-reopen interaction passes.
- The revised browser regression passes locally against a freshly built
throwaway instance. It covers stable sidebar geometry, add/reopen
uniqueness, drafts, search, history, and terminated-agent history after
reload. The full CI browser suite also passes.
- Latest commit `b323577d9523180104df4000eaceedea2772608c`: all 54
completed checks pass, including the complete server/workspace/browser
suites, aggregate verification, build/typecheck, security scans, and
canary packaging. The two Storybook jobs are skipped by their workflow
conditions. [CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36714052050).
- Greptile reviewed this same commit at 5/5 with no remaining actionable
findings; all review threads are resolved.
- Reviewer path: enable Agent Chat, click Chat, use plus to choose an
agent, send a message, switch away, and reopen that agent. One
conversation must remain, with its history intact.

## Risks

- The new sidebar lists persistent conversations instead of starred and
recent shortcuts.
- Chat creation is asynchronous. Errors stay visible in the picker, and
delayed responses cannot navigate into a previous company or account.
- The shell adjustment is limited to chat routes and preserves the
existing conversation implementation.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
tools. The session does not expose the exact API 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
#123` / `Refs #123` 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 07:35:32 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 83076d7e7c feat: return completed handoffs to Agent Chat (#14408)
Return completed Agent Chat handoffs through a durable outbox and scope each generated update to its supplied tasks. Add recovery, browser delivery, result access, and calibrated quality coverage.

Validated with two consecutive ten-case Claude/Codex campaigns, all CI checks, and a 5/5 review.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-29 10:25:52 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip c9b93d7e8c fix: preserve terminal task owners during release (#14561)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks record an assigned owner and separate checkout and execution
locks.
> - A completed task must retain its owner after execution ends.
> - The release endpoint currently clears that owner when it clears the
locks.
> - This pull request preserves the assignee of Done and Cancelled tasks
during release.
> - Unfinished tasks keep the existing relinquishment behavior.
> - The benefit is stable task attribution without retaining execution
locks.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An agent completed an assigned task, then called the release endpoint.
The task stayed Done, but its assignee became null. The same defect
affects Cancelled tasks. It caused the legacy Claude clarification/reuse
and multiple-repository handoff E2E assertions to fail.

**Expected behavior**

Release must clear execution locks on terminal tasks and preserve their
assignee, final status, and disposition timestamps. Release of
unfinished tasks must still clear the agent assignee. Only In Progress
work returns to Todo.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an assigned task with checkout and execution locks.
2. Complete or cancel the task.
3. Call `POST /api/issues/:id/release` as the assigned agent.
4. Read the saved task. Before this fix, its assignee is null.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Reproduced on master commit `d172197117a14b80a1eb2d2835a0e7cce2679656`.

**Deployment mode**

Local tests against real PostgreSQL through the production issue routes
and services. This is a core lifecycle defect, independent of the agent
adapter.

Refs: #11689, #6899, #7769. These are related open release proposals.
This is an independent fix limited to terminal task ownership. It does
not include timer scheduling changes.

## What Changed

- Preserve the current assignee when releasing Done or Cancelled tasks.
- Keep all execution-lock cleanup and existing unfinished-task behavior.
- Cover all seven task statuses through the release API and read back
saved state.
- Check disposition timestamps, activity attribution, and repeated board
cleanup.
- Update the API contract, agent reference, and CLI help.

## Verification

- Red commit `ddaabb754`: the two terminal-owner regressions failed with
`assigneeAgentId: null`; 12 other route tests passed.
- Green: all 14 route tests pass, plus the existing successor-checkout
race test (15 selected tests total).
- Command: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-stale-execution-lock-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t 'stale issue execution lock
routes|does not let stale release clobber a successor checkout lock'`.
- The local host has exhausted its SysV semaphore pool. The red/green
runs used the existing test-provider hook to start disposable Docker
PostgreSQL 17 instances. Routes, services, migrations, and assertions
were unchanged. No database tests in the selected set were skipped. The
other 134 tests were excluded by the name filter.
- Capability contract and inventory drift checks pass.
- `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` pass.
- The local `pnpm test:run` was interrupted after environment failures
while the complete sharded CI suite ran in parallel: native PostgreSQL
bootstrap fails under the host semaphore limit, and the large Git
fixture hits macOS `ENAMETOOLONG`. A focused rerun confirmed these
happen before the relevant assertions. The interrupted local run is not
counted as a full pass.
- Greptile completed on `1caeeb827e9cb658ddb71f16c2421ec20f80634e` with
**5/5**, a successful check, and no review threads.
- All CI gates pass on the current head: typecheck, build, general and
serialized tests, Runner checks, browser E2E, release packaging, and
security checks. Server shard 11 passed on one targeted retry; the first
attempt had 836 passing tests but an unhandled workspace-runtime startup
rejection caused by an existing timing window. All other successful jobs
were reused.
- No paid provider evaluations were run.

## Risks

- A caller that used release to erase ownership from terminal work will
now retain that owner. An explicit assignment update or the board
force-release option with `clearAssignee=true` can still clear it.
- No schema or migration changes. The transaction, company access,
assignee/run checks, and activity log remain in place.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use, code execution, and test
debugging. The session does not expose a more specific backend model
version or context-window size.
- OpenAI `gpt-6-luna` assisted with read-only test discovery and review.

## 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 08:47:33 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip 53aad90b9e fix: retry sandbox ACP input delivery after gateway failures (#14485)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work through execution adapters.
> - Sandbox ACP sessions send ordered input through a remote file queue.
> - A temporary provider 502 currently closes the session during an
input upload.
> - A lost response can occur after the sandbox has consumed the
message, so a blind retry can duplicate input.
> - This pull request retries gateway failures with the same sequence
and drops consumed sequences at the receiver.
> - The session can continue through a brief provider failure without
repeating a tool call.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A sandbox ACP run can fail with `ACP agent disconnected during request
(connection_close, exit=null, signal=null)` when a provider input upload
returns HTTP 502. The bridge destroys its local socket on the first
failure and can discard the diagnostic before the proxy reads it.

**Expected behavior**

A temporary gateway failure should get a bounded retry. A lost response
after successful delivery must not duplicate input or reorder later
messages. Permanent failures must still close the session.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run the real sandbox process bridge with an echo child and a local
test runner.
2. Inject a provider 502 before preparation, after a chunk upload, or
after final publication and consumption.
3. Send the next input message. Before this change, the connection
closes instead of delivering it.

Searched open and closed PRs for `ACP disconnect`, `bridge retry`, and
`502 sandbox`. Related work: #13287 covers shutdown after bridge loss;
#13793 covers large launch envelopes. This change covers ordered input
delivery within a running legacy ACP session.

## What Changed

- Retry input uploads up to three times for recognized Daytona and
Cloudflare HTTP 502, 503, and 504 diagnostics, with 250 ms and 500 ms
delays.
- Give each upload separate temporary paths and discard already-consumed
input sequences, including late publication from an earlier attempt.
Clean failed attempts in the background without removing a published
message or another attempt’s files. Cleanup cannot delay retries or
shutdown.
- Keep later input behind the retry. Stop queued input on permanent
failure and flush a fixed diagnostic before closing the socket. Neither
failure-diagnostic persistence nor shutdown-warning persistence can
block teardown.
- Add real-process regression tests for lost responses, late
publication, retry exhaustion, immediate permanent failure, and
diagnostic redaction.
- Give accepted run-log file appends up to three seconds to drain before
finalization computes the size, hash, and durable copy. Close the run
handle to later appends. This waits only for file writes, independently
of later DB progress or live-event persistence. If writes remain
stalled, return null size/hash metadata and skip the final durable copy
so the run can settle. Late writes cannot restart mirroring.
- Preserve legacy comment attribution when final log size is unknown by
reading existing entries within the unchanged 2 MB scan limit. Storage
errors or a three-second read deadline return the evidence already read
instead of failing the comment listing; pagination stops at the
deadline. The deadline requests cancellation of the underlying local
stream or S3 HEAD, GET, and response stream. A separate response timeout
returns partial evidence even when filesystem I/O delays cancellation;
late reads cannot append evidence or start another page. Each listing
retains its existing batches of eight reads, without a shared admission
cap that skips readable logs under contention.
- Document the retry and log-finalization boundaries in the development
guide.

## Verification

- Final commit `347daa564b`: [Linux
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36506995168/attempts/2)
passed. Greptile Apex review 13 scored this commit 5/5 with no new
findings; all 12 review threads are resolved.
- The final CI run initially hit a Cursor test timeout and four Discord
credential-lock contention failures. All five cases passed in isolation.
The two failed shards and their aggregate gate passed on retry without a
code change. Those intermittent failures are not claimed fixed by this
PR.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-stdin-race.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/execution-target-sandbox.test.ts
packages/adapter-utils/src/sandbox-callback-bridge.test.ts`: 262 tests
passed on the final implementation, including 21 new regressions. The
original three fault-injection cases failed before the fix.
- The regressions cover failed and indefinitely stalled cleanup,
Cloudflare gateway responses and retry exhaustion, permanent errors that
must not retry, and teardown while failure logging remains indefinitely
stalled. Seven Apex regression cases failed before the review fixes.
Adapter-utils typecheck and build passed again after the final review
change.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/run-log-store.test.ts
server/src/services/run-log-store-cancellation.test.ts`: all 25 tests
passed, including four new regressions that failed before the
finalization fix. They cover delayed and failed appends, late-write
admission, agreement between the local bytes/summary/durable copy, and a
stalled append that exhausts the three-second budget. The timeout case
verifies unknown metadata, no final upload, and no mirror restart after
late completion. New cancellation tests use the real AWS SDK against a
local HTTP server. They verify that stalled HEAD, GET, and response-body
connections close on abort and that a subsequent read succeeds. Local
range and already-aborted read cases also pass.
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts -t
'readIssueCommentRunLogText|deriveIssueCommentRunLogAttribution'`: 14
targeted tests passed. The null-size reader case, both storage-error
cases, the stalled-read case, and the cancellation/concurrent-listing
cases failed before their fixes. The new regressions verify that
timed-out reads are cancelled, subsequent listings recover, and two
concurrent listings both retain their attribution markers. A read that
ignores cancellation still returns partial evidence at three seconds and
cannot resume pagination when it finishes; this regression failed before
the response-timeout fix.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server build` passed after the response-timeout change.
- Full `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed earlier in this PR;
the affected packages were rechecked after review fixes.
- Full local `pnpm test:run` failed in the general-server group: 511
files passed, 40 failed, and 158 were skipped. Failures include embedded
PostgreSQL initialization, read-only cache directory renames, a macOS
long-path fixture, and a workspace exposure assertion. The PostgreSQL,
cache-permission, and long-path failures also reproduce with both
changed implementation files restored to baseline commit `24c58e479a`.
The exposure suite passes in isolation both on baseline and the fixed
branch (28 passed, 3 skipped). CI runs the full suite on Linux. Later
local test groups were not reached.
- An earlier CI run hit the Telegram retry-timing failure fixed upstream
in #14501. The branch includes that master fix. The selected recovery
test passed against a fresh, migrated PostgreSQL 16 database. The
embedded PostgreSQL runner is unavailable on this Mac; the isolated
database was stopped and removed afterward.
- No live agent turn was replayed. The tests use local child processes
and injected provider failures.

## Risks

Retries are restricted to recognized Daytona SDK and Cloudflare bridge
gateway-error messages, which survive plugin RPC serialization. Other
errors fail immediately. Temporary upload paths are now unique for all
command-managed queue writes. Receiver sequence checks prevent duplicate
input; retries do not restart an agent turn. Cleanup and failure logging
are nonblocking and best effort; session teardown remains the final
cleanup boundary. Log finalization now drains accepted local file writes
for at most three seconds and ignores later appends on the closed run
handle. A timeout leaves final size/hash unknown and skips the final
durable upload; an existing partial mirror may remain available, but it
is not claimed as a verified final snapshot. It does not wait for later
DB progress or live-event persistence. Optional attribution keeps
partial evidence when a read fails or times out. Cancellation closes S3
requests and response streams. Local filesystem I/O may finish after the
caller deadline, but a late read cannot change the returned evidence or
continue pagination. Later listings can retry after storage recovers.
There is no schema, authentication, or permission change. Revert this
commit to restore the previous behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
editing, and local test 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
#` 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; targeted tests pass and full-suite
limitations are documented 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>
2026-09-28 19:15:33 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 992f720262 fix: make runner task context ownership explicit (#13753)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100). -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task descriptions, comments, continuation data, skills, and
execution rules enter several agent adapters.
> - The same source can be rendered by more than one automatic input
carrier.
> - Failed resumes can also rebuild input from stale or compact context.
> - This pull request gives each Paperclip-owned source one delivery
owner and preserves the required transport boundaries.
> - It adds deterministic adapter, interaction, runner, and browser
tests for these boundaries.
> - The benefit is more predictable context delivery with explicit
evidence for later live qualification.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Related: #13144 removes a duplicate environment payload and bounds wake
lists. Related: #11360 addresses Hermes resume behavior. This pull
request preserves compatible active-session formats while repairing
context ownership and stale question creation.

**What happened?**

Task descriptions and comments could enter more than one automatic
context block. Native transports could wrap a complete model input in a
second task envelope. Some legacy and gateway adapters could omit the
owned assignment on ordinary tasks or rebuild a failed resume with stale
compact context. A continuation could also request a question after
newer human comments had arrived.

**Expected behavior**

Each task or comment source has one automatic model-facing owner.
Distinct comment IDs and repeated wording remain distinct. Fresh
fallback attempts rebuild the required full context. A question request
is rejected when newer queued human direction makes it stale. Harness
access policy remains owned by execution configuration.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Build a task with a description and current comments.
2. Capture the actual adapter or runner input.
3. Compare source ownership and task-envelope nesting.
4. Queue a human comment before a continuation requests a question.
5. Trigger a failed resume and inspect the fresh retry input.
6. Run the focused adapter, interaction, runner, and browser checks.

## What Changed

- Add shared prompt-section selection at the provider-attempt boundary.
- Deliver owned assignment context through native, legacy CLI, ACP,
gateway, cloud, Pi, Kimi, Grok, Gemini, OpenCode, Cursor, OpenClaw, and
Hermes paths.
- Rebuild full or compact context after resume recovery changes the
attempt. Add native and Claude ACP tests of actual recovery requests.
- Preserve custom templates, loaded instruction files, execution
policies, and older active-session formats.
- Record continuation source metadata and reject stale question creation
under the issue-row lock.
- Add explicit Product E2E context-integrity profiles, prerequisite
gates, credential-isolation checks, and report fixtures.
- Bypass service-worker forwarding for same-origin Vite development
modules. A real Chromium test fails with resource exhaustion before the
repair and passes after it. Production asset caching keeps its existing
policy.
- Add browser diagnostics and service-worker module-loading regressions.
- Add an explicit zero-retry eval option. The default retry behavior
remains unchanged. Each campaign records its effective policy.
- Remove the model-facing working-directory sentence from four prompt
builders. Existing workspace, sandbox, permission, and custom-template
configuration remains unchanged.
- Align the everyday workflow assertion with the current 47-entry
catalog.

Compared with current upstream master, the branch carries the
context-ownership implementation and its tests, the explicit
context-integrity catalog and evidence harness, and the focused browser
regression checks.

## Verification

**Merge assessment:** focused regression evidence supports merge. This
is not full completion of the original broad qualification matrix. The
maintainer has authorized merge after fresh verification of the master
integration.

- Current head: `bbd52f82114eabf09bc7b1a7e97d54a5b43bbc00`. This
integrates current master `2f585ef26a1814fa209715242d1ca791b63e4c4e`.
All 14 conflicts are resolved. Cancellation checks, workspace
finalization, native Grok support, and both sets of tests are retained.
- Current-head Greptile: **5/5**, with no blocking findings. The review
names this exact commit. All **59 reported checks are terminal: 55
successful, 4 skipped, zero pending or failing**. This includes the full
root general and serialized suites, separate runner checks, typecheck,
build, canary, browser E2E, Docker, and security checks. The successful
legacy security status is included in that total.
- After integration: workspace typecheck and full build passed. Separate
runner checks passed: **2,160 TypeScript tests (10 skipped), 582 Rust
tests, and 39 preparation checks**. Other passing checks include 621
Product E2E harness units, 376 focused shared/adapter tests, 160
real-database/API tests, 86 Hermes tests, 18 browser-support checks, and
Product E2E typechecking. The complete root suite passed in CI. The
duplicate local monolithic root run was stopped after that CI result; it
is not counted as a completed local pass.
- New native recovery coverage retains full assignment, completion
contract, and explicit skill selection after safe replacement, for old
and prepared input formats. Full native session test file: **136/136
passed**.
- New Claude ACP coverage captures actual fresh, resumed, and
missing-session fallback requests. It verifies one assignment copy,
comment order, identical text under distinct comment IDs, and full
fallback context. Full file: **33/33 passed**. Both affected TypeScript
checks passed.
- Existing deterministic tests cover source revisions, approval and
trust boundaries, completion validation, custom templates, compatible
sessions, standalone driver wrapping, and maintained adapter transport
requests.
- Provider-free browser support: **17/17 passed** after the master
merge. Service-worker unit tests: **33/33 passed**. The module-overload
regression failed before the repair and passed after it in real
Chromium.

### Fresh live comparisons

The new batch ran exactly four Product E2E attempts. **All four passed
on the first attempt; no retries.** Each has six terminal matchers plus
the existing browser lifecycle and invariant checks.

| Exact case ID | Control | Candidate |
|---|---|---|
| `core-compatibility.runner-codex.local.plan-revise-accept` | Passed |
Passed |
|
`local-session-integrity.runner-acpx-claude.local.structured-question-restart-resume`
| Passed | Passed |

The plan case checks a revised canonical plan and revision-bound
approval before completion. The question case restarts the server before
submitting the answer, then verifies the continuation completes.

Control source is `dfa4e1bda8d50a1a01746603251a9128dbe9d0d6`. Candidate
source is `79fcdb5dece501d28064ea9da306603881b46f0c`. They use identical
frozen definitions and provider versions: Codex `0.156.0` with
`gpt-5.6-sol`; ACPX `0.13.1` / Claude ACP `0.73.0` with
`claude-sonnet-5`. The September 24 head added master browser recovery
and test-only changes. The September 28 head also integrates newer
master changes, including cancellation, workspace finalization, and
native Grok. These are frozen-source live results, not exact-head live
runs.

The candidate received one description copy where the control initially
received three. The submitted initial plan envelopes were 7,969 versus
19,097 characters. Question envelopes were 7,592 versus 18,919. These
are structural measurements, not whole-provider token or dollar savings.

### Earlier evidence and failed attempts

- The preceding fresh batch has four effective passing pairs: OpenCode
comment continuation and assigned skill, native Codex comment
continuation, and native Claude comment continuation. It retains **11
attempts: eight passed and three failed**.
- Original failures remain recorded: missing local PostgreSQL library
links before task creation; host-sleep cleanup after task/page checks
passed; and a Claude **control** session-open rejection before a model
turn. Setup was repaired identically on both worktrees. The permitted
unchanged infrastructure retries passed. The underlying Claude provider
startup error was not retained and remains unknown.
- Older R2 retains **17 passes and one failure** across 18 attempts,
including eight both-pass native/legacy Codex/Claude pairs. Its OpenCode
blank-page failure led to the service-worker repair. R2 is historical
evidence: master changed the native fixed prompt and removed duplicate
wake environment data afterward.
- The September 24 CI run initially failed one unrelated preview
readiness test (`ECONNREFUSED` on its local fixture). Its test and
production code match master. Isolated local verification passed **28
tests, 3 skipped**. One unchanged CI retry passed the full shard: **831
passed, 1 skipped**, including all **31 preview-exposure tests**. The
aggregate CI gate passed afterward. The precise startup cause remains
unknown; a port race is a hypothesis, not a proved cause.

### Limits

The original wider profile/workflow matrix, repeated trials, and remote
Daytona qualification are incomplete. These results support a focused
merge recommendation, not statistical equivalence or universal harness
qualification. Some usage receipts are missing in both variants, so no
token or dollar savings are claimed. The $500 ceiling was preserved
using conservative allowances; failed attempts and unknown charges
remain in the ledger.

Reproduce the focused additions with `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/adapters/claude-local/src/server/acp.test.ts` and `pnpm
--filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run
src/native-session-runtime.test.ts`. Full checks use `pnpm -r
typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, `pnpm build`, and the separate runner
checks. Paid evals require the frozen definitions, profiles, and
credentials; do not use `--all` as a substitute for the selected cases.

## Risks

- Context placement changes can affect model behavior. Deterministic
checks cover the selected paths, but live qualification remains
incomplete.
- The stale-question guard can reject a request when queued human
comments arrived during the run. This is intended.
- New stored inputs and model envelopes retain compatibility readers for
older active sessions.
- Custom templates may intentionally repeat content.
- Removing a model-facing working-directory sentence does not change
filesystem, command, sandbox, or permission configuration.
- The worker bypass applies only to same-origin development module
paths. Cache-policy tests preserve private-response handling and
production asset caching. Mounted HTTP fixture changes remain test-only.
- This PR does not claim measured token savings or statistical
equivalence across every harness.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, exact model gpt-6-astra, with repository tools and code
execution. Bounded supporting work used gpt-5.6-luna and gpt-6-luna. The
serving context-window size is not exposed in this task.

## 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 using the required issue fields
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run the focused local checks and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect these changes
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All current-head Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
for the current head
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-28 14:49:14 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip b2e9e82f05 fix: stop remote Grok runs before continuing queued messages (#14100)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The execution service owns each run and saves messages sent while it
runs.
> - Interrupt must stop the current executor before it delivers those
messages.
> - Remote Grok commands did not register the host cancellation control.
> - A cancelled task run could still write Done and prevent queue
recovery.
> - This pull request connects remote cancellation and revokes cancelled
run writes.
> - Saved input can use the existing queue admission rules after
verified cleanup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Interrupting a queued message marked a remote Grok run cancelled before
its sandbox stopped. The old run could still post a reply and mark the
task Done. Its saved follow-up remained deferred behind execution
recovery.

**Expected behavior**

Stop revokes run write authority and waits for verified termination.
Saved messages remain durable and enter one successor through normal
admission after cleanup.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Run a task with `grok_local` in a remote sandbox.
2. Send a follow-up and use Interrupt while the command runs.
3. Let the old command attempt a task status update after cancellation.
4. Observe the task disposition and the saved message queue.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The gap is present in master at `d3e0f0a238`.

**Deployment mode**

Authenticated server with a Daytona sandbox.

Related work: #14028 and #14046 handle bounded continuation. #13291
covers infrastructure interruption and verified remote cleanup. #13332
addresses atomic recovery holds. This change handles direct Grok
operator cancellation and stale task writes.

## What Changed

- Register remote Grok cancellation before preparation. Keep command
ownership until the host confirms sandbox termination.
- Reuse the sandbox cancellation boundary for the direct CLI invocation.
Reject fresh attempts after cancellation and preserve workspace restore
failure evidence.
- Reject writes from cancelled task JWTs and runs with a pending stop.
Preserve diagnostic reads and existing conversation error codes.
- Recheck run authority under a database lock before task updates and
interaction responses commit.
- Preserve authorized handoffs that stop their own run. Only the
server-issued stop receipt for that request permits the final task
update.
- Add tests for hung commands, unverified stops, early cancellation,
copy-back failures, late Done, late interaction responses, authorized
handoffs, exact lease receipts, and one queue successor across
concurrent restart sweeps.
- Document the cancellation and write-authority contract.

## Verification

- Targeted adapter, cancellation-boundary, authentication,
queued-message, interaction-service, and activity-route tests passed.
The expanded run passed 214 tests; one new test had an incomplete
fixture. After correcting the fixture, all 8 selected follow-up cases
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed on
`179c86caf1bf0d89914a503d46e24af7e4b8c557`.
- `pnpm build`: passed on the same commit.
- `pnpm test:run`: the general-server group completed with 13,521
passed, 99 skipped, and 18 failed tests. It then stopped, so the
remaining local groups did not run. Five Slack, email, and wake-batching
failures passed on focused reruns after correcting the local
environment. The remaining 13 failures reproduce as `EACCES` on rename
in unchanged skill-cache code on macOS. Two custom-image suite setup
hooks also failed to start embedded PostgreSQL after the machine
exhausted shared-memory slots; all 31 tests in that file passed on rerun
after the local resource issue was resolved. CI covers all test groups.
- CI: 53 checks passed and 2 were skipped on the latest commit,
including the aggregate verification gate. The last server shard passed
on its single rerun after a preview-server startup timeout. The affected
file also passed locally with 28 passed and 3 skipped.
- Greptile: 5/5 on the latest commit. Both review threads are resolved.
- No live deployment or staging task mutation has been performed.

## Risks

- Stopping the sandbox can prevent file copy-back. The result preserves
workspace restore failure evidence; termination does not imply restored
files.
- If provider termination fails, the adapter keeps ownership of its
outstanding command and does not acknowledge Stop.
- The write restriction now applies to ordinary cancelled tasks. Reads
remain allowed. Task and interaction checks add a shared run-row lock to
agent mutations. An exact server-issued receipt permits the task request
that stopped its own run to complete its handoff.
- Existing terminal tasks are not reopened automatically. An operator
must correct a historical late Done before its saved queue can continue.
- No schema migration or UI change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution, and test tools. The precise backend revision 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
#` 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>
2026-09-26 17:07:07 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip b0155a681a feat(slack): connect Paperclip conversations and scheduled messages (#13920)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack conversations use the same tasks and agents as the Paperclip
board.
> - A board reply must reach that Slack conversation and let the agent
continue the work.
> - An assigned agent also needs its Slack tools during normal tasks and
scheduled routines.
> - Both paths must keep the linked user's authority, delivery rules,
and conversation history.
> - This pull request adds those paths and reduces setup friction for
Slack bots.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Server orchestration, Slack connector tools, shared contracts, and chat
setup UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Replies entered in Paperclip did not provide a complete round trip to
the linked Slack thread. Slack and board wakeups could select different
model sessions for the same task. Agents also lacked their assigned
Slack tools outside Slack-origin work, which prevented a routine from
sending its responsible user a briefing. Inviting a bot could leave the
new channel disabled.

**Proposed solution**

Mirror human board messages with author attribution and route the agent
result to the same thread. Use the same session key across both entry
points. Supply Slack tools to the connection's assigned agent in normal
tasks and routines, using the current responsible user's verified link.
Enable newly invited channels while preserving explicit disabled
choices. Add a browser-agent setup prompt to the Slack wizard.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate Slack scheduler or task dispatcher would duplicate existing
Paperclip workflows. Reusing the connection owner's identity would grant
the wrong authority. Replaying old channel history could start
unintended work. This change uses ordinary task wakeups, routine
dispatch, and Slack's original invitation mention event instead.

**Roadmap alignment**

Extends the shipped Scheduled Routines and governed Apps capabilities.
It does not add a separate task lifecycle. Related work: #13828 and
#13809. Related test stabilization: #13877. The existing plugin
Slack-control proposals are separate from this built-in connector
change.

## What Changed

- Queue human Paperclip messages for the original Slack thread with
display-name attribution and stable delivery identities. Require the
author’s current linked Slack identity and recheck access before
delivering messages or agent replies.
- Apply pause, dependency, cancellation, and closed-workspace guards
before explicit Board sends request work and again when the durable
outbox dispatches it.
- Route agent results back to Slack and preserve model-session
continuity, including replies that reopen completed tasks.
- Resolve assigned Slack connections for normal agent tasks and
routines. Recheck the responsible user's link, membership, and
permissions at execution.
- Add `slack_open_dm` for the responsible user's bot DM and request the
`im:write` scope.
- Enable newly discovered invited channels. Keep explicit OFF choices
and normal admission and deduplication rules.
- Add a copyable Slack setup prompt for a computer-use agent, with
Storybook coverage. Share the prompt-button component with GitHub.
- Update Slack tool documentation and runtime instructions.
- Stabilize the mobile project browser test by waiting for the final
canonical route before editing, preserving all persistence assertions.

## Verification

- Live staging: invited the bot after the first mention. The channel
became enabled and the bot answered that original mention.
- Live staging: a normal Paperclip reply appeared in Slack with author
attribution. The agent completed the calculation and replied once in the
original thread and in Paperclip.
- Live staging: a codeword entered in Slack was recalled from Paperclip.
A following Slack calculation used the result from the Paperclip turn.
Run metadata confirmed the same model session for both entry points.
- Live staging: a scheduled routine used `slack_open_dm` and
`slack_post_message` to deliver one DM. The existing app was reinstalled
with `im:write`. The test routine was paused after verification.
- Before the master merge: 397 focused feature tests passed. The
continuity fix passed all 76 issue comment/update route tests and six
focused route/integration cases. Typecheck, build, and token gates
passed.
- Review fixes: 47 focused integration cases passed, covering link
revocation/replacement, private membership removal, guarded outbox
dispatch, concurrent workers, lost scheduler responses, a real
one-connection pool, exact reply provenance, and attachment retries. All
99 issue-comment route tests and the Slack catalog browser test passed.
- Full local typecheck, production build, token gates, and
module-boundary checks passed. The full local test command passed 25,915
tests before a 15-second timeout in
`issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts`; that entire suite passed on
isolated rerun (81 tests). Remaining serialized coverage is provided by
the current-head CI shards.
- An unchanged Cursor adapter test hit its 10-second limit in CI; all
five tests in that file passed on a local rerun in 3.11 seconds, and the
failed CI shard passed on its single retry.
- The preview-server readiness test passed a local rerun (28 tests). The
mobile-project readiness fix passed three repetitions of both browser
tests (6/6).
- Final commit `64ac0d9897f4353375996f1b1b38e5040bdeb0a0`: all CI gates
passed, including all eight browser shards, all server/chat suites,
typecheck, build, runner checks, and security checks. Greptile reviewed
this exact commit at 5/5; all review threads are resolved.

## Risks

- Human messages on a Slack-linked task now publish to its Slack thread.
The task banner states this behavior. Incoming Slack messages and
internal agent bookkeeping must not echo back.
- Normal tasks and routines can now use the assigned bot. Authority
remains bound to the current responsible user's link; it does not fall
back to the connection owner. Revocation, private-context limits, and
queued-write checks still apply.
- Existing Slack apps need `im:write` and a reinstall to open DMs. Other
existing capabilities remain available without that scope.
- New invited channels default to enabled. Explicit disabled choices
remain disabled. Channels created by bot tools still require a person to
enable responses.
- No database migration or new provider credentials are required.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, code execution, GitHub CLI,
and browser tools. The runtime does not expose a more specific model
build identifier 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>
2026-09-24 10:51:45 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip a10702a878 feat(slack): add governed tools for Slack-origin tasks (#13828)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Chat connectors let people start and continue agent tasks from other
services.
> - A Slack conversation needs access to its surrounding discussion and
Slack collaboration tools.
> - The agent must use the linked requester's access and keep private
material within its permitted audience.
> - This pull request adds Slack tools through the existing connector
contribution and approval framework.
> - People can ask an invited bot to read a discussion, create follow-up
tasks, and collaborate in Slack.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Chat connectors, connector runtime, tool gateway, and connection
Settings/Access.

**Problem or motivation**

Slack-origin tasks can receive messages but cannot inspect the rest of a
channel or act through the originating bot. People must paste context or
configure a separate integration.

**Proposed solution**

Supply typed Slack tools and a bundled skill only to the originating
task and assigned agent. Resolve the linked requester on the server.
Check bot and requester access before reads and writes. Use existing
durable actions and approvals. Retrieved messages remain source
material.

**Alternatives considered**

Slack's user-OAuth MCP server does not replace the customer-created chat
bot. An unrestricted Web API proxy would not provide suitable permission
or publication boundaries.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing MCP Tool Gateway & Apps work with a provider
contribution. It does not add a task dispatcher or a separate Slack task
lifecycle. Related: #11144 covers generic per-user MCP grant execution;
this change binds Slack bot operations to chat-origin tasks.

## What Changed

- Add 39 typed Slack tools, a method/scope matrix, a bundled skill, and
shared native/HTTP execution.
- Bind tools to company, endpoint, task, run, assigned agent, and
admitted linked requester. Check membership and revocation on each call
and before queued writes.
- Add paginated reads, bounded history search, source links, messages,
file uploads, reactions, pins, bookmarks, topics, canvases, lists, and
approved channel operations.
- Restrict private-source publication, including automatic replies and
uploaded deliverables. Keep other people's bot DMs inaccessible.
- Reuse action receipts, idempotency, approvals, and reconciliation.
Suppress an identical explicit-send/final-reply duplicate. Return
governed results through their verified originating conversation.
- Add endpoint-bound personal search OAuth storage and lifecycle. Keep
native real-time search disabled until a runtime meets Slack's
transient-result requirements. Current runtimes use bounded history
search.
- Show capabilities, scope upgrades, and personal search authorization
in Settings/Access and Storybook. Document provider and runtime limits.

## Verification

- Current head `0eb21cba4`: CI checks pass and Greptile is 5/5 with no
unresolved findings. One unchanged rapid-callback timing test passed on
a single CI retry.
- Approval presentation regressions cover board-comment precedence and
exact Slack publication; the expanded database assertion passed in CI.
The local PostgreSQL startup probe later became unavailable, so that
final assertion was verified in CI. Slack setup and failed-run retry
browser tests also passed locally.

- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. Server typecheck/build
passed again after the approval routing fix.
- Broad local suites passed in separate groups: server 12,958 tests, UI
6,555, shared 770, skills catalog 20, and other workspace packages
2,652. CLI and serialized server checks passed after environment/timeout
retries. These are composite results, not one uninterrupted green
full-suite invocation.
- PostgreSQL authority regression covers admitted identity,
cross-company/task/agent rejection, recovery, retained-session
revocation, OAuth refresh/disconnect races, approval execution, exact
publication lineage, retries, uncertain sends, and duplicate
suppression.
- Gateway/response regressions cover separate-origin approval batches
and durable continuation. Focused provider, access, search, native
runtime, route, and AgentMail regressions pass.
- Storybook capability, missing-scope, OAuth configuration,
authorization, and disconnect states were inspected in the browser.
- Live staging: read a channel decision and full thread, create exactly
two assigned backlog tasks, add a reaction, paginate discovery to
exhaustion, and return bounded search matches with source links and
coverage.
- Live staging: create/edit/read a canvas and list, inspect the canvas
in Slack, post/edit one message, and create a channel only after
approval. New channels remain disabled for responses.
- Live staging: read a response-disabled channel from the requester's
DM; writes to that channel were denied. The test setting was restored.
- Final live retest passed: explicit file upload and exact content
read-back; approved deletion of only the disposable bot message;
continuation confirmation returned to the original Slack thread without
repeating the action.
- Optional OAuth, private multi-user boundaries, native RTS, and CLI
provider execution are not fully live-qualified. The staging agent
initially supplied malformed tool arguments; valid arguments succeeded,
and the tool/skill descriptions now emphasize UUID write keys.

## Risks

- Existing Slack apps must add scopes and reinstall for new
capabilities. Provider plans and document permissions can still restrict
operations.
- Instances need an independent `PAPERCLIP_TOOL_ACTION_SIGNING_SECRET`
for governed tool actions. The staging instance was configured with
explicit operator approval; fleet provisioning is a separate gap.
- Native RTS is not exposed on current transcript-retaining runtimes.
Bounded history scans are deliberately reported as incomplete. Inline
file reads support text/canvas content up to 256 KiB; other types return
metadata.
- Private document edits fail closed when the full audience cannot be
verified. Uncertain effects other than posts/uploads require inspection
instead of blind retries.
- Shared approval-delivery code now separates outcomes by source run to
preserve origin boundaries. No database migration is required.
- A separate completion-validator gap remains when the agent cites a
prior run's registered artifact during finalization. It asked for
registration again even though Slack delivery was confirmed. This change
does not add a connector-specific task-completion policy.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository tools, code execution, and
browser testing. The exact deployed model identifier and context-window
size were not exposed in the 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>
2026-09-22 15:29:07 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 8725d6ce09 fix: make answered Slack conversations idle (#13809)
Settle published, successful Slack turns as Idle; resume the same conversation on an admitted message. Preserve unfinished work, delivery errors, and explicit dispositions.

Verified through focused lifecycle/API/UI tests, full CI, and a real staging Slack conversation in the embedded browser.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-22 10:35:33 -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 422287eecd fix: preserve runner recovery, warm sessions, and task outcomes (#13338)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runner connects task messages, provider execution, and
task outcomes.
> - First-time user tests exposed gaps in recovery, completion
permissions, message delivery, and Stop behavior.
> - These gaps left usable output hidden, completed work waiting for
bookkeeping, or safe work unable to continue.
> - This pull request fixes the shared lifecycle and receipt paths while
preserving process ownership and action checks.
> - Users can continue work with accurate task state and durable
messages.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A stopped local Codex execution could remain blocked even after its
processes had stopped and its complete transcript proved that no
external action needed replay. Claude under Conservative permissions
could fail to call task completion tools. Recovery could reuse an
assistant item ID and overwrite prior output. A delivered comment could
remain marked uncertain after navigation. Stop could look like Pause or
a new recovery incident. Workspace contention could look like
cancellation. A direct reply reopening Done could enter a clarification
loop.

**Expected behavior**

Recover automatically only with verified termination and complete action
receipts. Preserve answers and messages. Keep task completion available
under Conservative permissions without broad tool access. Show crashes
as Blocked, actual human decisions as In Review, and ordinary workspace
contention as waiting. Stop the current response and allow a new
direction.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create ordinary response tasks with local Codex and Claude Code, then
send follow-up messages through the task composer.
2. Interrupt a disposable local Codex runner during text-only work.
Verify automatic continuation and retained output.
3. Stop a response, send a new request, answer a clarification, and
reopen completed work with another message.
4. Navigate or reload while a comment submission is pending. Confirm the
exact persisted request receipt settles it without removing newer draft
text.
5. Run two tasks in a shared Daytona workspace. Confirm waiting does not
appear as failure.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Initial acceptance baseline: `c9021c6721f91e2c74bd9fee9d3fd41c999d17b7`.
Current integration base: `6cef9743c`. Both operator-interruption and
workspace-waiting guards are preserved; native restart and legacy
permission rules remain documented.

**Deployment mode**

An isolated source-built test-drive instance, with real local Codex and
Claude Code providers and disposable Daytona environments.

Related work: #13314, #13316, #13327, #13344, #13239, #13254, #13163.
This PR addresses additional failures from ordinary task journeys,
including controller restart handoff and repeated warm sandbox setup.
Historical task status reconciliation is excluded.

## What Changed

- Persist runner ownership immediately at spawn and resume an explicitly
adopted runner even when the controller crashed before the first driver
checkpoint. Detach the controller safely across graceful restarts,
including session startup. Prevent an old finalizer from suspending or
signaling an adopted runner. Checkpoint idle warm sessions before
shutdown. Preserve the same run and queued follow-up messages.
- Scope saved legacy queue successor checks to the queue owner while
preserving ordinary task locks, operator identity, assignment gates, and
exactly-once delivery.
- Preserve managed Codex credential files when an old session is
detached for restart; normal owned cleanup still copies refreshed auth
back and removes the scoped copy.
- Reuse the bound warm shared sandbox and fully verify an existing
staged provider pack before using it. This avoids repeated uploads when
the pack is already valid.
- Add a narrow local Codex replacement path with stopped-process proof,
a closed transcript inventory, exact completion receipts, and
fresh-session lineage. Preserve no-replay holds when evidence is
incomplete. Recovery may clear only the same run's recorded Blocked
status version; manual re-blocking and dependency changes invalidate
that receipt, while queued comments do not. Later blocks stop scheduled,
queued, and final dispatch; queued/final checks re-read dependencies
even when the task status stays In Progress.
- Permit only task delivery and human-input tools through the isolated
Claude runner's exact task bridge.
- Scope assistant item identity to the provider turn and ignore only
authority-free Codex skill-change notifications during startup.
- Reconcile composer submissions by client request ID across response
loss, navigation, and reload. Retain text typed during delivery.
- Keep acknowledged run-only Stop neutral and show workspace contention
as waiting. Project exhausted native failures as Blocked.
- Restore the guarded task-page retry action for failed legacy runs,
including the server-supported explicit new-attempt path for stopped
conversation adapters. Preserve native/process recovery holds and avoid
promising Retry while a decision or execution gate hides it.
- Refresh delivered artifacts and handle direct user replies that reopen
completed work without a clarification loop.
- Check the embedded PostgreSQL PID, data directory, and actual port
before connecting or migrating.
- Document accepted behavior and add focused regressions at lifecycle,
route, transcript, and UI boundaries.

## Verification

- Final head `fece606ac2` passes the complete GitHub CI matrix: **34
green checks, two expected Storybook skips, no failures or pending
checks**, including `ci / verify`, `ci / e2e`, full runner verification,
typecheck, build, every server/workspace shard, and all browser shards.
[CI
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34727183287).
Greptile is **5/5 with no open findings**. The final two commits only
refine test fixtures; both affected suites pass 24/24 locally and in CI,
with server typecheck green.
- Complete local Vitest coverage uses the canonical groups/shards: all
635 general server suites, all 145 serialized suites, and all workspace
packages. The aggregate began on `0a8001c18` while the final queue fix
arrived: 23,903 passed, five failed, 87 skipped. The five
port/socket/timing failures passed unchanged in follow-ups (60 tests in
the exposure/file suites and 412 tests covering the serialized failures
and unrun tails). The final queue/operator-identity suites separately
passed 52/52. This is aggregate coverage plus explicit reruns, not a
pristine single-command final-head run.
- After integration with current master,
queue/operator-identity/continuation suites passed 162/162 and affected
UI suites passed 140/140. ACP Stop/continuation and legacy
task/Inbox/message browser suites passed 9/9, including both task
recovery Retry and thread Try again, automatic saved-message delivery,
exactly one new run, Done, and retained output after reload. The default
process Stop/Pause/Resume browser case passed (the native-provider case
is opt-in and skipped by default). The complete Board attachment/receipt
browser suite passed 11/11 on a disposable instance, covering both
composers, exact receipts after lost responses, no replay, bound
attachments, and newer drafts after reload.
- Blocking-intent regressions cover pre-existing Blocked, a mismatched
run/cause, an explicit manual re-block, changed dependencies, a queued
comment after failure, and a block arriving between scheduling and
provider dispatch. The negative cases reproduced before the fix. All 478
affected executor/recovery/dispatch tests passed; both database suites
ran separately after availability-probe skips in the first combined
command. The final late-dependency check passed all 143 affected
recovery/dispatch tests (zero skips) after two new negative cases
reproduced the bug.
- Focused runtime regressions cover awaited runner ownership
publication, authenticated adoption before the first checkpoint,
old-finalizer detachment, idle and busy warm-session shutdown, rejected
checkpoint propagation, provider-pack verification, and managed-Codex
credential preservation. Four managed credential detachment cases
reproduced the bug before the fix; normal owned cleanup still succeeds
exactly once.
- Live local Claude: SIGKILL 2.6 seconds into startup recovered the same
run automatically in 53 seconds, then a normal follow-up completed in 24
seconds. SIGTERM 2.5 seconds into startup preserved the same run (54
seconds) and its queued follow-up (21 seconds). Answers remained visible
and the task reached Done.
- Live Claude Daytona: a warm follow-up retained its sandbox and fell
from 121 seconds to 44 seconds. A separate cold turn took 127 seconds;
after controller shutdown and checkpointing, its follow-up completed in
33 seconds with the same sandbox, workspace, native session, and runner.
Both answers remained visible and the task was Done.
- Other live journeys covered task completion and follow-up with local
and Daytona Codex, local Codex crash recovery, Stop then new direction,
clarification response, live artifact refresh, and shared-workspace
waiting.
- Validation limits: the opt-in native composer Stop/Pause→subtree
Resume fixture exposes terminal/result ordering and subtree-cancellation
attribution bugs that can leave a child task blocked; that new finding
is assigned to a separate follow-up and is not claimed fixed here.
Default CI skips this optional native-provider fixture. Managed-Codex
credential handoff and the queue-agent integration use automated
regression evidence. Cold custom provider-pack uploads still add startup
latency.

## Risks

- Automatic replacement remains deliberately narrow: local Codex,
verified stopped identities, unchanged retained state, and a complete
text/completion-only turn. Unknown actions, partial history, or changed
ownership remain blocked.
- Claude completion permission handling changes an upstream package
patch. The exact isolated task bridge must remain pinned; unrelated
tools keep their existing permissions.
- New task failure projection changes user-visible status. No historical
status backfill or database migration is included.
- This is a broad lifecycle fix across server and UI. Live proof covers
graceful local Claude restart during startup and idle Claude Daytona
session recovery across controller shutdown. Live abrupt SIGKILL during
local Claude startup also recovered the same run. Unknown ownership or
missing action evidence still blocks reuse. Cold custom provider-pack
uploads still add startup latency; this change avoids unnecessary repeat
uploads.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, code execution, browser
automation, and tool use. The exact hosted model ID and context window
are not exposed in this task.

## 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 19:41:15 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1652a5c7f2 fix: improve task search relevance with a PostgreSQL rubric (#13335)
Unify full and quick task search around PostgreSQL term coverage, explicit relevance bands, and conservative typo recovery. Preserve matching evidence and navigation, and add a judged corpus, regression tests, and documented performance measurements.

Validation: local typecheck, build, focused PostgreSQL tests, and task-list tests pass. All final-head CI gates pass and Greptile is 5/5.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-12 16:22:58 -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 2083bf6f9a feat(connections): add AgentMail inboxes and email tasks (#13256)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Connections give agents controlled access to external services.
> - Experimental channels already map conversations to tasks and durable
work queues.
> - Email needs inbox ownership, recipient envelopes, delivery records,
and explicit sends.
> - This pull request adds AgentMail to that infrastructure and keeps
the provider key in the server vault.
> - Agents can receive and send email from local or sandbox execution
while the board follows each conversation in its task.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Agents need dedicated email addresses. Incoming email should become
assigned work. Internal task comments and progress must never become
outgoing email by accident.

**Proposed solution**

Add experimental AgentMail connections, an inbox assignment wizard,
durable email intake and publication, task email cards, and
authenticated API, CLI, and native runtime actions. Agents use Paperclip
credentials to request sends. Paperclip owns the provider key and
enforces access and task authority.

**Alternatives considered**

A general mailbox MCP connector does not provide durable task binding or
publication boundaries. A separate mailbox application duplicates task
collaboration. The board instead directs the agent through the normal
task conversation.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing experimental connections and task
infrastructure. Product scope and interaction design were reviewed with
the maintainer. Related connection authority work: #11831 and #11818.
The duplicate search found no competing task-based AgentMail
integration.

## What Changed

- Add AgentMail catalog data, shared contracts, company-scoped email
records, and an additive migration.
- Add vaulted setup, inbox assignment, access grants, trust guidance,
and provider-side allowlist guidance.
- Support WebSocket and signed-webhook intake through a shared durable
pipeline, deduplication, catch-up, and task wakeups.
- Queue explicit new conversations and replies with immutable send
intents, idempotency, delivery state, and uncertain-send resolution.
- Show inbound and outbound email cards in normal task conversations.
Keep internal messages internal.
- Add task-scoped CLI actions and the sandbox callback routes required
for Daytona execution.
- Provide a dedicated AgentMail skill automatically only to agents with
active authorized inbox assignments. Keep email instructions out of the
universal Paperclip skill.
- Advertise connector-owned `agentmail_inboxes`,
`agentmail_read_thread`, `agentmail_send`, and `agentmail_delivery`
tools only in eligible native sessions. Recheck live authority on
execution.
- Isolate Codex CLI connector skills by agent and skill revision.
Deliver the assigned skill in the run prompt for adapters that use
shared skill directories, including resumed turns. Keep automatic skills
out of manual persistent sync. Show them as read-only and document the
pattern in the connector playbook.
- Fix AgentMail health checks that entered local-stdio validation and
optional missing Codex credential cleanup in sandboxes.
- Add API, pipeline, authorization, sandbox, browser, and Storybook
coverage.

## Verification

- Live AgentMail testing covered WebSocket intake, signed webhooks,
restart catch-up, and a full receive → task → Daytona Codex CLI →
explicit reply → Delivered round trip. The reply was verified in the
other inbox. The normal task composer also initiated an outgoing email
child task.
- The connector-skill change was verified in the browser: AgentMail
appears once as an automatic, read-only skill with its assigned address.
Disabling experimental chat connections removes it; re-enabling restores
it. A regression test covers assignment data arriving after library
data.
- Connector regression coverage passed 178 runtime utility, email
integration, skill-route, and heartbeat tests. All 17 Codex execution
tests passed, including per-agent skill isolation, model identity,
revision changes, removal, and prompt delivery without shared skill
files.
- After rebasing onto master, all 44 focused email, heartbeat, and
native-authority tests passed. All 313 native-session executor tests
passed. The UI regression suite passed all 3 tests. These test sets
overlap earlier focused runs.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed after the rebase. Token
gates passed. Earlier focused Playwright task/setup coverage and the
Storybook build also passed.
- Native connector tool execution uses deterministic integration tests.
Live Daytona qualification used the Codex CLI adapter; the new
shared-home prompt fallback has deterministic coverage.
- The full repository suite is run by CI. The earlier unsharded local
full-suite attempt was stopped after the equivalent CI suites passed and
is not reported as a completed local run. Greptile reviewed
`7e57dc267a8446d3c906e3cc5b8abc94fb8860eb` at 5/5 with no unresolved
threads. All server, workspace, serialized server, and browser suites
passed in CI. The build job hit a five-second timeout in a runner
transport test; both variants and the full 80-test file passed locally
with unchanged timeouts. The build passed on retry on the same commit
without code or timeout changes. All required CI gates, including the
final `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` summaries, are green on
`7e57dc267a8446d3c906e3cc5b8abc94fb8860eb`.

## Risks

- Email from external senders can start normal agent work. Setup
recommends a low-trust agent and AgentMail sender controls. Sender
addresses never grant board membership.
- Provider timeouts can leave uncertain sends. Retries retain their
idempotency key; expired windows require reconciliation or operator
resolution.
- Connector skills and native tools are assignment-dependent and require
current access. Revocation denies retained calls; assignment changes
select a new runtime context.
- Activation remains behind the experimental-channel setting. The native
runner path has deterministic coverage; live Daytona qualification used
the Codex CLI adapter.
- Schema changes are additive. Inbox ownership is unique across
companies. Disconnect preserves provider inboxes and task history.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex). Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution,
and browser testing. The exact deployment model ID and context-window
size were 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>
2026-09-11 16:56:38 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3bafac12f7 refactor: remove automatic productivity reviews (#13263)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its recovery loop keeps assigned work moving after execution
failures.
> - Productivity review used run counts, comment counts, and elapsed
time to create management tasks.
> - Infrastructure failures could satisfy those rules and create more
tasks without evidence that the source work needed management review.
> - This pull request removes that detector and its continuation holds.
> - Bounded recovery, budgets, explicit blockers, and normal review
stages remain in place.
> - Existing task records stay readable and unchanged.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #5897. That request describes unwanted automatic productivity
reviews and asks to preserve existing tasks. This change retires the
feature instead of adding another configuration switch.

Related prior approaches: Refs #9191, Refs #12489. Those changes
excluded infrastructure failures or bounded review creation. This
removal replaces the detector rather than tuning its thresholds.

## What Changed

- Delete the scheduled detector, automatic task creation, evidence
refresh, and productivity continuation holds.
- Remove computed productivity fields, special attention items, badges,
and Storybook fixtures.
- Retain historical origin values, decision compatibility, and recovery
recursion exclusions. Add no migration and change no existing task data.
- Update the execution contract. Replace feature tests with regressions
for legacy task reads, ordinary attention, and bounded continuation in
the presence of an old review.

## Verification

- Targeted attention, issue-route, startup, and UI tests: 4 files and
101 tests passed.
- Updated issue-route and UI tests: 2 files and 61 tests passed.
- Bounded continuation regression: 2 cases passed, including a legacy
review plus pre-dispatch cancellation churn.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: all four gates passed.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook`: passed.
- Greptile: 5/5 on `a5a612eea`, with no actionable findings.
- Scheduler and historical recovery regressions: 2 files and 28 tests
passed.
- Repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed.
- The complete `pnpm test:run` suite passed across the CI server,
serialized-server, and workspace shards on `a5a612eea`. Stopped the
duplicate local monolithic run after the full CI suite passed; no
completed local full-suite result is claimed. The targeted local suites
above passed.
- CI serialized shard 5 initially hit a 10-second timeout in the first
interaction-route test. The complete file passed locally (78 tests),
then the single CI rerun passed.
- All CI gates are green, including the build and end-to-end suites.
- A local merge check against current `master` (`ce09ea40b`) completed
without conflicts.

## Risks

- API responses no longer include the computed `productivityReview`
field. Consumers must stop using it.
- The scheduler no longer creates management work from elapsed time, run
counts, or missing comments. This is the intended behavior change.
- Existing review tasks and explicit dependencies remain in place.
Historical origins still prevent recursive recovery treatment. No task
cleanup or data migration occurs.
- The native review handoff repair is separate from this removal.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. 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
- [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>
2026-09-11 15:46:35 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 7b829efdf6 feat: show tasks created from a task by project (#13241)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task can cause an agent to create more tasks.
> - Those tasks can belong to other projects or have another parent.
> - The subtask view does not show all work created from the current
task.
> - This pull request adds a Tasks tab with separate subtask and
creation groups.
> - Operators can follow created work without changing its parent or
project.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Problem or motivation**

Operators need to see all work that an agent creates while running for a
task. Parentage alone does not describe this relationship. Legacy and
native runs must follow the same rules.

**Proposed solution**

Show all subtasks in one section. Separately group tasks created from
the source task by their current project, with a No project group when
needed. A created subtask appears in both sections. Use saved run
context and recorded creation activity to find the source task.

**Alternatives considered**

Making all created tasks children would change their hierarchy. Removing
overlap between sections would hide the creation relationship. This
change keeps the two memberships separate.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing Activity log & action attribution capability.
It does not add a new roadmap area. Related PR: #9727 adds a stored
source-task field and inbound attribution UI. This PR adds the outgoing
task list using existing run and activity records and does not require
that schema change.

## What Changed

- Add a company-scoped createdFromIssueId filter to issue lists.
- Save the actor run during task creation, including legacy child-helper
calls.
- Recover historical run attribution from creation activity when the
origin run is absent.
- Render the production Tasks panel with all subtasks and independently
grouped created work.
- Keep progress only for subtasks. Add folding, hover fades and project
links.
- Fetch all result pages and refresh on issue activity. Show load
failures with Retry.
- Add database, API, UI and pagination tests, design-guide examples and
Storybook pages.

## Verification

- Before rebase: 158 targeted tests passed. Workspace typecheck,
UI/server builds, Storybook build and token gates passed.
- After rebase: full workspace typecheck and build passed. The cursor
fix passes 26 focused tests and UI/server typechecks.
- The full local test command completed its general-server group with
10,563 passing tests and two failures: a missing native-runner fixture
and a concurrency-test timeout. Building the fixture and rerunning both
affected files passed all 41 tests. The local command stopped before its
remaining groups; all corresponding GitHub test shards passed on the
submitted head.
- GitHub checks on commit 3b4bf0bd8: 31 passed, including the aggregate
CI gate, all server/workspace/browser test shards, typecheck, build,
runner verification, canary dry run, policy and security checks. Two
conditional Storybook jobs were skipped by the workflow.
- Greptile reviewed commit 3b4bf0bd8 at 5/5 with no unresolved comments.
- Open Storybook at UX Labs / Tasks Created From a Task / Full Task
Page. Check that a created subtask appears in both sections. Fold each
group and use a project link. Check the No project group and first-task
arrival story.

## Risks

- Old tasks without a saved origin run or attributed creation activity
cannot be linked to a source. The code does not infer a source from a
shared creator or a comment.
- The new list filter reads run and activity records. Source, run,
activity and result stay within the requested company.
- Task creation now saves the actor run when no explicit origin run is
supplied. Existing explicit origins remain unchanged. No database
migration is required.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The runtime identifies the model family as
GPT-6 but does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window
size. Used reasoning, repository tools, code execution and browser
inspection.

## 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>
2026-09-11 12:39:08 -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
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 6dd48cad43 refactor(server): move the release half of the deferred wake state machine into a wake-queue module (#13132)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The heartbeat service releases deferred issue wakes and promotes the
next run
> - The release logic sat in a large service function, which made its
decisions and database effects hard to test
> - A promotion race could reopen an issue without creating the promoted
run
> - Company checks did not protect every read and write, and some
readers used a second transaction connection
> - This pull request moves the release logic into a layered wake-queue
module and closes these race and company-scope defects
> - The benefit is clearer decisions, safer writes, and focused tests
while existing callers keep the same entry point

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #10195

## What Changed

- Move the release half of deferred issue execution from `heartbeat.ts`
into `server/src/modules/wake-queue/`.
- Add pure policy decisions with table-driven tests.
- Claim a wake before the reopen write and advance to the next wake when
the claim fails.
- Add company predicates to guarded reads and writes.
- Pass the transaction-scoped issue snapshot to reader ports.
- Keep `releaseIssueExecutionAndPromote` as the public wrapper.

## Verification

- Run `pnpm check:module-boundaries`.
- Run `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit` inside `server/` and compare the result
with the known baseline.
- Run the wake-queue unit and adapter tests in continuous integration.
- Check the promotion-claim ordering, guarded writes, transaction-scoped
reads, and cross-company outcomes.
- Search the pull request diff for internal issue identifiers.

## Risks

- The refactor changes the transaction path for deferred wake release.
- A stale or lost wake claim now skips that wake and continues with the
next queued wake.
- The public wrapper keeps its name and signature, which limits caller
risk.
- Continuous integration must confirm the full server test suite and
build.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, exact runtime model version not exposed, context
window not exposed, with shell, Git, and GitHub tool use.

## 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>
2026-09-09 21:01:26 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 35fdc0c66b fix: make task recovery durable and preserve current requests (#13075)
Make task recovery durable and preserve the latest user request across native and legacy continuations. Keep routine recovery quiet and prevent replay when action outcomes are uncertain.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-09 09:14:25 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e200104727 feat: review connection actions from tasks (#13063)
Bring governed connection reviews into task history and composer approvals. Share resolution with Connections, add scoped remembered permissions, and resume agents through durable outcome receipts.

Keep cards compact, collapse raw results, isolate untrusted provider output, bound continuation payloads, and reconcile missed live events. Add Storybook coverage, browser journeys, and service regression tests.

Verification: all PR CI gates passed, Greptile 5/5, security scans passed, five connection-review browser journeys passed, and real native Codex approval/continuation was verified against the local MCP fixture.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-09-08 19:37:13 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip e095b84dab feat(connections): connect services from native task feeds (#13058)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents use connections to reach external services.
> - A fresh native task can have no service tools installed.
> - The agent needs a way to discover services and ask the responsible
person for access.
> - This pull request brings the existing connection-intent flow into
native task execution.
> - The person can connect from the task, and the agent can continue
with updated tools.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Native runner tool authority, connection intents, task interactions, and
shared connection setup.

**Problem or motivation**

A task that needs an unconnected service cannot finish its work. Leaving
the task to configure access also loses context. A resolved request must
survive a restart and resume the correct agent once.

**Proposed solution**

Expose connection discovery and access requests as server-owned native
tools. Render a durable task card and use the shared setup dialog.
Persist outcome delivery and start a fresh provider session after access
is ready.

**Alternatives considered**

Sending the person to the Connections page adds navigation and does not
solve continuation. Polling for authorization consumes runs and can
create duplicate requests.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing connection-intent runtime and setup
experience. It reuses the shared access model and the native runner.

Related: #12345, #12347. The service-slug fix in #12906 is related but
separate. Companion evaluation PR:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/21.

## What Changed

- Expose `connections_search` and `connection_request` with server-bound
company, task, agent, and responsible user. Preserve the legacy entry
points.
- Discover catalog services and authorized custom connections. Check
installation, identity, health, and executable permissions before
reporting ready.
- Keep pending cards through ordinary messages. Reuse requests and
retire stale ownership. Put Connect at the right of Not now.
- Reuse the shared setup flow in a task dialog. Keep access additive and
default to the requesting agent. Recover from cancelled or blocked OAuth
windows with a new-tab fallback.
- Persist outcome delivery with an idempotent wake key. Resume in a
fresh session and recheck ownership before dispatch.
- Add native browser fixtures, offline Storybook states, server
contracts, and evaluation fixtures. Update guidance and documentation.

## Verification

- `pnpm build`: passed after replaying the change on current master.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build-storybook`: passed.
- New continuation-policy regression cases: 16 passed.
- Docker-backed PostgreSQL regressions passed for requester-only OAuth
access, assignment-only expiry, terminal expiry, and credential-free
setup metadata.
- Shared setup and task-card UI tests: 121 passed, including configured
MCP reconnect URL recovery and preserving user edits across refetch.
- Storybook browser checks: all 119 passed on the latest reconnect fix.
- `pnpm test:run`: 4,734 tests passed in the first server group, but
embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and resulting cleanup errors
prevented a complete local pass. All Linux CI lanes passed on the latest
reviewed commit. One external-object route test returned an unexplained
500 on the first run; it passed twice locally and the failed shard
passed on retry without code changes.
- Earlier feature-checkout evidence: three deterministic native browser
journeys passed, including restart delivery and an actual fixture tool
result. Legacy scripted coverage also passed. All 59 added stories were
inspected in light and dark themes.
- Live Notion testing recorded successful provider reads. The manual
test used a local-trusted instance. It does not prove
authenticated/cloud deployment or every provider journey.
- Native browser rerun reached the embedded PostgreSQL startup limit
before bootstrap, so the latest checkout’s full native browser journey
remains unverified. Both OAuth page/task regression cases passed against
isolated Docker-backed PostgreSQL 17. They verify no premature task
access, requester-only completion, additive retries, and reconnect
preservation.
- Applied both new migrations twice to isolated PostgreSQL 17. Foreign
keys remained intact, duplicate active delivery keys were rejected, and
failed delivery records did not block retries.

Reviewer path: start a fresh test drive, enable the native runner, use
an agent that can perform work directly, and ask it to summarize a
Notion page. Connect from the card, then verify the resumed provider
call and source-linked answer. The default test-drive CEO is instructed
to delegate, so it can introduce an unrelated hiring step.

## Risks

- Two additive migrations create durable deliveries and a partial unique
wake index. They are idempotent. The wake index can require a
maintenance window on large tables because migrations run in a
transaction.
- OAuth and continuation cross asynchronous boundaries. Tests cover
ownership changes, retries, additive access, and restart delivery; live
provider behavior still varies.
- The latest requester-scope fix has not yet been exercised through live
OAuth. GitHub, API-key, authenticated-user, and all recovery journeys
are not claimed as verified.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex assisted with implementation, tests, and review
using tools and code execution. The runtime does not expose the exact
model version, context window, or reasoning setting. Live evaluation
used `gpt-5.6-luna`; manual native testing used `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 and disclosed unavailable runtime
details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this extends existing
connection 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 issue
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues
or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [ ] I have run all required tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [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>
2026-09-08 15:55:26 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 1cc45086d3 feat: use the responsible person's GitHub for shared agent operations (#13005)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Several people can send instructions to the same agent and task.
> - A fixed GitHub token in the provider process can keep the first
person's access after another person's message is accepted.
> - Task ownership cannot select credentials for each accepted
instruction or preserve the identity of an operation already in
progress.
> - This pull request records ordered execution identity contexts and
resolves credentials when managed Git, gh, or GitHub tools start.
> - The benefit is automatic personal GitHub access for shared agents,
with durable continuation rules and no teammate credential fallback.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: orchestration, connection grants, database, runtime
adapters, native runners, and run details.

**Problem or motivation**

A shared agent must use the person whose instructions it has accepted. A
queued message must retain its author. A retry or approval without new
instructions must retain the originating identity. GitHub must remain
optional for ordinary work.

**Proposed solution**

Persist execution identity separately from task ownership. Give new
processes a run-scoped broker capability and token-free managed
launchers. Capture identity at operation start. Keep an explicit
dedicated-agent grant as an override. Show redacted diagnostics in run
details.

**Alternatives considered**

Per-task ownership, fixed provider tokens, and mutable repository author
configuration do not handle accepted steering or concurrent operations.
A manual account-selection action would add unnecessary setup to each
turn.

**Roadmap alignment**

This completes the existing Multiple Human Users, MCP Tool Gateway &
Apps, Secrets Manager, and Self-healing Runs capabilities. The
implementation follows the maintainer-approved plan.

Related work: Refs #12843, Refs #12907. Existing proposals #4618 and
#8945 cover per-agent or per-worktree author configuration. This change
instead follows the accepted human instruction across runtime types.
Refs #11831 for governed personal connection delegation; this change
preserves connection audience checks and does not use standing
delegation as a personal credential fallback.

## What Changed

- Add durable, ordered identity contexts and active run references.
Preserve message authors through consolidation, steering, retries,
delegation, approvals, routines, and restart.
- Add an authenticated operation-time GitHub credential broker and
local/remote managed git and gh launchers. Keep personal tokens out of
the long-lived provider process.
- Resolve GitHub gateway and server-side Git operations through the same
responsible-person or dedicated-grant selection rules.
- Make absent and unavailable GitHub credentials non-blocking at generic
startup. Clear host and prior-person credentials. Keep anonymous Git
access where supported.
- Add run-detail identity history and the dedicated-account warning.
Keep task ownership and queue-versus-steer decisions unchanged.
- Preserve personal OAuth declarations through connection edits. Retain
exact selected grants in the gateway.
- Fix continuation races found during real acceptance: verify a warm
owner before credential rotation, and wait for bounded durable runner
suspension before the next run starts.
- Make migrations replay-safe. Retain identity through agent/run
deletion, remove it with its company, and clean terminal launcher
directories before releasing execution environments. Document
coordinated release and rollback.

## Verification

- Full workspace typecheck, build, and token gates passed. The complete
local suite passed in its normal test groups: 17,120 passing tests,
including all 143 serialized server suites. After integrating the newly
merged runner API work, full local typecheck and build passed again,
along with 890 focused integration tests. All 31 checks on the
integrated revision passed, including build, browser E2E, release
registry, canary dry run, typecheck, security and all test suites.
Greptile is 5/5 with all review threads resolved.
- Current focused checks passed: 142 native executor tests, 67 runtime
lifecycle tests, 9 durable identity tests, 75 credential/routine tests,
19 low-trust/resumption tests, and the executable migration replay test.
- Authenticated browser acceptance with two Paperclip users and two
GitHub accounts on one shared native agent passed. Real commits and
pushes followed A → B accepted steering → queued A continuation in the
same saved conversation. GitHub commit author and committer identities
matched all three operations. Both runs succeeded and task ownership
stayed unchanged.
- Real GitHub MCP calls switched from A to B after accepted steering. A
delegated subtask retained its originating identity across a server
restart.
- Disabling B's GitHub connection left ordinary work successful. Managed
gh was unauthenticated and the provider had no inherited GH_TOKEN or
GITHUB_TOKEN.
- The browser displayed run-detail diagnostics and the exact
dedicated-account warning. A final controller-restart check followed by
another-person continuation retained the conversation, selected the
correct GitHub login and Git author, and removed each terminal launcher
directory.
- Company-lifetime migration and all five previously failing CI suites
passed locally (167 tests). Same-token gateway A → B → A and six
broker/launcher boundary tests passed.
- Remote callback, launcher, sandbox, and runtime contract tests passed.
Both native and legacy Codex completed actual Daytona executions on the
integrated revision ([campaign
results](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34155056509)).
The remote package-manager shim staging regression also passed locally.

## Risks

- Deploy the migrations, server broker, launchers, and runner artifacts
together. Existing processes finish with their original contract. New
managed processes need the broker endpoint for GitHub operations.
- Finish or stop new managed executions before rolling application code
back. Keep the additive schema and identity history during rollback.
- Scripts that require a persistent raw GH_TOKEN must use managed git,
gh, or GitHub gateway tools. Run capabilities authorize code executing
within that run to acquire its current identity; this is not
hostile-code isolation within one execution principal. Managed commands
prevent automatic credential carryover; arbitrary code deliberately
copying a credential is outside that boundary.
- Uncertain steering acknowledgement deliberately holds new credential
acquisition until reconciliation. Already-started operations retain
their captured identity.
- GitHub private access and provider outages can still fail the specific
operation that needs them. Dedicated grant failure does not fall back to
personal access.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, review, shell
execution, and browser acceptance. The exact model variant and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool use included
TypeScript and Rust tests, database integration tests, GitHub CLI, and
authenticated 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 (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 14:32:20 -05:00
Dotta 0c1e7504c0 fix(runner): persist warm Daytona workspaces across turns (#12904)
## Thinking Path

> - Daytona preserves a stopped sandbox filesystem, but deleting or
replacing a sandbox removes its only remote copy.
> - Warm reuse therefore improves latency but cannot be Paperclip's
durability boundary.
> - The host execution workspace must remain authoritative after every
successful turn, while same-run recovery must avoid overwriting
unexported remote work.
> - Result proposal, workspace export/merge, and terminal completion
need a durable, replayable ordering so a crash never starts a duplicate
provider turn.
> - A paid browser acceptance suite must exercise both legacy Codex and
Runner Codex for three real turns on one continuously warm Daytona
sandbox.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12901.

Runner Codex did not previously export successful Daytona workspace
changes back to the authoritative host workspace. That made warm reuse
depend on Daytona's remote filesystem and left deleted/replacement
sandboxes without a reliable reconstruction path. The existing paid
fixture also lacked a focused three-turn continuity case for both Codex
adapters.

## What Changed

- Persist versioned, atomic native workspace-sync descriptors and
durable seeds in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, without credentials or a database
migration.
- Classify fresh, warm, replacement, and same-run-recovery workspace
preparation explicitly; ambiguous lease/root/digest evidence fails
closed.
- Finalize native workspace export/merge after semantic result proposal
and before run completion, with idempotent replay that never submits a
second provider turn.
- Surface legacy Codex workspace restoration failures instead of masking
them, while preserving an earlier provider error when both fail.
- Keep healthy reusable Daytona leases warm for legacy and native
adapters, stamp finalized workspace generations, and retain existing
cleanup behavior for per-turn or unhealthy leases.
- Preserve Runner Codex's provider process/session across warm turns,
including bounded post-terminal tail draining and exact authority
rotation.
- Add the exact paid `daytona-warm-continuity` matrix:
  - `legacy-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
  - `runner-codex × daytona × warm-three-turn`
- Drive all three turns through the browser, verify ordered file
continuity and stable lease/workspace/runtime identities, capture
per-turn timings, and delete the sandbox immediately after assertions.
- Document `pnpm test:e2e:runner -- --suite daytona-warm-continuity`; no
package script was added.

## Verification

- `pnpm typecheck` — passed, including migration safety (no migration
added)
- Focused server/runner Vitest coverage — 144 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` — 114 passed
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` — passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:codex` — 66 passed,
1 helper ignored
- `native-session-executor.test.ts` — 139 passed, including safe
fail-closed cleanup after remote runner identity capture failure
- Paid local browser acceptance, exact post-rebase Linux/amd64 runner
binary:
- Runner Codex — passed in 1.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — passed in 2.7m; 3 runs; lease outcomes `created,
resumed, resumed`; 10/10 matchers; cleanup passed
- [Protected paid GitHub Actions
campaign](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34026735033)
against `7da42a91b95fa7fb2df126668ef7e37afb3b2b9d` — passed 2/2:
- Runner Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
- Legacy Codex — 3 runs; lease outcomes `created, resumed, resumed`;
evidence and cleanup passed
  - Merge/enforcement, S3 history, and Pages publication jobs passed
- Paid result artifacts were scanned for both provider credentials;
neither secret was present.
- Current PR checks — 31 passed, 1 expected Storybook skip; Greptile
5/5; Superagent security scan passed
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed
- Confirmed no `package.json`, lockfile, migration, or SQL changes.

## Risks

- Workspace synchronization now sits on the terminal-success path, so a
remote export failure deliberately prevents false success. Retryable
state retains its lease/seed; loss of the only unexported remote copy
fails closed.
- Warm provider reuse has strict identity and quiescence checks.
Mismatched or ambiguous evidence blocks reuse rather than risking
concurrent provider work.
- The paid suite incurs Daytona and Codex cost only in the existing
protected scheduled/manual workflow and explicitly destroys its sandbox
after each cell.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 agentic reasoning, repository inspection, real
browser E2E execution, Rust/TypeScript test execution, and GitHub
Actions diagnostics.

## 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 an existing issue or described the issue
in-PR
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name contains no internal ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have documented the dedicated suite invocation without adding a
package script
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green on the current revision
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
on the current revision
- [x] I will address all reviewer comments before requesting merge
2026-09-06 08:16:12 -05:00
505e7b40fc fix: guard listComments against non-UUID afterCommentId to prevent 500 errors (#8695)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is an open-source app for managing AI agents
> - The issue history subsystem stores comments per issue, with
cursor-based pagination via the `after` query parameter
> - `GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<commentId>` looks up the anchor
comment by UUID to get its created_at timestamp
> - When agents store an incorrect or truncated comment ID (e.g.
`670427ab` instead of `670427ab-e0ae-4a54-959e-2b13a2e33d14`), Postgres
throws `invalid input syntax for type uuid` before the anchor-not-found
guard can execute
> - This surfaces as an unhandled 500 and causes agents to fail when
doing incremental comment reads on any issue
> - This pull request adds a UUID validation guard in `listComments`
using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper
> - The benefit is that invalid cursors get a clean empty-array response
instead of a 500, matching what already happens when a valid UUID simply
isn't found

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #2612 (a different 500 on the same `after=` cursor path, fixed
earlier; this PR covers the malformed-cursor case that remains).

**What happened?**

`GET /issues/:id/comments?after=<value>` returns a 500 when `after` is
not a UUID. The route trims the query value and passes it straight to
the anchor lookup, so Postgres raises `invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"` before the anchor-not-found guard can run. Any agent
that stored a truncated or malformed comment ID as its pagination cursor
gets stuck in a 500 loop on that issue.

**Expected behavior**

A cursor that cannot name a comment behaves like a cursor that names a
missing comment: the endpoint returns `[]`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Pick any issue id on a running instance.
2. Call `GET /api/issues/<issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab` (8 hex
characters instead of a full UUID).
3. Observe a 500 with `PostgresError: invalid input syntax for type
uuid: "670427ab"`, where a full-but-unknown UUID such as
`00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000` returns `[]`.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at the time this PR was opened (June 2026). The `listComments`
anchor lookup in `server/src/services/issues.ts` is unchanged on current
`master`, so the failure still reproduces there.

**Deployment mode**

Local dev (`pnpm dev`). Not deployment-specific: the failure is in the
server's comment-listing service, so it reproduces in every mode.

## What Changed

- `server/src/services/issues.ts` — added `if
(!isUuidLike(afterCommentId)) return [];` guard in `listComments` before
the DB anchor lookup, using the already-imported `isUuidLike` helper

## Verification

```bash
# Start the dev server
pnpm dev

# Pass a truncated UUID — should return [] instead of 500
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=670427ab"
# Expected: []

# Pass a valid full UUID that doesn't exist — should also return []
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000"
# Expected: []

# Pass a valid full UUID that exists — should return comments after that cursor
curl -s "http://localhost:3100/api/issues/<any-valid-issue-id>/comments?after=<real-comment-uuid>"
# Expected: array of comments
```

## Risks

Low risk. The change only adds an early-return guard for values that are
provably invalid UUIDs. The code path for valid UUIDs is unchanged. The
existing behavior for anchor-not-found (returning `[]`) is preserved for
invalid UUIDs, which is the correct semantic (cursor not found → no
comments after it).

## Model Used

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (`claude-sonnet-4-6`) via Paperclip CTO agent, tool
use + code execution mode, 200K context window.

## 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip CTO <cto@paperclip.ai>
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Aymeloglu <aaymeloglu@gmail.com>
2026-09-03 20:47:19 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 87d05e194b feat(work-products): add rich cards and run artifact inventory (#12717)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies.
> - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect
from a task.
> - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card
vocabulary.
> - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and
producing-run context.
> - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and
state.
> - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration,
inventory, and Storybook review coverage.
> - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect
without seeded data.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the
task Artifacts tab.

**Subsystem affected**

The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path,
server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh,
the React board UI, and Storybook.

**Current behavior**

The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only
as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run
context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind.

**Proposed behavior**

The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each
run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product.
The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook
shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats
variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media.

**Reason and benefit**

Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card
permutations without creating task data.

**Breaking changes**

None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are
additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current
behavior.

## What Changed

- Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a
compact inventory variant.
- Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state
refresh.
- Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments.
- Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in
the same server transaction.
- Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings.
- Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a
company Artifacts link.
- Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all
eight visual kinds.
- Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title
truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow
coverage.
- Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops
or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`.

### Screenshots

Before: one resting card per kind.

![Previous rich-card
inventory](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/before-inventory.png)

After: the kind and state matrix.

![Rich-card kind and state
matrix](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/after-kind-state-matrix.png)

After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.

![Message-tail thumbnails and typed
chips](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/after-message-tail.png)

[Open the Storybook evidence
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/).

The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the
[artifact inventory
viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/).

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed.
- `pnpm build-storybook` passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed
with 5 tests.
- Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths.
- All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test
was flaky and passed on its single retry.
- Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads.

## Risks

- Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime
fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes.
- The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible
in one review surface.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core
work.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request.
Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The context-window
size is not exposed.

## 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 public branch name describes the change and contains no
internal task id
- [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests 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
- [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>
2026-09-02 15:27:54 -05:00
DottaandDev Agent 25cf079ec5 feat(runner): add Codex-native application integration (#12591)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The runner package is useful only when the application can start,
observe, and recover a native Codex run safely.
> - Existing direct adapters must keep their current execution and
finalization paths.
> - The application boundary therefore needs additive persistence,
authorization, coordination, and recovery behind an explicit
experimental adapter.
> - This pull request adds that Codex-only boundary without activating
generalized providers, remote environments, or the later task/SDK
surfaces.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Shared contracts, database persistence, adapter utilities, server
native-runtime services, and the experimental Paperclip Runner adapter.

**Problem or motivation**

The already-landed runner package has a qualified Codex path, but the
application needs durable native-run state, guarded runtime selection,
authenticated coordination, tool security, finalization, and recovery
before the experimental adapter can be exercised safely.

**Proposed solution**

Add a Codex-only `paperclip_runner` application path behind the existing
default-off native-runner setting. Bind native state and coordination to
company/run identity, preserve persisted-run recovery, and leave every
direct adapter on its existing legacy execution path.

**Alternatives considered**

The earlier stack boundary introduced a generalized executor and
remote-environment lifecycle here. That made this PR depend on
implementations in higher PRs and changed reusable sandbox behavior
globally. Those pieces are now deferred together to #12592.

**Roadmap alignment**

ROADMAP.md does not list a conflicting native-runner integration
project. This change adds the application boundary for the existing
Runner architecture.

## What Changed

- Added native run/result/finalization/provider-trace persistence,
shared validators, and idempotent migration/replay coverage.
- Added guarded Codex-only runtime selection, authenticated PRP
coordination, recovery, finalization, and interaction services.
- Added run/company-bound tool-gateway authorization, credential
redaction, SSRF protections, and replay-safe behavior.
- Added the explicit `paperclip_runner` adapter behind the default-off
rollout setting.
- Preserved legacy answered-question wake projection and direct-adapter
execution/finalization paths.
- Hardened cancellation so only owned in-memory child processes are
signaled; persisted recycled PIDs/process groups are never trusted.
- Retained the narrow Claude ACPX isolated-context security follow-up
discovered after #12590.
- Deferred the generalized executor, provider ingress, remote lifecycle,
SDK/lab/eval work, release-process changes, and lockfile.

## Verification

- Changed-file delta against `master`: 133 files.
- GitHub Actions is the authoritative verification environment for this
PR.
- Full CI, security, and Greptile review will run on this lowest
unmerged stack PR.
- Local tests/build/typecheck were not run because this checkout is
resource constrained.
- Static diff/reference checks pass, and `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged.

## Risks

- This touches central heartbeat and agent-route code, so legacy
compatibility is the primary risk.
- Runtime selection remains Codex-only and explicit; direct Codex,
Claude, OpenCode, process, HTTP, and plugin adapters remain on their
existing paths.
- Fresh native starts fail closed while the rollout flag is off;
persisted native records remain readable and recoverable.
- Cancellation, company/run binding, tool calls, status decisions, and
completion writes are guarded or replay-safe.

> For core feature work, check [ROADMAP.md](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in #dev before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with
planned core work may need to be redirected.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, with repository tools, code execution, and
parallel agent review.

## 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 or 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 — GitHub Actions is
authoritative for this resource-constrained checkout
- [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 and security gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open actionable findings
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge

## Stack

- Position: 3 of 5 overall; lowest of 3 currently unmerged
- Base: `master`
- Previous:
[#12590](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12590), qualified
Claude ACPX runtime — merged
- Next: [#12592](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/12592),
generalized Codex executor, task experience, and developer SDKs

---------

Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-31 14:38:38 -05:00
Dotta bc9ba7cd26 feat(runner): project native runs into task threads (#12321)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The experimental Paperclip Runner can execute a guarded Codex run
and persist provider-neutral events.
> - The task page still reads direct-adapter transcripts and cannot
present those native events.
> - Structured runner questions must also use the existing task
interaction experience.
> - Runtime selection must use the persisted run mode, not an adapter
name or a current feature flag.
> - This pull request projects native events and questions into the
existing task thread.
> - Direct adapters keep their existing transcript, composer,
interaction, and finalization paths.
> - The benefit is a complete native Codex task thread without a
behavior change for existing adapters.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12202. This pull request replaces that stale implementation on
current `master`.

**What happened?**

The server persists native runner events and structured input requests.
The task page only consumes direct-adapter transcripts. A native run
therefore cannot present a complete transcript, usage, or question flow
through the normal task experience.

**Expected behavior**

Native runs project persisted provider-neutral events into the existing
task thread. Native structured questions use the existing interaction
card. Direct adapters retain their current behavior.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable the experimental runner.
2. Start a native Codex run that emits progress, usage, a structured
question, and a final reply.
3. Open the task page.
4. Observe that the direct-adapter transcript path cannot project the
native event records.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`master` at `67f9867bc`.

## What Changed

- Add the canonical structured-question validator and shared contract
exports.
- Materialize native input requests as existing task interactions.
- Validate native answers and deliver them through the durable
question-response receipt.
- Resume the original PRP request with an idempotent `request.resolve`
command.
- Project native messages, tool activity, cumulative usage, and final
replies into the existing transcript model.
- Propagate persisted `runtimeMode` to the task page and select native
handling only for `runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Expire pending interactions through the shared issue service on every
terminal transition, including decisions, stalled reviews, tree control,
and pipeline retry cleanup.
- Queue native run cancellation while a transaction is open and execute
it only after the owning transaction commits.
- Keep nonterminal and non-runner issue paths on their existing service
call shapes and behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed, including the
Rust runner release build and protocol/catalog drift gates.
- Focused native-thread and lifecycle suites — 18 files and 481 tests
passed during review.
- `issue-execution-policy-routes.test.ts` — 19/19 passed after the final
transactional-queue expectation update.
- `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` — 87/87 passed in the
final isolated compatibility rerun.
- GitHub Actions — policy, build, canary, typecheck/release registry, 5
serialized server shards, 8 general-test shards, 3 browser shards, and
both aggregate gates passed on `7793f3193`.
- Security — Snyk, Socket Project Report, Socket PR Alerts, and
Superagent passed.
- Greptile — 5/5 on `7793f3193`; all actionable review threads resolved.
- `git diff --check` — passed.
- Diff against `master`: 44 files.

## Compatibility Boundary

- Native transcript polling only runs when the persisted run reports
`runtimeMode: "native"`.
- Missing or legacy runtime modes continue through
`useLiveRunTranscripts`.
- Legacy questions keep the existing optional free-text choice.
- Native closed select sets can suppress that legacy fallback.
- Terminal cleanup uses the same issue service for native and legacy
interactions; only a bound native question schedules a native run
cancellation.
- Native cancellation happens after transaction commit, so failed or
rolled-back writes do not cancel a still-valid run.
- The durable delivery service checks the original native request before
it considers a continuation run.
- This pull request adds no migration, dependency, workflow, manifest,
or lockfile change.

## Risks

The main risk is routing a direct-adapter task through native handling
or changing terminal issue behavior. The implementation selects the
native path only from persisted runtime facts, retains the existing
nonterminal call shape, and schedules native cancellation only for a
validated bound native question after commit. Focused and
repository-wide tests cover both paths. Native requests remain bound to
the company, issue, run, and agent; answers are validated, durable, and
idempotent across reconnects.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 family. The client does not expose the exact
deployment ID or context window. Agentic reasoning, tool use, and code
execution were enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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 the affected local tests and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated the compatibility notes for this change
- [x] I have considered and documented risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I addressed all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting
merge
2026-08-29 19:26:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 6244e4cf32 feat(apps): add Composio and Gmail connectors (#12342)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - App connections need both direct providers and managed provider
hubs.
> - The grant layer now defines safe credential ownership.
> - Composio needs parent and child connection lifecycle rules, and
Gmail needs governed setup.
> - This pull request adds both connector families on the grant
foundation.
> - The benefit is broader app access without weakening credential
isolation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #11965

This is stack 4 of 11. It depends on stack 3 and replaces another
reviewable part of #11965.

## What Changed

- Add Composio parent and child connection support.
- Add Gmail connection setup and governance.
- Preserve credential paths and remove duplicate binding declarations.
- Cascade Composio pause and restore actions to child connections.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts`
- Result: 164 tests passed.
- `pnpm build`

## Risks

- Parent lifecycle changes can affect every Composio child.
- The service restores only children whose provider accounts remain
active.
- Credential binding paths are normalized before secret resolution.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app
connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not
exposed. The model 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
- [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>
2026-08-29 12:08:33 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 4d2af732ae feat(runner): add native persistence contracts (#12169)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs need durable records so Paperclip can explain results and
final status changes.
> - The current heartbeat tables support direct adapters, but they do
not model native runner evidence.
> - The runner transport and server coordinator must share a strict
finalization contract before they write production data.
> - This pull request adds that contract and its additive database
boundary.
> - It does not select the Paperclip Runner or change any existing
adapter execution path.
> - The benefit is a reviewable persistence layer that preserves all
current behavior and supports later guarded integration.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #11962

Refs #12129

## What Changed

- Add native run result, finalization, completion, assessment, status
decision, and status effect tables.
- Add inert native metadata to heartbeat runs and events. Keep `legacy`
as the default runtime mode.
- Bind each evidence relationship to one company, issue, run, contract,
result, assessment, and decision with composite constraints.
- Add a strict `paperclip.native_finalization.v1` shared type and
validator.
- Preserve database functions, triggers, and the unique indexes required
by foreign keys in JavaScript backups.
- Add migration, backup, mixed-owner denial, validator, and
direct-adapter compatibility tests.
- Document the new records and their ownership rules.

## Verification

- Run `pnpm -r typecheck`.
- Run `pnpm build`.
- Run `pnpm db:generate`. The schema output and migration safety checks
remain current.
- Run
`PAPERCLIP_PSQL_PATH=/Applications/Postgres.app/Contents/Versions/latest/bin/psql
pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/validators/native-finalization.test.ts
packages/db/src/client.test.ts packages/db/src/backup-lib.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-busy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts`. All 52
tests pass.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` run completed 4,688 tests. It found 30
existing macOS test-environment failures. A serial rerun with the
canonical `/private/tmp` path reduced those failures to six existing
listener-diagnostics and skill-browser cases. None of those suites use
files in this change.
- The full Linux GitHub Actions matrix passes. This includes all
general-server, serialized-server, workspace, browser, build, typecheck,
canary, and aggregate verification jobs.
- Greptile passes at 5/5. Contributor trust, Superagent, Socket, and
Snyk pass with no finding from this change.
- Storybook visual regression skips by path because this pull request
has no UI or Storybook change.
- Confirm that the diff contains 25 files. Confirm that it contains no
workflow or `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes.

## Risks

- The migration adds tables, columns, indexes, a function, a trigger,
and ownership constraints. It does not remove or rename existing data.
- Composite foreign keys reject mixed-company, mixed-issue, and
mixed-run evidence even when each ID exists.
- The status-version trigger runs only when an issue status changes.
Backup tests confirm that restore retains this trigger and its
dependencies.
- Native source identifiers are unique when present. Legacy event rows
remain unchanged.
- This change does not add a unique run sequence constraint. The later
native writer must allocate its sequence atomically before that
invariant can be safe.
- Existing adapters keep their current execution and finalization paths.
New heartbeat runs default to `legacy` mode.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window
size are not exposed. The model used agentic reasoning, repository
tools, code execution, and test 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>
2026-08-25 13:08:39 -05:00
zach-hermesandPaperclip 8db826d18a fix(issues): cycle-aware issue_blockers_resolved after terminal reset (#11979)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents resume blocked work through the `issue_blockers_resolved`
wake when every durable blocker is `done`
> - That wake is level-triggered: one ready state produces one wake,
shared by the issue update route, workspace-finalize backstop, and
periodic liveness backstop
> - The ready-state key hashed only the dependent id and blocker set, so
it ignored a later reset from a terminal status back into `blocked`
> - After that reset, completing the same blockers found the previous
cycle's completed wake and suppressed the new continuation
> - This pull request folds the dependent's `blockedTransitionAt` into
the ready-state key, with compatibility for old no-cycle keys
> - The benefit is that a reset blocked issue receives exactly one new
wake without watchdog status repair or a change to blocker edges

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/5985
Refs: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/6555
Related: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/8009
Related: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/11570

This change does not auto-flip `blocked` to `todo`. The wake is the
continuation. It also does not treat cancelled blockers as resolved.

**What happened?**
A blocked assigned issue that was previously `done` or `cancelled`, then
reset to `blocked` on the same blocker set, did not receive
`issue_blockers_resolved` when those blockers later returned to `done`.
A completed wake from the previous cycle reused the same level-triggered
state key and suppressed the new wake. Route-time emit,
workspace-finalize backstop, and periodic liveness backstop all used
that helper.

**Expected behavior**
When every durable blocker is `done`, a currently `blocked` assigned
issue must receive exactly one valid `issue_blockers_resolved`
continuation for the current blocked cycle. A completed wake from an
earlier cycle must not suppress it. Watchdog `blocked` → `todo` repair
must not be required.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Assign issue B, block it on issue A, mark A `done`, and let B receive
`issue_blockers_resolved`.
2. Mark B `done`.
3. Reset A to `todo` and reset B from `done` to `blocked` on the same A
id. This refreshes `blockedTransitionAt`.
4. Mark A `done` again.
5. Observe that B stays `blocked` with no new `issue_blockers_resolved`
wake.

**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at `cc42a67e7e9e8eb183097afc8ff4ebfa694fb3e0`

**Deployment mode**
Self-hosted server

## What Changed

- Extend `buildIssueBlockersResolvedWakeStateKey` so the digest includes
the dependent's `blockedTransitionAt` as UTC ISO-8601, or `none`
- Thread `blockedTransitionAt` through `listWakeableBlockedDependents`,
both route emit sites, and both backstop candidate selects
- Keep compatibility: new cycle-aware keys suppress in idempotent
statuses; old no-cycle state keys suppress when in-flight, or when
completed and `requestedAt >= blockedTransitionAt` (or the cycle is
null); legacy per-edge keys stay in-flight-only
- Do not rewrite `blockedByIssueIds`, auto-flip `blocked` → `todo`, or
delete historical wake rows
- Add helper, route, restore, chained dependent, and backstop tests for
the reset cycle

## Verification

```
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run \
  src/__tests__/issue-dependency-wakeups-routes.test.ts \
  src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts \
  src/services/issue-dependency-wakeups.ts \
  src/services/issue-dependency-wakeups.test.ts
```

Local result: all named tests passed (helper 9, routes 8, liveness 26).

## Risks

- Deploy overlap: in-flight and same-cycle completed wakes still exist
under the old no-cycle key. The lookup keeps those as suppressors so
this change does not enqueue a duplicate in the current cycle.
- A completed old-key wake from before the current `blockedTransitionAt`
no longer suppresses. That is the intended fix.
- No schema migration. Rollback is revert of this PR.
- This does not change cancelled-blocker semantics or watchdog `blocked`
→ `todo` repair.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- Provider: xAI
- Model: Grok 4.6
- Tool use and code execution: yes
- Human-authored: no

## 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>
2026-08-23 08:50:38 -07:00
417336f8be fix(workspaces): attach PR preparation to existing branches (#11703)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Execution workspaces isolate an agent task from the primary
checkout.
> - Pull request preparation can need a branch that already contains
completed work.
> - The workspace policy could not require an exact existing branch.
> - Workspace cleanup also treated worktree creation as branch
ownership.
> - This pull request adds an exact existing-branch policy and separate
branch ownership metadata.
> - The benefit is safe pull request preparation that preserves every
existing commit and operator-owned branch.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A pull request preparation run could not pin its execution workspace to
an exact existing branch. Workspace reuse and cleanup could also confuse
worktree creation with branch ownership.

**Expected behavior**

The run must attach only to the requested branch in an isolated Git
worktree. It must fail if the branch is missing, busy, or inconsistent.
Cleanup must not delete a branch that Paperclip does not own.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a branch that contains completed work.
2. Configure a pull request preparation task to use that branch.
3. Start the task and observe that the prior policy cannot require the
exact branch.

**Paperclip version or commit**

This behavior reproduces on the base revision before this pull request.

**Deployment mode**

Local development with isolated Git worktrees.

## What Changed

- Add `existingBranch` to the execution workspace policy and shared
validation contracts.
- Require `existingBranch` to use an isolated Git worktree and reject
conflicting branch templates.
- Attach to the exact branch without creating, renaming, resetting, or
deleting it.
- Track branch ownership separately from worktree creation and use that
ownership during cleanup.
- Return HTTP 422 for invalid existing-branch settings on every
issue-producing route.
- Add a bounded repair script for existing pull request preparation
tasks.
- Add focused policy, route, heartbeat, runtime, and ready-comment
tests.
- Document the exact-branch behavior and safety rules.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/execution-workspace-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-session.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-existing-branch-validation-status.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
server/src/services/workspace-runtime-exposure.test.ts
server/src/services/workspace-runtime-ready-comment.test.ts` passed 335
tests.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed for all workspace projects.
- `pnpm test:run` passed 4,431 tests. Two unrelated embedded-Postgres
setup hooks timed out under aggregate load. Their isolated rerun passed
74 tests.
- `pnpm build` passed for all workspace projects.
- The two review regressions passed with 139 unrelated tests skipped.
- All latest-head CI gates passed after one unrelated timing-sensitive
test passed on rerun.
- Greptile scored the latest head 5/5 with no unresolved review threads.

## Risks

- Invalid workspace settings now return HTTP 422 instead of a generic
validation response.
- The exact branch must already exist and must not be checked out by
another worktree.
- The new policy fails closed when it cannot prove branch identity or
ownership.
- This change has no database migration.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex from the GPT-5 family assisted with this change. The
runtime did not expose its exact deployment ID or context window. The
agent used high-reasoning mode, repository tools, shell execution, 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-21 17:23:18 -05:00
cb0009b097 fix: preserve recovery retries across restarts (#11817)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The control plane must keep each active issue on a clear execution
or recovery path.
> - A missing issue disposition can require more than one bounded repair
attempt.
> - A server restart could lose that repair path or move source
ownership to the recovery owner.
> - A parked or expired retry could also make the user interface show a
false healthy state.
> - Concurrent recovery loops must not schedule the same repair attempt
twice.
> - This pull request keeps retry state durable, makes scheduling
atomic, and keeps source ownership stable.
> - The benefit is that recovery continues after a restart and operators
see the correct state.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A run that ended without a valid issue disposition could lose its repair
path after a server restart. Manager recovery could also change the
source owner. In addition, a parked or expired retry could make the
issue look healthy when no active work existed. Concurrent
reconciliation could also schedule the same repair attempt twice.

**Expected behavior**

Paperclip must keep bounded source and manager repair attempts across
restarts. Recovery ownership must stay separate from source issue
ownership. The server and user interface must report only a live retry
as active work. Each repair attempt must be scheduled at most once per
company.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start an agent run on an issue.
2. End the run without a valid issue disposition.
3. Let the first repair attempt schedule a retry.
4. Restart the server, let the retry time pass without a live run, or
start two reconciliation loops together.
5. Observe that the repair path can stop, the issue can show a false
healthy state, or duplicate retries can be created.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The problem existed on `master` before candidate head
`d8e620fe86bade7df18decac332007f5821ae04f`.

**Deployment mode**

The problem affects self-hosted servers and local builds that use
automatic recovery.

## What Changed

- Persist bounded source-owner and manager repair lineages with stable
fingerprints and retry limits.
- Resume incomplete disposition repairs after a server restart.
- Keep recovery ownership separate from source issue ownership and
enforce source mutation authority.
- Project live retry evidence into issue and blocker summaries.
- Show recovery owner, return owner, attempt count, and retry state in
the board user interface.
- Treat expired or parked retries as attention states unless a queued or
running attempt exists.
- Atomically deduplicate disposition-repair wake requests with a
company-scoped partial unique index.
- Reuse the winning run when concurrent reconciliation loses the
uniqueness race, without duplicate scheduling activity.
- Honor disabled on-demand wake policy before recovery scheduling and
again before delayed retry promotion.
- Keep the new index migration safe for lagging seeded databases that
already contain the index.
- Add server and user interface tests for recovery, restart, ownership,
retry, concurrency, and blocker states.
- Update the implementation and execution semantics documents.

## Verification

- Focused server recovery and ownership suites: 282 tests passed on the
repaired base candidate.
- Focused user interface recovery suites: 128 tests passed on the
repaired base candidate.
- Atomic-deduplication schema and recovery suites: 111 tests passed on
the first Greptile repair.
- Recovery and scheduled-retry wake-policy suites: 126 tests passed at
`d8e620fe86bade7df18decac332007f5821ae04f`.
- The exact lagging-source migration-order test passed after the index
migration became idempotent: 1 test passed and 62 unrelated tests were
skipped.
- `@paperclipai/db` and `@paperclipai/server` typechecks passed at the
current head.
- Migration generation and migration safety checks passed for migration
`0226_tan_colossus.sql`.
- `pnpm check:token-gates` passed on the repaired base candidate.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed on the repaired base candidate.
- `pnpm build` passed on the repaired base candidate.
- `pnpm test:run` passed 4,540 tests on the repaired base candidate.
Four fixed-port cases met listeners that already existed on the host.
- The two unchanged fixed-port files passed in an isolated network
namespace: 129 tests passed and 27 tests were skipped.
- Independent Security and QA reviews approved
`63c0423aab54c66f2293a20b0fb3f3b013ee3ba8`; exact-head re-review is
required after automated checks settle on
`d8e620fe86bade7df18decac332007f5821ae04f`.

## Risks

- Recovery orchestration affects issue liveness and ownership. The new
paths use bounded attempts, stable fingerprints, row locks, authority
checks, and database uniqueness.
- A conservative attention state can show more warnings when a scheduled
retry has no queued or running attempt. It does not hide stopped work.
- Migration `0226_tan_colossus.sql` creates a partial unique index on a
known-large table. Migrations run transactionally, so `CONCURRENTLY` is
unavailable. The matching disposition-repair key namespace is introduced
by this release, so deployed databases have no matching rows before the
index is added.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex from the GPT-5 model family used agentic reasoning, tool
use, and code execution. The runtime did not expose the exact model ID
or context window.
- Anthropic Claude Opus 5 used a 1M context window, tool use, and code
execution for part of the user interface repair, as recorded in the
commit history.

## 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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-20 17:09:42 -05:00
SamandSami Rusani 14fd8aee36 fix(server): flag truncated issue descriptions (#4771)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - The issue list API is one of the surfaces API consumers use to
synchronize issue metadata.
> - The list endpoint intentionally returns a bounded `description`
preview so large descriptions do not bloat list responses.
> - Before this change, that preview looked like a complete field value
because the response did not say whether it had been shortened.
> - That made round-trip clients vulnerable to accidentally PATCHing a
preview back over the full description.
> - This pull request keeps the existing preview behavior but adds an
explicit `descriptionTruncated` flag.
> - The benefit is backwards-compatible visibility into truncated issue
descriptions, so clients can avoid data-loss workflows.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #4758.

Related PR: #4792 also targets #4758, but it includes unrelated logger
changes and currently has separate review/security concerns. This PR
keeps the fix scoped to the issue-list description truncation API
behavior.

## What Changed

- Added `descriptionTruncated` to the issue list projection when
`description` exceeds the existing 1200-character preview limit.
- Exposed `descriptionTruncated?: boolean` on the shared `Issue` type.
- Added service tests for truncated descriptions, exact-limit
descriptions, null descriptions, and multibyte-safe preview truncation.

## Verification

June 18, 2026 refresh after rebasing onto current `origin/master`:

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm typecheck`
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD`
- GitHub PR checks are green on head `12e828e6`.

Earlier pre-review verification also included `pnpm test`.

## Risks

- Low risk. This is an additive API response field; existing clients can
ignore it.
- The list endpoint still returns the same bounded `description`
preview. Clients that need full text should continue fetching the issue
detail, but can now detect when that is necessary.
- No database migration or UI behavior change.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5, via Codex desktop on April 29, June 15,
and June 18, 2026. Used tool-assisted repository inspection, code
editing, local test execution, GitHub CLI workflows, and PR review
follow-up. Exact context window size is not surfaced by the tool.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A: no UI change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A:
additive API field covered by tests)
- [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: Sami Rusani <sr@samirusani>
2026-08-17 14:02:01 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 10d0555189 fix(interactions): authorize resolvers consistently (#11376)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Issue interactions give agents and people a structured decision
record.
> - Resolver routes used different authorization rules.
> - Some routes blocked valid agents, including task watchdogs with
normal issue access.
> - The API did not show who could resolve a pending interaction.
> - This pull request gives every interaction kind one resolver policy
evaluator.
> - The benefit is a clear decision path with consistent governance and
company isolation.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes: #8087

Refs: #7403

Related PR: #11082 proposes board-only confirmation rules. This change
keeps human-only review as an explicit policy.

**What happened?**

Agents could create issue interactions. Some resolver routes still
required board access.

This left valid agent confirmations pending. Task watchdogs could see
the same problem without board identity.

**Expected behavior**

Every interaction kind must use one resolver policy contract.

The contract must support `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`. It
must also apply all normal governance controls.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create a `request_confirmation` interaction as an agent.
2. Resolve it with another authorized agent.
3. Observe the board-only denial.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The problem exists on `master` before this change.

**Deployment mode**

Local development with `pnpm dev`.

## What Changed

- Add canonical policies for `anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`.
- Use one server evaluator for every interaction kind.
- Apply named addressees, company limits, review rules, and task
watchdog scope.
- Charge cross-issue resolutions to the existing per-run action limit.
- Return the effective resolver audience in attention and interaction
data.
- Show the audience, governance choices, and denial reasons in the board
UI.
- Add telemetry, API documents, product documents, and regression
fixtures.
- Add migration provenance for safe legacy behavior.
- Make migration `0218` safe for complete replays and partial prior
runs.

## Product Rules

- An interaction records a response. It does not grant authority for the
next action.
- `anyone` lets any authorized issue participant respond.
- `not_creator` requires a responder other than the interaction creator.
- `human_only` requires an authorized person.
- A named addressee, company policy, or governed action can narrow the
audience.
- These controls cannot widen the audience.
- A task watchdog uses the same rules as an ordinary agent.
- A task watchdog does not receive board authority.
- An agent resolution on another issue uses the shared cross-issue
action limit.
- Legacy pending interactions keep their earlier restrictions.
- The UI shows the effective audience and a permanent denial reason.

## Verification

- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db check:migrations`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm exec vitest run
packages/db/src/issue-thread-interaction-resolver-policy-migration.test.ts`
- The focused PostgreSQL test applies migration `0218` twice.
- The test also completes a partial prior run and preserves existing
provenance.
- The latest GitHub head has 29 successful checks.
- The opt-in Storybook visual check skipped as expected.
- Greptile reports 5/5 with no open comments.

## Risks

- New interaction writes use `anyone` by default.
- Callers must select `not_creator` or `human_only` when they need
stricter review.
- Legacy pending interactions keep the old creator and human
restrictions.
- Migration `0218` fills only missing provenance fields during recovery.
- Cross-issue resolutions can reach the existing action limit.
- The shared evaluator affects every interaction kind.
- Route, service, database, shared contract, and UI tests cover these
rules.

> This work matches the Agent Reviews and Approvals direction in
`ROADMAP.md`. It does not duplicate a planned item.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID
or context window.

The agent used reasoning, repository tools, shell commands, and test
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 linked public issues or described the issue with the
required labels
- [x] I have not referenced internal Paperclip issues or links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket id
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented the risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open comments
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-16 13:46:50 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 9e9f744f58 Show blocker links in the task chat (#11456)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English
(ASD-STE100): short sentences, one instruction per sentence, simple
approved vocabulary, and the active voice. -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip helps operators supervise agent work through tasks and
task threads.
> - The redesigned task thread shows the current work and its state.
> - A blocked task did not show the dependency that prevented progress.
> - Operators had to leave the thread to find the direct and final
blockers.
> - This pull request adds compact blocker links at the top and bottom
of the task thread.
> - The benefit is that operators can identify and open the relevant
tasks without adding a large notice to the thread.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The redesigned task thread did not show which task directly blocked the
current task or which task ultimately blocked its dependency chain.

**Subsystem affected**

`server/`, `packages/shared/`, and `ui/` task-blocker presentation.

**Current behavior**

A blocked task can open in the redesigned thread without a visible
dependency link at the top or bottom of the conversation.

**Proposed behavior**

Show one compact amber row for the direct blocker. Show a second row for
the selected final blocker when one exists. Render the rows at both ends
of the thread.

**Reason and benefit**

Operators can see the reason for the blocked state and open the relevant
task from the conversation. The compact rows preserve thread density.

**Breaking changes**

None. The new blocker-attention fields are optional. Existing clients
remain compatible.

## What Changed

- Added a compact task-chat component for direct and selected final
blocker links.
- Added the blocker rows to the top and bottom of populated and empty
task threads.
- Added link-ready blocker-attention details so an intermediate selected
task stays on its correct direct chain.
- Included blocker-link changes in the thread content key so pinned
threads follow a newly added bottom row.
- Added component, scrolling, server contract, and Storybook coverage
for the new states.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/TaskChatThread.test.tsx
server/src/__tests__/issue-blocker-attention.test.ts` (38 tests passed)
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`

## Risks

- Low risk. The rows only render while the task status is `blocked` and
an unresolved blocker is available.
- Long titles are truncated to keep each blocker on one line. The full
task label remains available in the link title.
- Older server payloads keep the original leaf-selection behavior
because the new sampled details are optional.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The run used tool-enabled reasoning and code
execution. The context-window size was not exposed to the run.

## 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>
2026-08-16 13:09:17 -04:00
DottaandCodex 991f40bb2e fix(server): serialize review policy verdict authorization
Recheck terminal verdict and policy mutations under a row lock, and scope interaction verdict enforcement to the review confirmation itself.

Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>
2026-08-15 01:25:17 +00:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip 44694328a3 fix(issues): make DELETE /api/issues/:id succeed for issues with dependents (#11331)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server provides issue APIs and the database stores issue child
rows
> - The issue delete endpoint removes the parent issue before dependent
rows
> - Several issue foreign keys had no delete policy, so PostgreSQL
returned a foreign-key error
> - This pull request adds safe cascade and set-null policies and a
clear conflict response
> - The benefit is reliable issue deletion with a useful error when a
restricted audit row still blocks deletion

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #7728
Fixes #4660
Fixes #7991
Fixes #4627
Fixes #5086

**What happened?**

`DELETE /api/issues/:id` returned HTTP 500 when dependent comments,
thread interactions, read states, inbox archives, feedback votes, or
ledger rows referenced the issue. The database raised SQLSTATE 23503
because several foreign keys had no delete policy.

**Expected behavior**

The endpoint must remove dependent rows that have no meaning without the
issue. It must keep ledger rows with a null issue reference. It must
return HTTP 409 when a restricted decision audit row still references
the issue.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an issue.
2. Add a comment or thread interaction that references the issue.
3. Send `DELETE /api/issues/:id`.
4. Observe the HTTP 500 response.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Commit `1f8f456f8340823fe2bd891ae8933d942f190b7b`.

**Deployment mode**

Local dev with embedded PGlite or external PostgreSQL.

## What Changed

- Add `CASCADE` to five issue child foreign keys.
- Add `SET NULL` to the finance and cost event issue foreign keys.
- Keep decision audit references restricted.
- Map SQLSTATE 23503 from the issue delete service to HTTP 409.
- Add migration 0217 for the seven changed tables.
- Add regression tests for cascade deletion and restricted decision
references.

## Verification

- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`.
- Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`.
- Run `npx vitest run src/__tests__/issue-remove-cascade.test.ts` from
`server/`.
- The regression test applies migration 0217 to a fresh embedded
PostgreSQL database.

## Risks

- Migration 0217 changes only seven foreign keys that reference
`issues.id`.
- Cascade deletion removes child rows that cannot exist without the
parent issue.
- Set-null preserves finance and cost ledger rows.
- Decision audit rows remain protected, so the endpoint can return HTTP
409.

## Model Used

Codex, based on GPT-5, with tool use and code-review support. The
implementation author used an AI coding agent. This PR handoff uses the
same model family to validate the commit and manage the pull request.

## 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
- [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-13 12:02:15 -07:00
dmndbrp-ossandCoder 0db8480b19 fix(SAG-2595): land updatedSince issues-list filter on master (#9050)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The issues-list REST endpoint (`GET
/api/companies/:companyId/issues`) backs the digester and other pollers
that ask "what changed since last time".
> - The service layer supports rich filters, but there was no
`updatedSince` filter — so every routine fire re-read the full backlog
instead of just the delta.
> - A prior commit added this filter, but it was never merged to
`master`; it only ran in production because a feature branch happened to
be the live checkout, and the behavior vanished when that directory was
repurposed.
> - This pull request re-lands just the `updatedSince` filter (route
param parse + validation, service `IssueFilters` field, and the
`updatedAt` predicate) as a single-purpose change.
> - The benefit is that pollers can request only issues updated after a
timestamp, and the fix now lives durably on `master` instead of a
transient checkout.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline per the bug report
template.

**What happened**

`GET /api/companies/:companyId/issues` ignores an `updatedSince` query
parameter, so consumers (e.g. the digester and other pollers) cannot
request only the delta since a prior poll and must re-read the whole
backlog on every fire.

**Expected behavior**

Passing `updatedSince=<ISO 8601 timestamp>` returns only issues whose
`updatedAt` is strictly after that timestamp; a malformed value returns
`400`.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Call `GET /api/companies/:companyId/issues?updatedSince=<a future ISO
8601 timestamp>`.
2. Observe the endpoint returns the full backlog instead of an empty
list (the parameter is silently ignored).

## What Changed

- `server/src/routes/issues.ts`: parse the `updatedSince` query param,
return `400` for a non-parseable timestamp, and pass it into
`svc.list()`.
- `server/src/services/issues.ts`: add `updatedSince?: string` to
`IssueFilters` and, when present and valid, add a `gt(issues.updatedAt,
since)` condition to the list query.
- `server/src/__tests__/issue-list-updatedsince-filter-routes.test.ts`:
new route+service coverage — future timestamp returns 0 issues, a past
timestamp returns only the delta, and a malformed timestamp returns 400.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-list-updatedsince-filter-routes.test.ts` — 3/3 pass.
- `pnpm vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-list-assignee-filter-routes.test.ts` — 5/5 pass
(regression check on the sibling filter path).
- `tsc --noEmit` on `server/` — no new errors introduced (pre-existing
unrelated `plugin-sdk` build errors on `master` are untouched).

## Risks

Low risk. Purely additive: the new filter only takes effect when
`updatedSince` is supplied, so existing callers that omit it are
unaffected. Invalid timestamps fail fast with `400` rather than silently
returning all rows.

## Model Used

Claude — `claude-sonnet-4-6` (implementation) with `claude-opus-4-8`
review/merge-gate; tool use + code execution enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — no UI change)
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (in progress)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(in progress)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Coder (Claude) <coder-claude@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-12 16:08:40 -07:00
b847e8b6f6 perf(server): reduce issue detail request overhead (#10414)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to coordinate
AI-agent work
> - Opening an issue fans out into several authenticated issue-detail
reads, so repeated work on that path directly affects perceived latency
> - Those reads repeated issue and authorization lookups, returned full
private JSON even when unchanged, and performed non-critical bookkeeping
writes on the request path
> - Interaction reads also performed lifecycle writes even though `GET`
must be read-only
> - This pull request adds request-scoped reuse, private conditional
responses, read-only interaction access, and bounded write debouncing
without crossing actor, request, or company boundaries
> - The result is less database, serialization, logging, and
response-body work while preserving authorization and interaction
lifecycle invariants

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

This is the server-only latency phase. Related work is tracked
separately in #10415 (aggregate view), #10416 (warm navigation, merged
into the base), and #10463 (bundle split). This pull request
intentionally excludes those scopes.

**What happened?**

Opening an issue detail view caused avoidable server costs: repeated
issue and authorization reads within one request, full private JSON
responses when a representation was unchanged, writes during
interaction-list reads, production debug transport setup, and immediate
bookkeeping writes for cloud tenant activity and board-key usage.

**Expected behavior**

All successful JSON `GET /api/issues/:id/*` responses should support
strong private ETags and `304 Not Modified`. Repeated work may be reused
only within the current request. `GET /interactions` must not modify
stored interactions. Non-critical activity timestamps may be debounced
without weakening authentication or stale instance-admin cleanup.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Start Paperclip in local development or self-hosted server mode.
2. Open one issue and request its detail subresources with the same
authenticated actor.
3. Repeat a successful JSON request with its `ETag` in `If-None-Match`.
4. Observe `304 Not Modified`, no interaction writes from `GET
/interactions`, and unchanged authorization boundaries.

**Deployment mode / installation**

- Local development or self-hosted server
- Built from source
- Core server behavior; not adapter-specific

## What Changed

- Added strong ETags and `Cache-Control: private, must-revalidate` to
successful JSON reads under `/api/issues/:id/*`, including
standards-compliant `If-None-Match` handling.
- Added request-scoped promise memoization for issue and authorization
lookups; no authorization result survives the request.
- Made `GET /interactions` read-only, moved supersession and
terminal-state handling to mutation paths, and prevented plugin callers
from accepting or rejecting interactions after an issue closes.
- Removed the production debug-file logger transport while preserving
development formatting.
- Debounced cloud-tenant activity and board-key `lastUsedAt`
persistence, while keeping stale instance-admin deletion unconditional
and authentication checks per request.
- Added focused tests for ETags, request isolation, authorization
lifecycle behavior, interaction invariants, logger configuration, and
retry-safe debounce behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/private-json-etag.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interaction-routes.test.ts` — 2 files,
23 tests passed.
- Focused Vitest run covering request memoization, authorization,
interactions, plugin orchestration, logger, cloud tenant, board auth,
and issue services — 9 files, 264 tests passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed.
- Scope guardrails: 21 changed files under `server/src`; no lockfile,
workflow, migration, UI, aggregate-view, or bundle-split changes.

## Risks

- Strong ETags hash each successful serialized JSON response. This adds
a small CPU cost but avoids transferring unchanged bodies.
- Debounced bookkeeping timestamps can lag by the bounded debounce
interval. They are non-critical usage metadata; authentication still
runs per request, and stale instance-admin deletion remains
unconditional.
- Legacy pending interactions on terminal issues are projected as
expired by reads and are finalized only by mutation paths. The stored
record remains unchanged on `GET` by design.
- No database schema or migration changes are included.

> This is a focused performance correction and does not duplicate a
planned core feature in `ROADMAP.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex using `gpt-5.3-codex` for the initial implementation and
`gpt-5.6-sol` for isolation, verification, and PR preparation, with
reasoning, repository tool use, code execution, and GitHub CLI access.
The runtimes did not expose authoritative context-window sizes.

## 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>
Co-authored-by: Dev Agent <dev@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-11 14:39:23 -04:00
Devin Foley 35aaaa0bd0 feat(server): preserve task timestamps and hierarchy through company import/export (#11193)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Company export/import moves a whole company — agents, tasks,
comments — between instances as a portable bundle
> - The bundle never carried task timestamps or parent links: the export
writes neither, the importer lets database defaults stamp "now", and
sub-tasks arrive flattened
> - Boards sort by recency, so every imported task showing "created just
now" collapses the task list into import order, and the task hierarchy
the user built is gone
> - This pull request adds created/updated/started/completed/cancelled
timestamps and a parent link to the bundle (schema v7), preserves them
end to end on import, and keeps comment imports from clobbering a
preserved updated time
> - The benefit is that an imported company reads like the company the
user left: same recency order, same task tree

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

After a company import, every task showed as created at import time.
Recency sorting collapsed to import order, and parent/child task nesting
disappeared. The user called out losing "the meaningful task hierarchy
and recency sorting". Cause: the export bundle has no fields for task
timestamps or parent links, the importer lets `defaultNow()` win on
insert, and the comment importer bumps every touched task's `updatedAt`
to now.

**Expected behavior**

An imported company preserves each task's
creation/update/start/completion times and its position in the task
tree, so sorting and nesting on the destination match the source.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. On a source instance, create tasks over several days, including
sub-tasks nested under parents.
2. Export the company and import it into another instance.
3. Every task shows the import moment as its creation/update time and
all tasks are top-level.

## What Changed

- Export writes
`createdAt`/`updatedAt`/`startedAt`/`completedAt`/`cancelledAt` (ISO,
only when set) and `parent: <taskSlug>` into each task's bundle
extension; a parent outside the export selection drops the edge with an
aggregate warning, mirroring the existing blocker-edge warning
(`server/src/services/company-portability.ts`).
- Bundle schema version 6 → 7. All new fields are optional: v5/v6
bundles import unchanged with a version-aware downlevel warning; bundles
newer than the board still fail closed.
- Manifest parsing validates the new timestamps like comment timestamps
(invalid → warn and ignore, never a hard failure); shared types and the
zod validator carry the new optional fields.
- Import resolves parent slugs to pre-generated destination ids, drops
self-references and cycles from tampered bundles with warnings, and
orders rows parents-first because the self-referencing FK is checked per
insert chunk.
- `importIssues` writes the preserved timestamps (falling back to insert
time when absent; `startedAt` stays null unless bundle-carried, per
#11191's semantics) and `parentId`.
- `addImportedComments` no longer blanket-bumps `updatedAt = now()`; it
takes `GREATEST(updated_at, newest imported comment createdAt)`, so a
preserved update time never regresses while unpreserved rows keep the
old behavior.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability-import-batching.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts` — 102 passed,
1 pre-existing opt-in benchmark skip. Includes: full round-trip with
exact timestamp equality and a 3-deep parent chain against embedded
Postgres; v6 back-compat (defaults + warning); forward-compat rejection
(v8); cycle/self-reference/invalid-timestamp tampered-bundle handling;
comment-bump preserve-awareness in both directions.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/shared typecheck` — clean.

## Risks

- **Rollout ordering**: a board on the previous build (max schema v6)
refuses bundles exported by this build (stamped v7) — the existing
newer-than-supported rejection, working as designed. Cross-instance
moves need the importing board upgraded first. Called out here so
operators aren't surprised during the transition window.
- Parent edges from tampered bundles are dropped with warnings rather
than failing the import; blocker relations already behave this way.
- Timestamps are data-only; no destination schema migration.

Stacked on #11191 (its commit is included here) — merge #11191 first;
this PR then shows only the v7 changes.

## Model Used

- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code CLI, with extended
thinking and tool use (multi-agent implementation with independent
verification).

## 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
2026-08-10 17:01:33 -07:00
Devin Foley d816eb8095 fix(server): keep imported tasks quiescent under the productivity review sweep (#11191)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Company import brings a full company package — agents, tasks,
routines — into an instance, with `pauseAutomations` promising a quiet
landing
> - The pause covers the imported entities, but the destination's own
productivity-review sweep does not know the difference between imported
rows and live work
> - The importer stamps every imported in-progress task with `startedAt
= now()`, so six hours later the sweep's long-active check fires on
every one of them and floods the board with review tasks and agent
wakeups
> - This pull request stops fabricating `startedAt` on import and makes
the sweep skip tasks whose assignee agent is paused
> - The benefit is that an import lands quietly: no surprise review-task
storm, and paused teams stay paused until the operator activates them

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

After importing a company package with automations paused, a batch of
"productivity review" tasks appeared roughly six hours later — one for
every imported in-progress task — each with an owner-agent wakeup. The
user described it as jarring and wasteful. Cause: `importIssues`
fabricates `startedAt = now()` for imported in-progress rows, and
`reconcileProductivityReviews` considers any assigned in-progress task
without checking whether the assignee agent is paused, so its
long-active-duration evidence (6 h threshold) trips on the fabricated
timestamp.

**Expected behavior**

An import with paused automations must be quiescent: no destination
sweep should generate work from imported rows until the operator
unpauses the imported team. A paused agent must not accumulate review
tasks it cannot act on.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Import a company package containing tasks with status `in_progress`
assigned to agents, with "pause automations" enabled.
2. Wait for the productivity-review reconcile (runs at startup and on
the heartbeat scheduler tick) more than six hours after the import.
3. Observe one new review task plus an owner wakeup per imported
in-progress task.

## What Changed

- `importIssues` no longer fabricates `startedAt` for imported
`in_progress` rows; it inserts null (`server/src/services/issues.ts`).
Audited every consumer of `issues.startedAt` — all are null-tolerant,
and normal checkout/status-transition paths set the value when work
really starts.
- `reconcileProductivityReviews` skips candidates whose assignee agent
is `paused`, counting them as skipped
(`server/src/services/productivity-review.ts`). This is a general rule,
not import-specific: a paused agent cannot act on a review.
- Tests: paused-assignee candidate with an old `startedAt` creates no
review, and creates one after unpausing; imported in-progress issue
lands with null `startedAt` (embedded-Postgres import test); the
pre-existing long-active regression test still passes.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/productivity-review-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/company-portability-import-batching.test.ts` — 20
passed, 1 pre-existing opt-in benchmark skip.
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` —
78 passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — clean.

## Risks

- Behavior change beyond imports: tasks assigned to paused agents no
longer receive productivity reviews anywhere. This is intended — the
review would target an agent that cannot respond — and reviews resume on
the first reconcile after unpausing.
- Imported in-progress tasks now carry no `startedAt` until real work
starts on the destination. The one sweep that read the fabricated value
is the one this PR quiets; all other consumers fall back safely (audit
in the commit body).
- Low risk otherwise: no schema change, no API shape change.

## Model Used

- Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`) via Claude Code CLI, with extended
thinking and tool use (multi-agent implementation with independent
verification).

## 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
2026-08-10 17:00:32 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip f554d67377 fix(server): add explicit review verdict policies (#10931)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Issues use `in_review` to request a final decision from an
authorized writer
> - The server rejected an assignee agent that tried to close its own
review, even when the issue had no independent-review rule
> - This rejection stopped the default agent workflow and did not
represent the configured execution-stage rules
> - Paperclip needs an open default and explicit issue-level constraints
for teams that require an independent or human verdict
> - This pull request removes the unconditional rejection and adds
`anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only` review policies
> - The benefit is a working default path with opt-in, authenticated
verdict controls

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #10635, #4429, and #10671.

The related public work covers execution-stage independence,
self-approval fallback behavior, and durable review paths. This change
is distinct. It controls who can resolve an issue review verdict. It
keeps configured execution stages active.

## What Changed

- Added a nullable `review_policy` issue column. Null has the same
meaning as `anyone`. The migration does not backfill existing issues.
- Added shared create, update, response, and compact issue contracts for
`anyone`, `not_creator`, and `human_only`.
- Removed the unconditional agent self-approval rejection for
`in_review` issues.
- Added one reusable verdict-actor check for terminal status changes and
pending interaction accept or reject actions.
- Used the authenticated principal type for `human_only`. Agent keys and
run tokens remain agent principals.
- Used the latest transition into `in_review` to identify the requester
for `not_creator`.
- Added actionable 403 responses that name the policy, the allowed
actor, and the next step.
- Kept the configured execution-stage transition and signoff behavior.
- Added focused contract, helper, status-route, interaction-route, and
execution-stage regression tests.
- Updated the implementation specification for the new issue field.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/issue.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-review-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-stalled-review-decision-routes.test.ts
--reporter=dot` passed: 42 tests.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck` passed, including migration
numbering and safety checks.
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed.
- `pnpm run typecheck:build-gaps` passed across server, CLI, plugin
SDK/examples, plugin wiki, and UI.
- `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed.
- SecurityEngineer review approved the authenticated-principal checks
and accepted policy-relaxation tradeoff with no required changes.
- Greptile reviewed the latest head at 5/5 with zero inline comments or
follow-ups.
- The latest-head GitHub rollup passed build, typecheck,
server/workspace tests, serialized suites, canary, e2e, and external
security checks.

## Risks

- The migration adds one nullable text column. It has no default and no
backfill.
- `not_creator` reads the latest recorded transition into `in_review`.
It denies the verdict when it cannot identify the requester.
- Agents can change or relax `reviewPolicy` when they have issue write
access. This is intentional for this issue-level control.
- Null and `anyone` do not add a database query to the verdict path.
- Configured execution-stage checks still run after the issue-level
policy check.

> This work aligns with the completed "Agent Reviews and Approvals" and
"Enforced Outcomes" roadmap items. It does not add a new roadmap
capability.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window size
are not exposed to the agent. The run used reasoning, repository tools,
code execution, and GitHub CLI access.

## 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>
2026-08-05 23:12:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 72b509c895 Recognize delivered workspaces and reap terminal worktrees (#10908)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip separates workspace provisioning lifecycle from whether
the work was actually delivered.
> - Git ancestry alone cannot recognize squash merges or deliveries into
a branch other than the workspace base.
> - A merged pull request linked from a terminal issue is stronger
delivery evidence for those cases.
> - The read contract should expose that evidence without changing
persisted workspace schema.
> - Cleanup must remain conservative: terminal descendants, delivered
work, and no active run checkout are all required.
> - Reusing the existing cleanup primitives keeps service shutdown,
lease cleanup, activity logging, and archival behavior consistent.
> - Focused regression coverage locks in both the honest read signal and
the fail-closed reaper guards.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Execution workspace close-readiness payloads and terminal workspace
cleanup.

**Current behavior**

Delivered squash-merged or cross-branch workspaces can remain `active`
and report a permanent “not merged” warning because git ancestry does
not contain their original commits.

**Proposed behavior**

Read payloads distinguish PR-confirmed delivery, ancestry delivery,
unmerged work, and unknown state. Fully terminal delivered workspace
trees are archived only when no active run holds the checkout.

**Reason and benefit**

Operators and automation receive an honest delivery signal, while
shipped worktrees stop looking active forever and genuinely unmerged
work retains its warning.

**Breaking changes**

The workspace payload gains a derived field. Existing fields and
persistence remain unchanged; no database migration is required.

**What happened?**

A delivered workspace can remain `active` and warn that it is not merged
forever after its issue ships through a squash or cross-branch pull
request.

**Expected behavior**

Pull-request delivery should be represented honestly, and a fully
terminal delivered workspace should become cleanup-eligible when no run
holds its checkout.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Create an issue workspace with commits ahead of its configured base.
2. Deliver those commits with a squash merge or into a different target
branch.
3. Mark the source issue and descendants done, then read workspace close
readiness.

Before this change, the workspace remains active with a “not merged”
warning indefinitely.

## What Changed

- Added the derived `deliveryState` workspace contract: `merged_via_pr`,
`merged_by_ancestry`, `unmerged`, or `unknown`.
- Extracted a shared GitHub pull-request merge classifier and reused it
for merge confirmations and workspace delivery checks.
- Suppressed false ancestry warnings when a terminal issue has
ground-truth merged-PR evidence.
- Added an idempotent terminality reaper with descendant-terminal,
active-run, and delivered-work guards.
- Restricted PR delivery evidence to the source issue, then required
live merged state plus matching GitHub repository, head branch, and
current workspace HEAD; persisted status, stale PRs, lexical mentions,
inbound references, and descendant PRs cannot authorize cleanup.
- Preserved workspaces with modified or untracked files even when their
committed HEAD was delivered.
- Bounded both long-lived pull-request state caches to 1,000 entries
with oldest-entry eviction.
- Routed eligible workspaces through existing runtime shutdown, lease
cleanup, activity logging, and archival machinery with exclusive Git
index, HEAD, and branch-ref locks plus non-forced removal.
- Added regression coverage for delivery derivation, warning behavior,
reaper guards, scheduler wiring, and squash/cross-branch delivery.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/merged-pr-confirmation-sweep.test.ts
src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts --reporter=verbose`
— 63 passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts --reporter=verbose`
after review hardening — 43 passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/merged-pr-confirmation-sweep.test.ts
src/__tests__/external-objects-service.test.ts --reporter=dot` on the
final local head — 73 passed
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-busy.test.ts --reporter=verbose` — 15
passed
- `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm test:run` —
server 3,662 passed (4 skipped), UI 3,599 passed, CLI 327 passed, shared
415 passed, and skills catalog 20 passed; the aggregate DB stage ran
both source and built copies of one unrelated embedded-Postgres
migration test and both reached its 5-second timeout
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db exec vitest run
src/status-card-migrations.test.ts --reporter=verbose` — isolated
aggregate-timeout verification passed in 3.99 seconds
- `NODE_ENV=production pnpm build`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`

## Risks

The reaper intentionally fails closed when issue terminality,
pull-request state, git ancestry, or checkout ownership cannot be
proven. GitHub lookups can delay classification and cleanup but cannot
cause an unproven workspace to be archived. Automated terminal archival
holds exclusive Git index, HEAD, and branch-ref locks across validation
and removal, skips configured destructive hooks, and uses non-forced
removal so dirty writes fail closed. Reopening a source issue does not
restore an archived workspace; it emits an audit event so a human or
agent can re-provision explicitly.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID
or context-window size. Reasoning, tool use, repository editing, test
execution, and GitHub CLI access were enabled.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have 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>

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-08-05 16:34:04 -05:00