PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-28 12:04:41 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	f91a6e27c0	feat(issues): contain cross-issue agent side effects (#10837 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane that coordinates autonomous agent work. > - Agents need to collaborate on issues beyond their current assignment. > - Cross-issue comments and updates are useful, but an unbounded run can create cascading side effects. > - The control plane must preserve company-wide collaboration while containing each run's influence. > - Comment attribution must also show the responsible user and the acting agent in audits. > - This pull request adds run-bound cross-issue containment, attribution, and agent-class wake rules. > - The benefit is safer collaboration without restoring issue-assignee ownership restrictions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What existing behavior does this improve? Agent-authenticated issue comments, updates, reopen behavior, and assignee wake routing. Subsystem affected Cross-cutting: server routes and services, shared contracts, database schema and migration, and implementation documentation. Current behavior An authenticated agent can collaborate across company issues, but one heartbeat run has no per-run side-effect boundary. Comment records also do not persist the responsible user separately from the acting agent. Proposed behavior Require a valid heartbeat run for agent cross-issue comments and updates. Audit each attempt and cap a run at 20 cross-issue effects. Keep the cap in log-only mode until it automatically changes to enforcement at 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Preserve same-issue writes. Use agent-class wakes for agent comments. Keep same-run completion comments from reopening completed work. Record the responsible user on agent-authored comments and activity. Reason and benefit Agents can collaborate on other issues without an assignment gate, while each run has an atomic and inspectable side-effect limit. Operators can identify both the acting agent and the responsible user. Breaking changes After 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC, the twenty-first cross-issue comment or update from one heartbeat run returns a containment error. Agent cross-issue writes without valid run context are rejected. The migration is additive and backfills existing agent-authored comment attribution where the source data is available. ## What Changed - Added an atomic per-run counter for cross-issue agent comments and updates. - Added audit events for allowed and rejected cross-issue effects. - Added the automatic log-only to enforcement flip at 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. - Added responsible-user attribution to agent-authored comments, activity records, shared types, and validators. - Added an additive migration and migration coverage for existing comments. - Updated reopen, resume, and wake behavior so agent comments create agent-class wakes and same-run completion comments remain inert. - Updated the implementation specification and regression coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/cross-issue-influence-limit.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-attribution-audit-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts packages/db/src/issue-comment-on-behalf-migration.test.ts` — 97 tests passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed, including migration safety checks. - `pnpm test:run` — server batch: 3,364 passed and 2 skipped; UI batch: 3,504 passed. One unrelated CLI doctor test warned because this agent runtime injects static AWS credentials. - `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts` — 8 tests passed and confirmed the CLI failure was ambient-environment sensitive. - `pnpm build` — passed. ## Risks - The fixed enforcement timestamp changes production behavior automatically on 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Audit logs before that time provide rollout visibility. - The per-run counter serializes on the heartbeat-run row. This prevents concurrent attempts from racing past the cap but adds a small lock scope for cross-issue writes. - Existing comments can only be backfilled when their acting run or agent attribution is recoverable. > 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 GPT-5 in the Codex agent runtime. The runtime did not expose a context-window size. Reasoning, shell tools, code editing, and test 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 (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>	2026-08-04 13:17:49 -05:00
Devin Foley	ddbcf53e31	fix(server): refuse agent delegation cycles back to an open ancestor's creator (#10658 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents decompose work by creating child issues assigned to other agents > - When two agents each lack a capability the other assumed (e.g. neither can push to GitHub), each can "resolve" its blocker by delegating the same step to the other: A creates a child for B, B creates a grandchild back for A > - Nothing detects the cycle; the chain of blocked issues grows and no signal reaches the human who could actually fix the capability gap > - This pull request refuses agent-initiated child creation when the child's assignee is the creator of a still-open ancestor in the same chain — a mechanical, semantics-free cycle signal > - The benefit is that the hot-potato dies at creation time with an actionable error instead of growing a dead chain ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #10642 (write-time counterpart: #10648 refuses assignment to paused agents; the credential-gap preflight side is tracked separately in #10644) ## What Changed - `issueService.findOpenAncestorCreatedByAgent(parentIssueId, agentId, {maxDepth})`: bounded walk up the parent chain looking for a still-open (not done/cancelled) ancestor created by the given agent. - Agent-initiated issue creation with a parent (both the create-with-`parentId` route and `POST /issues/:id/children`) now refuses with a structured 409 (`code: delegation_cycle`, naming the ancestor) when the new child would be assigned to the agent that created a still-open ancestor: that agent delegated the work into this chain, so assigning it back is a cycle. The message states the alternatives — complete the work, leave the child unassigned, or escalate to a board operator. - Deliberately unaffected: human actors (deliberate re-routing is their call), closed ancestors (re-engaging the creator of finished work is normal), and accepted-plan decomposition (its children come from a human-approved plan). ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-assignee-invokability-routes.test.ts` — cycle refused with 409 and no create call; the same child allowed when no open ancestor matches; board actors never consult the guard. - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — new embedded-Postgres coverage: ancestor found through the chain, closed ancestors ignored, depth bound honored (114 total). - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-create-deduplication-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` — unchanged (79). - `cd server && pnpm run typecheck`. ## Risks - Low-to-moderate: a new 409 for a creation shape that previously succeeded. The blocked shape (agent assigns new work to the creator of an open ancestor) is the cycle signature; the legitimate "hand a subtask to the parent's assignee" pattern is unaffected because it keys on assignee, not creator. Watchdog and plan-decomposition flows are exempt or unaffected as described. - The walk adds at most `maxDepth` (10) single-row lookups per agent child creation with an assignee. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended thinking, agentic tool use. No other models involved. ## 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	2026-08-01 17:43:09 -07:00
Devin Foley	ada47be764	fix(server): refuse agent-initiated issue assignment to paused agents (#10648 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents can create and assign issues to other agents, and commonly escalate to their org-chart manager (`reports_to`) when they hit something outside their authority > - Issue assignment already refuses terminated and pending-approval assignees, but accepts paused assignees from any actor > - A paused agent never runs, so agent-initiated escalations to a paused manager become invisible dead letters — accepted silently, never picked up, never surfaced > - This pull request refuses paused assignees when the assigning actor is an agent, at the single normalization helper all four assignment paths flow through > - The benefit is that agent-routed work can no longer silently vanish into a paused agent's queue ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #10641 ## What Changed - `normalizeIssueAssigneeAgentReference` (used by issue create, both child-create routes, and issue update) now throws a 409 when an agent actor assigns to a paused agent, with a message naming the alternatives: assign an invokable agent, leave the issue unassigned, or escalate to a board operator. - Board/user actors are unchanged and may still assign to paused agents deliberately — the pause state is visible in the UI, and staging work for a later unpause is a legitimate workflow. Terminated / pending-approval / invalid-org-chain refusals are unchanged for all actors. - This matches the existing precedent for watchdogs ("Cannot assign watchdog to an agent that is not invokable") using the same conflict-error shape. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issue-assignee-invokability-routes.test.ts` — new coverage: agent PATCH → paused assignee 409 (no update call), agent child-create → paused assignee 409 (no create call), agent assignment to an invokable agent still 200, board assignment to a paused agent still 200. - Neighboring suites unchanged: `issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes`, `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes`, `issue-create-deduplication-routes`, `issue-watchdogs-routes` (97 tests). - `cd server && pnpm run typecheck`. ## Risks - Low. The only behavior change is a new 409 for agent actors assigning to paused agents — previously a silent dead-letter. Agents that relied on this (escalation flows) now get an actionable error instead; human workflows are untouched. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended thinking, agentic tool use. No other models involved. ## 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	2026-08-01 15:05:16 -07:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

DottaandPaperclip

f91a6e27c0

feat(issues): contain cross-issue agent side effects (#10837 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the control plane that coordinates autonomous agent
work.
> - Agents need to collaborate on issues beyond their current
assignment.
> - Cross-issue comments and updates are useful, but an unbounded run
can create cascading side effects.
> - The control plane must preserve company-wide collaboration while
containing each run's influence.
> - Comment attribution must also show the responsible user and the
acting agent in audits.
> - This pull request adds run-bound cross-issue containment,
attribution, and agent-class wake rules.
> - The benefit is safer collaboration without restoring issue-assignee
ownership restrictions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Agent-authenticated issue comments, updates, reopen behavior, and
assignee wake routing.

**Subsystem affected**

Cross-cutting: server routes and services, shared contracts, database
schema and migration, and implementation documentation.

**Current behavior**

An authenticated agent can collaborate across company issues, but one
heartbeat run has no per-run side-effect boundary. Comment records also
do not persist the responsible user separately from the acting agent.

**Proposed behavior**

Require a valid heartbeat run for agent cross-issue comments and
updates. Audit each attempt and cap a run at 20 cross-issue effects.
Keep the cap in log-only mode until it automatically changes to
enforcement at 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Preserve same-issue writes. Use
agent-class wakes for agent comments. Keep same-run completion comments
from reopening completed work. Record the responsible user on
agent-authored comments and activity.

**Reason and benefit**

Agents can collaborate on other issues without an assignment gate, while
each run has an atomic and inspectable side-effect limit. Operators can
identify both the acting agent and the responsible user.

**Breaking changes**

After 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC, the twenty-first cross-issue comment or
update from one heartbeat run returns a containment error. Agent
cross-issue writes without valid run context are rejected. The migration
is additive and backfills existing agent-authored comment attribution
where the source data is available.

## What Changed

- Added an atomic per-run counter for cross-issue agent comments and
updates.
- Added audit events for allowed and rejected cross-issue effects.
- Added the automatic log-only to enforcement flip at 2026-08-11 00:00
UTC.
- Added responsible-user attribution to agent-authored comments,
activity records, shared types, and validators.
- Added an additive migration and migration coverage for existing
comments.
- Updated reopen, resume, and wake behavior so agent comments create
agent-class wakes and same-run completion comments remain inert.
- Updated the implementation specification and regression coverage.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/cross-issue-influence-limit.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-attribution-audit-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-reopen-routes.test.ts
packages/db/src/issue-comment-on-behalf-migration.test.ts` — 97 tests
passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed, including migration safety checks.
- `pnpm test:run` — server batch: 3,364 passed and 2 skipped; UI batch:
3,504 passed. One unrelated CLI doctor test warned because this agent
runtime injects static AWS credentials.
- `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY pnpm exec vitest
run cli/src/__tests__/secrets.test.ts` — 8 tests passed and confirmed
the CLI failure was ambient-environment sensitive.
- `pnpm build` — passed.

## Risks

- The fixed enforcement timestamp changes production behavior
automatically on 2026-08-11 00:00 UTC. Audit logs before that time
provide rollout visibility.
- The per-run counter serializes on the heartbeat-run row. This prevents
concurrent attempts from racing past the cap but adds a small lock scope
for cross-issue writes.
- Existing comments can only be backfilled when their acting run or
agent attribution is recoverable.

> 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 GPT-5 in the Codex agent runtime. The runtime did not expose a
context-window size. Reasoning, shell tools, code editing, and test
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 (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>

2026-08-04 13:17:49 -05:00

Devin Foley

ddbcf53e31

fix(server): refuse agent delegation cycles back to an open ancestor's creator (#10658 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents decompose work by creating child issues assigned to other
agents
> - When two agents each lack a capability the other assumed (e.g.
neither can push to GitHub), each can "resolve" its blocker by
delegating the same step to the other: A creates a child for B, B
creates a grandchild back for A
> - Nothing detects the cycle; the chain of blocked issues grows and no
signal reaches the human who could actually fix the capability gap
> - This pull request refuses agent-initiated child creation when the
child's assignee is the creator of a still-open ancestor in the same
chain — a mechanical, semantics-free cycle signal
> - The benefit is that the hot-potato dies at creation time with an
actionable error instead of growing a dead chain

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #10642 (write-time counterpart: #10648 refuses assignment to
paused agents; the credential-gap *preflight* side is tracked separately
in #10644)

## What Changed

- `issueService.findOpenAncestorCreatedByAgent(parentIssueId, agentId,
{maxDepth})`: bounded walk up the parent chain looking for a still-open
(not done/cancelled) ancestor created by the given agent.
- Agent-initiated issue creation with a parent (both the
create-with-`parentId` route and `POST /issues/:id/children`) now
refuses with a structured 409 (`code: delegation_cycle`, naming the
ancestor) when the new child would be assigned to the agent that created
a still-open ancestor: that agent delegated the work into this chain, so
assigning it back is a cycle. The message states the alternatives —
complete the work, leave the child unassigned, or escalate to a board
operator.
- Deliberately unaffected: human actors (deliberate re-routing is their
call), closed ancestors (re-engaging the creator of finished work is
normal), and accepted-plan decomposition (its children come from a
human-approved plan).

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-assignee-invokability-routes.test.ts` — cycle
refused with 409 and no create call; the same child allowed when no open
ancestor matches; board actors never consult the guard.
- `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — new
embedded-Postgres coverage: ancestor found through the chain, closed
ancestors ignored, depth bound honored (114 total).
- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-create-deduplication-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes.test.ts` —
unchanged (79).
- `cd server && pnpm run typecheck`.

## Risks

- Low-to-moderate: a new 409 for a creation shape that previously
succeeded. The blocked shape (agent assigns new work to the creator of
an open ancestor) is the cycle signature; the legitimate "hand a subtask
to the parent's assignee" pattern is unaffected because it keys on
assignee, not creator. Watchdog and plan-decomposition flows are exempt
or unaffected as described.
- The walk adds at most `maxDepth` (10) single-row lookups per agent
child creation with an assignee.

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended
thinking, agentic tool use. No other models involved.

## 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

2026-08-01 17:43:09 -07:00

Devin Foley

ada47be764

fix(server): refuse agent-initiated issue assignment to paused agents (#10648 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents can create and assign issues to other agents, and commonly
escalate to their org-chart manager (`reports_to`) when they hit
something outside their authority
> - Issue assignment already refuses terminated and pending-approval
assignees, but accepts paused assignees from any actor
> - A paused agent never runs, so agent-initiated escalations to a
paused manager become invisible dead letters — accepted silently, never
picked up, never surfaced
> - This pull request refuses paused assignees when the assigning actor
is an agent, at the single normalization helper all four assignment
paths flow through
> - The benefit is that agent-routed work can no longer silently vanish
into a paused agent's queue

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Fixes #10641

## What Changed

- `normalizeIssueAssigneeAgentReference` (used by issue create, both
child-create routes, and issue update) now throws a 409 when an
**agent** actor assigns to a **paused** agent, with a message naming the
alternatives: assign an invokable agent, leave the issue unassigned, or
escalate to a board operator.
- Board/user actors are unchanged and may still assign to paused agents
deliberately — the pause state is visible in the UI, and staging work
for a later unpause is a legitimate workflow. Terminated /
pending-approval / invalid-org-chain refusals are unchanged for all
actors.
- This matches the existing precedent for watchdogs ("Cannot assign
watchdog to an agent that is not invokable") using the same
conflict-error shape.

## Verification

- `pnpm vitest run
server/src/__tests__/issue-assignee-invokability-routes.test.ts` — new
coverage: agent PATCH → paused assignee 409 (no update call), agent
child-create → paused assignee 409 (no create call), agent assignment to
an invokable agent still 200, board assignment to a paused agent still
200.
- Neighboring suites unchanged: `issue-update-comment-wakeup-routes`,
`issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes`,
`issue-create-deduplication-routes`, `issue-watchdogs-routes` (97
tests).
- `cd server && pnpm run typecheck`.

## Risks

- Low. The only behavior change is a new 409 for agent actors assigning
to paused agents — previously a silent dead-letter. Agents that relied
on this (escalation flows) now get an actionable error instead; human
workflows are untouched.

## Model Used

Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code — extended
thinking, agentic tool use. No other models involved.

## 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

2026-08-01 15:05:16 -07:00