PaperClipAI

Jannik/PaperClipAI

0 Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-27 02:44:50 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	35bd7f6059	Reduce encrypted event retries and GitHub run-query transfer (#17251 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its Cloud connector delivers encrypted GitHub events to an instance. > - One failed inner event currently rejects the whole authenticated batch. > - Healthy events then remain unacknowledged and are downloaded again. > - GitHub response and check reconciliation also reads full run records when it needs only ownership and status. > - This pull request isolates inner failures and narrows those run projections. > - Valid events can finish while failed events remain available for recovery. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? An inner App event encrypted with an unavailable key causes `leaseEvents` to reject the complete batch. No sibling can finish or acknowledge. Repeated retries download the same encrypted payloads. Separately, GitHub response and check reads load prompts, runtime profiles, results, and log excerpts that their callers do not use. Expected behavior Authenticate the outer batch and lease before handling individual events. Process valid siblings independently. Retain failed events without acknowledging them. Read only the current run fields needed for response ownership and status checks. Steps to reproduce 1. Seal one event for an old instance key and another for the current key. 2. Put both events in a correctly authenticated outer lease. 3. Observe that the old client rejects the whole lease. 4. With this change, the valid event processes, the failed ID is reported locally, and only completed events acknowledge. No public issue exists. The change does not add a provider integration or duplicate a roadmap feature. ## What Changed - Keep outer authentication, environment checks, and lease binding strict. - Isolate inner decryption and route-binding failures. Return their authenticated IDs only to the local poller and count them as failures. - Leave failed events unacknowledged in the broker. Continue processing and acknowledging healthy and duplicate siblings. - Read only run identity, status, and required request context for GitHub responses. Read only run ID and status for check reconciliation. - Cover stale keys, swapped routes, invalid outer bindings, all-failed batches, large unused run payloads, and cross-company/task refusals. ## Verification - Connector cryptography suite: 47 tests passed. - Final connector suite: 50 tests passed, including cryptography and three real PostgreSQL connection-event tests. These cover acknowledgment isolation, all-failed batches, and the exact safe warning fields. - GitHub workflow regression suite after the master refresh: 307 tests passed, including the large-payload/company/task test (1,084 unrelated tests skipped by the selection). - Server typecheck passed after the final source changes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the latest conflict-free master refresh. - The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped when the branch was refreshed; it has no complete passing result. All CI gates passed on the final commit, including general and serialized server suites, runner verification, build, typecheck, and end-to-end tests. Apex is 5/5 with all review comments resolved. The last change removes source comments and expands docs; both edited TypeScript files emit identical JavaScript before and after that change. - A read-only sample compared full run records with the new field sets: response data decreased by about 96%, and check data by over 99%. This is serialized query output, not a claim of realized billing savings or CPU reduction. - An initial database test setup failed because the local dependency install omitted native-library symlinks. The package's standard setup script repaired them. The unchanged test timeout then passed. - Added lines checked for credentials, customer data, private links, and internal issue references. ## Risks Failed inner events remain pending and retry under the broker's existing lease and retention policy. This change does not recover a lost original private key or introduce a dead-letter deletion path. Outer authentication failures still reject the complete batch. Run projections must retain request provenance and task binding fields. Existing predicates, ordering, identity validation, and publication authority remain unchanged. The change has no schema migration and adds no background timer or new provider call. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and shell/GitHub CLI tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used with version and capability details - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug report 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 - [x] Focused local regressions and all CI gates pass - [x] I have added and updated tests - [x] I have updated relevant documentation - [x] I have 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>	2026-10-22 17:40:29 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip	a8b652b085	fix(github): preserve review delivery through reconnect (#16259 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub review bots turn authorized repository events into agent tasks and publish the result on the pull request. > - Cloud Apps send callbacks through a relay, but the direct callback recovery worker reported that URL as broken. > - Reconnecting the same App then prevented a new authorized publication from updating its existing working comment. > - Report-only runs could also produce an action-required check when no complete assessment was available. > - This pull request preserves comment identity across reconnects, verifies fresh signed delivery after repair, and keeps report-only results neutral. > - Users can receive the review without changing repository access or making an advisory bot block their pull request. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description What happened? A review could be saved in Paperclip while GitHub kept showing “Working on this…”. A same-App reconnect changed the runtime generation and the existing response receipt then failed with “GitHub response binding changed”. Cloud callback recovery also compared the relay URL with a direct tenant URL. An incomplete or failed report-only run could produce an action-required check. Expected behavior A fresh authorized attempt updates the same App-owned comment after reconnect. Stale attempts and revoked people remain denied. Cloud relay delivery does not produce a direct-callback mismatch. Report-only checks remain neutral and explain incomplete work honestly. Steps to reproduce 1. Accept a GitHub request and publish its working comment. 2. Reconnect the same App before the agent publishes its result. 3. Submit the result and inspect the working comment and check. 4. Separately, let a report-only run end without an assessment and inspect its check conclusion. Related: #16138 addresses the separate classification of local authorization errors as provider credential failures. This change fixes the response binding and report-only paths themselves. ## What Changed - Bind durable response comments to the App and agent. Keep per-attempt runtime generation checks and provider comment ownership checks, including legacy receipts. - Exclude Cloud-managed Apps from the direct webhook recovery scan and its stale callback-mismatch warning. The Cloud inbox owns relay retries. - Let a fresh authenticated event from the bound installation verify webhook delivery after repair. Keep signature, runtime epoch, installation, and credential lease checks. - Keep report-only assessment and terminal-run checks neutral. Preserve incomplete/error text and gated-review behavior. - Add integration regressions for reconnect races, legacy comments, failed runs, Cloud recovery, and foreign or forged webhook traffic. Update connector documentation. - Correct the assigned-tool search guidance to name the actual input fields (`offset` and `schemaOffset`) and show valid arguments. The failed automatic review had an input-schema rejection before tool execution; this clarifies recovery without expanding tool access. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. - GitHub policy and integration suite: 291 tests passed (`vitest run server/src/services/chat-github-review-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'GitHub\|github'`). - The report-only policy regression failed before the fix and passed after it. - `pnpm build` passed. - Assigned tool discovery: 24 tests passed. Its guidance now maps returned pagination offsets to the correct input fields and tells the model to omit unused optional fields. - Full `pnpm test:run` is running. It encountered a 15-second timeout in the unrelated authenticated Workspace calendar-write test. That test passed on one isolated rerun. - After the review-requested module extraction, server typecheck and both direct/Cloud recovery activity integration checks passed. - All 55 non-skipped CI checks passed for `32e690279d847e44a6946b6c7cfb110fb11aff79`. Greptile scored that commit 5/5 with no unresolved findings. Live staging publication verification follows deployment. ## Risks - A durable response can now survive a same-App reconnect. Fresh authorization, runtime generation checks for each publication attempt, App ownership, and the publication lease still fence writes. - Report-only failures intentionally become neutral. The check still reports the failure; it does not claim a complete assessment. - Cloud-managed callbacks rely on their existing durable relay inbox. The direct callback recovery worker remains unchanged for direct installations. - No schema migration or permission expansion. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and browser verification. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-13 22:24:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	8813a50105	feat: run GitHub review bots through Paperclip agents (#13717 ) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work as tasks and runs. > - GitHub chat brings repository conversations into those tasks. > - A review bot needs the assigned agent, its authority, and governed provider tools. > - The existing channel connection did not supply that review workflow or a complete setup journey. > - This pull request adds GitHub App setup, account access, event prompts, task-bound review tools, and exact-commit checks. > - Operators can inspect each review through the same task, run, and activity systems. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Subsystem affected GitHub chat, governed connection tools, task execution, shared/database contracts, and connector setup UI. Problem or motivation Operators need a GitHub review bot that runs their assigned Paperclip agent. Mentions and PR events must preserve task ownership and requester authority. Provider publication must use the bot App identity and enforce the configured permissions. Proposed solution Extend the existing GitHub chat connector with resumable App onboarding, linked-member and sponsored-guest access, editable event prompts, and governed review operations. Validate structured assessments on the server and compute a stable Paperclip Review check for the exact head commit. Alternatives considered A separate review scheduler would duplicate Paperclip execution and permissions. Reusing personal GitHub credentials would change the bot identity and credential boundary. Roadmap alignment This extends the existing Connected Apps and governed-tool infrastructure. The project owner requested and approved this design. Related PR #8645 imports external Codex review feedback; this change runs an assigned Paperclip agent and publishes its results through the existing chat connector. ## What Changed - Include the current Paperclip instance origin in the copied setup prompt. Storybook uses its configured Paperclip origin; callback parameters and URL credentials are excluded. - Add a Claude/Codex copy button in the real setup and Storybook opening step. Its detailed prompt asks four setup questions and guides embedded-browser setup, verification, and optional required checks. Clipboard failure exposes selectable instructions. - Add a tutorial that explains why App installation, review scheduling, and required checks are separate choices. - Add manifest registration, an existing-App path, separate installation and repository selection, repository refresh, and explicit account confirmation. - Add low-trust agent guidance, effective capability verification, member selection, and explicit restricted guests with a sponsor. - Add configurable PR events, prompts, repository overrides, rating thresholds, and separate formal-review permissions. - Give the assigned agent governed App tools to read PRs, comment, begin an assessment, submit findings, and optionally submit a formal review. - Bind review history, root PR events, and inline replies to ordinary tasks. Deduplicate deliveries/findings and reject stale publication. - Link check Details to the underlying task on the current trusted hostname, or to Reviews before task creation. - Add schema migration 0283, API contracts, production UI, and 49 interactive Storybook states. - Repair local lease recovery. Keep the Cloud Dockerfile identical to master; no provider-pack layer or runtime-default environment variable is added. - Retry only rolled-back wake-admission transactions after transient endpoint-lock contention. A deterministic held-lock regression proves one accepted wake. ## Verification - Current head: `7ba761fe007bb798400d3e62346fa964f607f0f8`, rebased on master `d9b3a5653e41f2ee5a1345b97c86a238f7a5c8e9`. Dockerfile has zero diff against master. Final workspace typecheck and build passed. The new PostgreSQL migration regression passed and preserves existing relation and constraint identities after replay. - Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5. There are zero unresolved review threads and no merge conflicts. - All current-head checks are green: 54 passed and two conditional Storybook jobs skipped. This includes complete server/workspace test suites, build, typechecks, policy checks, Runner suites, browser suites, and security status. One timing-sensitive callback-ordering test passed in isolation and its CI shard passed one retry. The duplicate local full-suite run was stopped after CI completed; it is not counted as a local full-suite pass. - Before the final Slack rebase and migration renumbering, 186 focused GitHub tests, 14 native bootstrap cases, token gates, and Storybook build passed. The final rebase retained the new Slack communication guidance. - The embedded-browser setup test copied the full detailed prompt, including the configured Paperclip instance URL. Desktop and narrow layouts were checked. Component tests cover successful copying and clipboard failure with selectable text and retry. - Live local and hosted GitHub acceptance evidence refers to application revision `cb703ac959876a07ebf3d7a295847f9f351eb6fc`. Real agent tasks exercised issue mentions, automatic PR reviews, inline findings, repeated mentions, task continuation, and failing-to-passing checks after a push. The Storybook agent generated, built, and browser-rendered pages; missing acceptance text failed, matching text passed, and broken JSX produced an incomplete result. - Live cases also covered independently disabled push events, prompt injection, duplicate signed deliveries, rapid pushes, stale-result rejection, finding deduplication, and restart recovery. Formal reviews were denied while disabled and published only after explicit enablement. Check Details links pointed to the underlying task on the trusted hostname. - Those hosted native Claude runs used the provider-pack layer now removed from this PR. They do not prove native Claude works on the standard Cloud image. A replacement hosted native Codex run is not yet verified: the disposable QA tenant has only an Anthropic AI connection. No new staging or production deployment was made for the packaging removal. - Required-check merge enforcement could not be tested because the private disposable repository's GitHub plan rejected the rules configuration. Published success/failure/incomplete check states were verified directly. ## Risks - Latest master allocated migration 0282 to Slack. The GitHub migration is regenerated as 0283 with replay-safe table/index/constraint creation; a PostgreSQL regression verifies existing relations and constraints are preserved. Existing preview tenants remain subject to the fleet migration-history compatibility preflight; no bypass is introduced. - Migration 0283 adds company-scoped configuration, registration, review, and publication records. Existing connections retain their behavior until reviews/tools are enabled. - Signed webhooks and expiring registration state remain required. Hosted installations also need the companion narrow Cloud gateway exemptions. - Agent assessments can be incomplete or wrong. The server enforces coverage/result structure, current-head publication, rating policy, and separate formal-review permission; it does not replace code-review judgment. - No Cloud image packaging changes are included. Remote native ACPX/Claude and OpenCode retain their existing operator-supplied provider-pack prerequisite. Native Codex and Codex with managed MCP tools do not require that pack. Earlier staging deployment evidence refers to its stated revision, not this packaging-removal head. Production rollout and merging remain outside this change. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository, code execution, API, and embedded-browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size were not exposed by the environment. ## 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>	2026-09-21 14:41:19 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Devin FoleyandPaperclip

35bd7f6059

Reduce encrypted event retries and GitHub run-query transfer (#17251 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its Cloud connector delivers encrypted GitHub events to an instance.
> - One failed inner event currently rejects the whole authenticated
batch.
> - Healthy events then remain unacknowledged and are downloaded again.
> - GitHub response and check reconciliation also reads full run records
when it needs only ownership and status.
> - This pull request isolates inner failures and narrows those run
projections.
> - Valid events can finish while failed events remain available for
recovery.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

An inner App event encrypted with an unavailable key causes
`leaseEvents` to reject the complete batch. No sibling can finish or
acknowledge. Repeated retries download the same encrypted payloads.
Separately, GitHub response and check reads load prompts, runtime
profiles, results, and log excerpts that their callers do not use.

**Expected behavior**

Authenticate the outer batch and lease before handling individual
events. Process valid siblings independently. Retain failed events
without acknowledging them. Read only the current run fields needed for
response ownership and status checks.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Seal one event for an old instance key and another for the current
key.
2. Put both events in a correctly authenticated outer lease.
3. Observe that the old client rejects the whole lease.
4. With this change, the valid event processes, the failed ID is
reported locally, and only completed events acknowledge.

No public issue exists. The change does not add a provider integration
or duplicate a roadmap feature.

## What Changed

- Keep outer authentication, environment checks, and lease binding
strict.
- Isolate inner decryption and route-binding failures. Return their
authenticated IDs only to the local poller and count them as failures.
- Leave failed events unacknowledged in the broker. Continue processing
and acknowledging healthy and duplicate siblings.
- Read only run identity, status, and required request context for
GitHub responses. Read only run ID and status for check reconciliation.
- Cover stale keys, swapped routes, invalid outer bindings, all-failed
batches, large unused run payloads, and cross-company/task refusals.

## Verification

- Connector cryptography suite: 47 tests passed.
- Final connector suite: 50 tests passed, including cryptography and
three real PostgreSQL connection-event tests. These cover acknowledgment
isolation, all-failed batches, and the exact safe warning fields.
- GitHub workflow regression suite after the master refresh: 307 tests
passed, including the large-payload/company/task test (1,084 unrelated
tests skipped by the selection).
- Server typecheck passed after the final source changes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after the latest
conflict-free master refresh.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` was stopped when the branch was
refreshed; it has no complete passing result. All CI gates passed on the
final commit, including general and serialized server suites, runner
verification, build, typecheck, and end-to-end tests. Apex is 5/5 with
all review comments resolved. The last change removes source comments
and expands docs; both edited TypeScript files emit identical JavaScript
before and after that change.
- A read-only sample compared full run records with the new field sets:
response data decreased by about 96%, and check data by over 99%. This
is serialized query output, not a claim of realized billing savings or
CPU reduction.
- An initial database test setup failed because the local dependency
install omitted native-library symlinks. The package's standard setup
script repaired them. The unchanged test timeout then passed.
- Added lines checked for credentials, customer data, private links, and
internal issue references.

## Risks

Failed inner events remain pending and retry under the broker's existing
lease and retention policy. This change does not recover a lost original
private key or introduce a dead-letter deletion path. Outer
authentication failures still reject the complete batch.

Run projections must retain request provenance and task binding fields.
Existing predicates, ordering, identity validation, and publication
authority remain unchanged. The change has no schema migration and adds
no background timer or new provider call.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and shell/GitHub CLI tools.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used with version and capability
details
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug report 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
- [x] Focused local regressions and all CI gates pass
- [x] I have added and updated tests
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have 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>

2026-10-22 17:40:29 -07:00

DottaandPaperclip

a8b652b085

fix(github): preserve review delivery through reconnect (#16259 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub review bots turn authorized repository events into agent
tasks and publish the result on the pull request.
> - Cloud Apps send callbacks through a relay, but the direct callback
recovery worker reported that URL as broken.
> - Reconnecting the same App then prevented a new authorized
publication from updating its existing working comment.
> - Report-only runs could also produce an action-required check when no
complete assessment was available.
> - This pull request preserves comment identity across reconnects,
verifies fresh signed delivery after repair, and keeps report-only
results neutral.
> - Users can receive the review without changing repository access or
making an advisory bot block their pull request.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A review could be saved in Paperclip while GitHub kept showing “Working
on this…”. A same-App reconnect changed the runtime generation and the
existing response receipt then failed with “GitHub response binding
changed”. Cloud callback recovery also compared the relay URL with a
direct tenant URL. An incomplete or failed report-only run could produce
an action-required check.

**Expected behavior**

A fresh authorized attempt updates the same App-owned comment after
reconnect. Stale attempts and revoked people remain denied. Cloud relay
delivery does not produce a direct-callback mismatch. Report-only checks
remain neutral and explain incomplete work honestly.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Accept a GitHub request and publish its working comment.
2. Reconnect the same App before the agent publishes its result.
3. Submit the result and inspect the working comment and check.
4. Separately, let a report-only run end without an assessment and
inspect its check conclusion.

Related: #16138 addresses the separate classification of local
authorization errors as provider credential failures. This change fixes
the response binding and report-only paths themselves.

## What Changed

- Bind durable response comments to the App and agent. Keep per-attempt
runtime generation checks and provider comment ownership checks,
including legacy receipts.
- Exclude Cloud-managed Apps from the direct webhook recovery scan and
its stale callback-mismatch warning. The Cloud inbox owns relay retries.
- Let a fresh authenticated event from the bound installation verify
webhook delivery after repair. Keep signature, runtime epoch,
installation, and credential lease checks.
- Keep report-only assessment and terminal-run checks neutral. Preserve
incomplete/error text and gated-review behavior.
- Add integration regressions for reconnect races, legacy comments,
failed runs, Cloud recovery, and foreign or forged webhook traffic.
Update connector documentation.
- Correct the assigned-tool search guidance to name the actual input
fields (`offset` and `schemaOffset`) and show valid arguments. The
failed automatic review had an input-schema rejection before tool
execution; this clarifies recovery without expanding tool access.

## Verification

- `pnpm -r typecheck` passed.
- GitHub policy and integration suite: 291 tests passed (`vitest run
server/src/services/chat-github-review-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t
'GitHub|github'`).
- The report-only policy regression failed before the fix and passed
after it.
- `pnpm build` passed.
- Assigned tool discovery: 24 tests passed. Its guidance now maps
returned pagination offsets to the correct input fields and tells the
model to omit unused optional fields.
- Full `pnpm test:run` is running. It encountered a 15-second timeout in
the unrelated authenticated Workspace calendar-write test. That test
passed on one isolated rerun.
- After the review-requested module extraction, server typecheck and
both direct/Cloud recovery activity integration checks passed.
- All 55 non-skipped CI checks passed for
`32e690279d847e44a6946b6c7cfb110fb11aff79`. Greptile scored that commit
5/5 with no unresolved findings. Live staging publication verification
follows deployment.

## Risks

- A durable response can now survive a same-App reconnect. Fresh
authorization, runtime generation checks for each publication attempt,
App ownership, and the publication lease still fence writes.
- Report-only failures intentionally become neutral. The check still
reports the failure; it does not claim a complete assessment.
- Cloud-managed callbacks rely on their existing durable relay inbox.
The direct callback recovery worker remains unchanged for direct
installations.
- No schema migration or permission expansion.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with code inspection, editing, test execution, and
browser verification. The exact deployment model ID and context window
are not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

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

---------

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

2026-10-13 22:24:41 -05:00

DottaandPaperclip

8813a50105

feat: run GitHub review bots through Paperclip agents (#13717 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work as tasks and runs.
> - GitHub chat brings repository conversations into those tasks.
> - A review bot needs the assigned agent, its authority, and governed
provider tools.
> - The existing channel connection did not supply that review workflow
or a complete setup journey.
> - This pull request adds GitHub App setup, account access, event
prompts, task-bound review tools, and exact-commit checks.
> - Operators can inspect each review through the same task, run, and
activity systems.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Subsystem affected**

GitHub chat, governed connection tools, task execution, shared/database
contracts, and connector setup UI.

**Problem or motivation**

Operators need a GitHub review bot that runs their assigned Paperclip
agent. Mentions and PR events must preserve task ownership and requester
authority. Provider publication must use the bot App identity and
enforce the configured permissions.

**Proposed solution**

Extend the existing GitHub chat connector with resumable App onboarding,
linked-member and sponsored-guest access, editable event prompts, and
governed review operations. Validate structured assessments on the
server and compute a stable Paperclip Review check for the exact head
commit.

**Alternatives considered**

A separate review scheduler would duplicate Paperclip execution and
permissions. Reusing personal GitHub credentials would change the bot
identity and credential boundary.

**Roadmap alignment**

This extends the existing Connected Apps and governed-tool
infrastructure. The project owner requested and approved this design.
Related PR #8645 imports external Codex review feedback; this change
runs an assigned Paperclip agent and publishes its results through the
existing chat connector.

## What Changed

- Include the current Paperclip instance origin in the copied setup
prompt. Storybook uses its configured Paperclip origin; callback
parameters and URL credentials are excluded.

- Add a Claude/Codex copy button in the real setup and Storybook opening
step. Its detailed prompt asks four setup questions and guides
embedded-browser setup, verification, and optional required checks.
Clipboard failure exposes selectable instructions.
- Add a tutorial that explains why App installation, review scheduling,
and required checks are separate choices.

- Add manifest registration, an existing-App path, separate installation
and repository selection, repository refresh, and explicit account
confirmation.
- Add low-trust agent guidance, effective capability verification,
member selection, and explicit restricted guests with a sponsor.
- Add configurable PR events, prompts, repository overrides, rating
thresholds, and separate formal-review permissions.
- Give the assigned agent governed App tools to read PRs, comment, begin
an assessment, submit findings, and optionally submit a formal review.
- Bind review history, root PR events, and inline replies to ordinary
tasks. Deduplicate deliveries/findings and reject stale publication.
- Link check Details to the underlying task on the current trusted
hostname, or to Reviews before task creation.
- Add schema migration 0283, API contracts, production UI, and 49
interactive Storybook states.
- Repair local lease recovery. Keep the Cloud Dockerfile identical to
master; no provider-pack layer or runtime-default environment variable
is added.
- Retry only rolled-back wake-admission transactions after transient
endpoint-lock contention. A deterministic held-lock regression proves
one accepted wake.

## Verification

- Current head: `7ba761fe007bb798400d3e62346fa964f607f0f8`, rebased on
master `d9b3a5653e41f2ee5a1345b97c86a238f7a5c8e9`. Dockerfile has zero
diff against master. Final workspace typecheck and build passed. The new
PostgreSQL migration regression passed and preserves existing relation
and constraint identities after replay.
- Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5. There are zero unresolved
review threads and no merge conflicts.
- All current-head checks are green: 54 passed and two conditional
Storybook jobs skipped. This includes complete server/workspace test
suites, build, typechecks, policy checks, Runner suites, browser suites,
and security status. One timing-sensitive callback-ordering test passed
in isolation and its CI shard passed one retry. The duplicate local
full-suite run was stopped after CI completed; it is not counted as a
local full-suite pass.
- Before the final Slack rebase and migration renumbering, 186 focused
GitHub tests, 14 native bootstrap cases, token gates, and Storybook
build passed. The final rebase retained the new Slack communication
guidance.
- The embedded-browser setup test copied the full detailed prompt,
including the configured Paperclip instance URL. Desktop and narrow
layouts were checked. Component tests cover successful copying and
clipboard failure with selectable text and retry.
- Live local and hosted GitHub acceptance evidence refers to application
revision `cb703ac959876a07ebf3d7a295847f9f351eb6fc`. Real agent tasks
exercised issue mentions, automatic PR reviews, inline findings,
repeated mentions, task continuation, and failing-to-passing checks
after a push. The Storybook agent generated, built, and browser-rendered
pages; missing acceptance text failed, matching text passed, and broken
JSX produced an incomplete result.
- Live cases also covered independently disabled push events, prompt
injection, duplicate signed deliveries, rapid pushes, stale-result
rejection, finding deduplication, and restart recovery. Formal reviews
were denied while disabled and published only after explicit enablement.
Check Details links pointed to the underlying task on the trusted
hostname.
- Those hosted native Claude runs used the provider-pack layer now
removed from this PR. They do not prove native Claude works on the
standard Cloud image. A replacement hosted native Codex run is not yet
verified: the disposable QA tenant has only an Anthropic AI connection.
No new staging or production deployment was made for the packaging
removal.
- Required-check merge enforcement could not be tested because the
private disposable repository's GitHub plan rejected the rules
configuration. Published success/failure/incomplete check states were
verified directly.

## Risks

- Latest master allocated migration 0282 to Slack. The GitHub migration
is regenerated as 0283 with replay-safe table/index/constraint creation;
a PostgreSQL regression verifies existing relations and constraints are
preserved. Existing preview tenants remain subject to the fleet
migration-history compatibility preflight; no bypass is introduced.

- Migration 0283 adds company-scoped configuration, registration,
review, and publication records. Existing connections retain their
behavior until reviews/tools are enabled.
- Signed webhooks and expiring registration state remain required.
Hosted installations also need the companion narrow Cloud gateway
exemptions.
- Agent assessments can be incomplete or wrong. The server enforces
coverage/result structure, current-head publication, rating policy, and
separate formal-review permission; it does not replace code-review
judgment.
- No Cloud image packaging changes are included. Remote native
ACPX/Claude and OpenCode retain their existing operator-supplied
provider-pack prerequisite. Native Codex and Codex with managed MCP
tools do not require that pack. Earlier staging deployment evidence
refers to its stated revision, not this packaging-removal head.
Production rollout and merging remain outside this change.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository, code execution, API, and
embedded-browser tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window
size were not exposed by the environment.

## 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>

2026-09-21 14:41:19 -05:00