Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 0e15c92073 feat(skills): make managed content independent of web-server disk (#18334)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agents use installed skills and exact version pins during execution.
> - Managed skills still depended on mutable directories on the web
server.
> - A replacement server could lose acknowledged edits or remove an
unassigned skill whose directory was absent.
> - This pull request makes immutable versions the authority for managed
content and installed repository reads.
> - The server can rebuild delivery files from durable content after
replacement.
> - This establishes skills readiness for ephemeral web servers. General
server draining and workspace recovery remain separate work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

Skills services, shared contracts, database receipts, Skill Studio, and
runtime delivery.

**Problem or motivation**

A fresh web server must discover, read, edit, and deliver protected
installed skills using the same database, object storage, secrets, and
supported application artifacts. It must not need its predecessor's
files or process memory.

**Proposed solution**

Use `managed` ownership with a null source locator. Read installed
content by immutable version. Prepare packages before a short
publication transaction. Persist execution selections before
materialization. Recover exact pinned runtime assets and reject deletion
while active or recovering pins exist.

**Alternatives considered**

Reconstructing a mutable installed directory preserves the old
source-of-truth ambiguity. Permanent dual writes create two competing
authorities. This change uses one managed model after a bounded legacy
conversion.

**Roadmap alignment**

This improves the existing Skills Manager, Studio, version history, and
Cloud execution capabilities. The maintainer supplied the implementation
contract. This does not add a separate skills product or deploy fleet
changes.

Related work: #18082 supplies immutable package storage. #17273
addresses edits outside the API for linked local skills; this PR keeps
that source category separate. #2648 is a closed earlier
ephemeral-filesystem proposal.

## What Changed

- Add managed ownership and focused content publication and execution
materialization modules. Keep the archive format and package storage
tables.
- Publish managed create, save, delete, fork, rename, restore, and
catalog content with version checks. Add durable create receipts.
Preserve file-save receipt responses.
- Return file version identities. Keep Studio drafts after a conflict
and provide an explicit reload action. A delayed reload cannot overwrite
newer typing or navigation.
- Persist exact runtime selections, including empty selections. Rebuild
pinned assets and verify their admitted digests on a replacement server.
- Preserve source access on forks and disconnected copies. Keep the
existing workspace policy category for managed skills.
- Add bounded conversion, eligibility, and independent verification
phases. Load persisted Cloud configuration in the standalone CLI without
seeding or changing it. Reject partial current versions against
installed inventories; recover only complete saved content or the exact
source. Document storage migration blockers and the compatible rollback
floor.
- Add separate-process PostgreSQL/S3 qualification and update domain,
retention, policy, and UI regressions.
- Pass the plugin worker manager into Studio execution, admit restricted
`skill_test` mode through native Runner contracts, and preserve admitted
scope across native and REST tools. Native tests cannot create ordinary
tasks, browse company data, or use external tools.
- Select the exact durable Studio revision even when unassigned or Beta
skills is off. Persist Studio output and audit atomically with native
task completion, preserving the result on replay.

## Verification

- Final revision `13e8af480b88ba6fea5737bac4bd81104d604792` passed full
CI: all 49 workflow jobs completed successfully ([run
41127396098](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41127396098)).
This includes typecheck, test suites, Runner checks, browser checks and
build. Greptile review 15 is 5/5 on that same revision, with zero
unresolved threads. The PR is ready for review.
- Local workspace typecheck and build passed after integrating master.
Focused checks passed: 33 execution/completion cases, 52 Runner HTTP
cases, 16 managed-content cases, 17 Studio cases, the new real-process
CLI regression, map checks and UI token gates. The CLI regression proves
inspection does not seed missing Cloud configuration. Server typecheck
passed after that fix.
- The independent-process PostgreSQL/S3 matrix passed through normal
HTTP skill routes. It covers A → B → C replacement, lost commit
responses, upload crashes, concurrent saves, binary contents and
executable delivery. Metadata listing and warm selected delivery retain
zero object downloads. Local timing measurements are recorded; they do
not establish hosted latency.
- Hosted A → B → C passed on the owned disposable test tenant with
external Postgres, S3 and a real remote Paperclip Computer. Predecessor
temporary homes were absent. C read and executed B's acknowledged
managed save. New runs used repository v1 while v2 was installed. Hashes
matched an independently checked exact upstream commit.
- Compatible image rollback to `6518b323` passed. Studio retained the
unassigned fork's C save. A fresh remote run executed the newer managed
content and historical repository pin. The actual shell event confirmed
expected hashes, stdout, exit 0 and mode 0555.
- Runtime candidate `9200e3fcb4` deployed successfully ([Cloud run
41124147876](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-cloud/actions/runs/41124147876)).
The final Studio test delivered only the unassigned fork's exact v3,
executed its script and persisted a successful output snapshot.
Independent command-event inspection confirmed all three hashes, stdout,
exit 0 and mode 0555. All 14 installations were version-backed.
Independent verification checked all 25 versions: 23 remote objects, two
bundled database snapshots, zero blockers.
- The deployed image is `9200e3fcb4`. Later master integration, the
client-only delayed-reload draft guard and the CLI bootstrap have
separate automated proof. The CLI bootstrap was also exercised against
the tenant's stored configuration and storage through the same read-only
services. This PR does not claim that the deployed image is the final PR
revision.
- Live Studio checks exposed worker wiring, admission, access scope,
exact selection and completion-publication gaps. They are fixed. Failed
attempts remain in the evidence. The full local suite exceeded 80
minutes under host contention and was stopped. Later combined/isolated
local attempts also timed out; they are not counted as passes. Full CI
covers the integrated suites. Earlier CI found an obsolete restart-scope
fixture, which was corrected and passed all 52 HTTP cases.
- Reproduction and migration:
[`doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md`](doc/skill-ephemeral-web-servers.md).
Source revisions, deployments, versions, run IDs, hashes and failure
history:
[`doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md`](doc/plans/2026-10-30-ephemeral-web-skills.md).

## Risks

- Legacy conversion requires stopped admission and retired
filesystem-authoritative writers. Pre-conversion binaries are not
supported rollback targets afterward.
- Cloud readiness requires remote object storage. Local provider
receipts and provider mismatches remain blockers until objects are
copied and verified.
- Linked local sources retain filesystem semantics and are outside the
cloud guarantee.
- Cold reads still fetch the existing archive format. Warm runtime
preparation retains the verified-cache path.
- Bundled reconciliation preserves an installed head. Existing release
snapshots remain selectable. An older server must not replace a newer
head with its shipped files.
- No production volumes, fleet defaults, or general deployment
coordination change in this PR.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools, code
execution, and browser use. The exact backend model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. No subagents were
used.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [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>
2026-10-30 16:18:27 -05:00
Dotta 4a641d0980 fix(ui): default human task replies to the latest assigning agent (#15594)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks let agents ask a person for input.
> - The reply composer needs a useful default recipient.
> - A recent comment does not identify the agent that assigned the task.
> - The old fallback can select the person who is writing the reply.
> - This change uses the latest agent assignment and keeps manual
choices.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**
When an agent assigns a task to a person, the reply composer can select
that person or a different commenter. A data refresh can also replace a
manual selection.

**Expected behavior**
For a task assigned to the current person, select the latest agent that
assigned it to them. If no such assignment exists, use the latest other
commenter. If neither exists, leave the recipient empty. Keep explicit
choices during refreshes.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Have agent Alpha assign a task to a person.
2. Assign it to agent Beta, then have Beta assign it to the same person.
3. Open the task as that person.
4. Check that the reply composer selects Beta.
5. Select another recipient. Refresh task data. Check that the selection
stays.

Related work: #15091 shares task composer controls. This change fixes
recipient defaults.

## What Changed

- Read real assignment changes from REST and native runner task
activity, in time order.
- Record human assignee fields in native create and reassign activity.
- Ignore unchanged assignment fields and assignments to other people.
- Use the assigning agent before comment hints for human-owned tasks.
- Connect the suggestion to current and classic task composers and
pipeline replies.
- Keep manual selections when suggestions change.
- Add regression tests and document the fallback.
- Use tasks with no assignee in the attachment receipt tests. This keeps
the tests on the comment route. Dismiss announcements through the real
UI.
- Record human and agent assignees in REST creation receipts. Include
child creation in the assignment history resolver.

## Verification

- Focused tests cover assignment order, creation, other recipients,
unchanged fields, fallback, and manual selections.
- Browser fixture uses the real composer and assignment resolver. It
selects Beta and keeps a manual human selection after history refresh.
- Passed: 223 focused tests across four suites.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`.
- Passed: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui build`.
- Passed: `pnpm check:token-gates`.
- The initial CI run passed full build, typecheck, Rust, unit tests and
seven E2E shards. The attachment shard exposed tests that relied on the
old self-selection default. The tests now select the recipient
explicitly.
- Native assignment regression tests and resolver tests pass: 40 tests.
- Attachment E2E suite: 10 passed; one page-load timing failure passed
on an isolated rerun. All 11 cases passed across the suite and rerun.
- Previous full CI passed at cc7ed05. New CI must pass on the current
head.
- Latest local checks: 16 resolver tests and 7 workspace policy tests
pass. REST creation audit tests cover both creation routes.
- The latest browser check could not start. The UI build exceeded the
local memory limit (exit 137). Full typecheck, tests, build, and browser
checks will run in CI.

## Risks

- Old activity rows without previous assignment values cannot prove a
reassignment. They use the comment fallback.
- An empty fallback requires the person to choose a recipient or use the
existing no-assignee flow.
- No database or API schema changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The session does not expose an exact model build or
context window. Used code editing, shell tools, tests, and browser
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
- [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


Final validation at f83f2f6: 55 checks passed. Two optional Storybook
checks were skipped. All browser shards passed. Both review threads are
resolved. Classic attachment tests use the real no-assignee
confirmation.
2026-10-13 00:56:15 -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