Preserve all existing story IDs, classify scoped source review separately from six fixture plays, and retain final package/provider qualification gates.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Preserve canonical startup ownership, scoped evidence, current Storybook IDs, and the Codex form controls while carrying Claude effort and immutable source bindings.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Extract the guided setup test fixture without dropping cases. Supply current settings/discovery contracts and Opus 5.5 in the isolated Storybook boundary.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Retain Pi profile 24 and bind the updated sandbox source in profile 25. Provider closures and qualification boundaries are unchanged.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep feature and access maps synchronized with the scoped cancellation repair, and retain the exact source and unresolved installed/staging qualification.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Chat channels connect that work to provider conversations.
> - One shared service contains callback, delivery, reaction, and setup
logic.
> - These responsibilities have distinct contracts and existing
public-path tests.
> - This PR moves ten cohesive responsibilities into focused modules.
> - The service retains shared runtime ownership and scheduling.
> - Provider behavior is easier to locate and review.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #15995, #16026, #16027, #16030, #16031, #16035, #16037, #16038,
#16041, #16043.
This PR consolidates the reviewed extraction stack. The plan is
`doc/plans/2026-10-12-chat-channel-delivery-boundaries-refactor.md`.
## What Changed
- Move Slack callback verification into the Slack folder.
- Move Discord Gateway events and root-thread admission/recovery into
the Discord folder.
- Extract durable receipt reactions and inbound reaction
admission/replay.
- Extract inbound attachment ingestion and outbound integrity-checked
hydration. Preserve the public hydration export.
- Extract durable provider effects. Keep Telegram callback notices in
the Telegram folder.
- Extract conversation/activity reads and setup qualification. Keep
Slack and Teams projections in their channel folders.
- Preserve the merged managed Slack setup behavior, shared workers,
credential leases, and transaction boundaries.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 26,493 lines / 1,048,769 bytes to
21,460 lines / 862,284 bytes. This removes 5,033 lines from the service.
## Verification
- Each extraction passed its selected existing tests before and after
through public service paths.
- On updated master, all 55 selected Slack cases passed before
extraction. All 194 selected chat/managed-Slack cases passed on the
final stack tip.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, module-boundary checks, and
whitespace checks passed on that tip.
- The normalized syntax audit verifies 69 moved declarations and all
retained statements, including their relative order, against updated
master.
- The eight earlier stack merges retain the exact validated repository
tree. The combined root equals the validated tip merged with current
master. All chat-channel files remain byte-identical to the validated
tip. Current combined-root CI and review are pending.
- Full local verification remains unverified. The unchanged
`workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts:56` stress test timed out at
300,000 ms in a clean run and again in isolation. The full run was
stopped after the reproduced failure. No timeout or assertion was
weakened.
- These checks use assembled services, real local databases, and
provider fixtures. They do not prove live third-party execution.
Reviewers can run the public-path suites:
```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts server/src/services/chat-outbound-attachment-hydration.test.ts server/src/__tests__/slack-development-manager.test.ts
```
## Risks
- Factory wiring must preserve live values, shared state, and
initialization order. Identity-link construction retains deferred access
to the provider-effects callback.
- Credential fences, authorization transactions, and delivery settlement
must keep their original ordering. Syntax parity and public-path
integration cases cover these boundaries.
- Full local verification has the recorded Git-streaming timeout. The
combined PR must pass master’s required CI before merging into master.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry
points.
> - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components,
proposals, and retained history.
> - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and
sidebar still use unrelated groups.
> - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and
uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar.
> - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles
change.
> - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure
without losing examples.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged.
This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased
onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged
by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change
organizes existing suites and adds no product capability.
## What Changed
- Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature
area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label.
- Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview
first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of
the sidebar.
- Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative
imports and active documentation.
- Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit
CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports.
- Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog.
Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the
maintenance skill and review evidence.
## Verification
- Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent
`75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries,
IDs, and names.
- UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked
as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`).
- UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed.
- Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token
gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed.
- Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached
`storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered,
sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue`
opened its preserved story link.
- Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative
references, and updated fixture path text in story files.
- To inspect: build Storybook, start `node
scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview
guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links.
- The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization
change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation,
without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked
by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was
not run.
## Risks
- Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a
feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one
primary home and retain related capability references.
- Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated
references to source paths may need the new location.
- This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves.
It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would
leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated.
- Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing
production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged.
- Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh
checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation
and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and
checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window
size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository
inspection, code execution, and local browser automation.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep the source-bound fixture regression, runner preservation proof, required map synchronization and pending full gates in the existing dated record.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Its tests protect company boundaries, approvals, durable tasks,
credentials and the board UI.
> - Several owner suites repeat large database fixtures and render
frames.
> - Some tests repeat stronger proof or pass when the behavior they
describe is broken.
> - This pull request shares exact setup, removes proven duplicate cases
and repairs weak observations.
> - It preserves distinct security, lifecycle, concurrency and
user-facing contracts.
> - The benefit is 5,027 fewer test lines and stronger regression
checks.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #15978. This continues the merged test-audit cleanup in [PR
#15978](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15978), which
removed 11,976 test/support lines. The savings in this pull request are
additional.
Related open work: [PR
#13460](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13460) changes
legacy OAuth parent/version lock ordering. This pull request retains
those production paths and the existing lock-order test. Its secrets
changes compact fixtures and repair the two AWS wrapper exclusion
observations.
Scoped title searches found no open duplicate audit or
fixture-consolidation PR and no matching audit issue. The problem is
described here using the enhancement template.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The maintenance and regression value of the existing server, UI, CLI,
shared and wiki-plugin test suites.
**Subsystem affected**
Cross-cutting test code. Two UI modules also lose unused test inspection
exports.
**Current behavior**
Owner tests repeat database rows, service inputs, HTTP setup and render
frames. Some cases repeat stronger assertions. Two AWS lock tests record
only cleanup events, so an AWS provider write can happen inside the held
lock without failing those observations. Several other negative tests
accept or do not observe the wrong result. Worktree fixtures also use a
temporary path alias that conflicts with the existing canonical-path
checks on macOS.
**Proposed behavior**
Use small local helpers that preserve exact inputs, fresh allocations,
callbacks, query order and await positions. Remove only cases with named
stronger keepers. Tighten negative assertions and observe actual AWS
provider entry while a confirmed lock holder remains parked. Resolve
temporary fixture roots to their canonical paths.
**Reason and benefit**
Remove 5,027 net test lines and 15 redundant registered executions.
Remove 11 lines of unused UI inspection exports. Keep every distinct
company, actor, approval, credential, persistence, stale-write and
concurrency contract. No wall-time speedup is claimed for setup
compaction.
**Breaking changes**
None for application behavior, APIs or stored data. The removed exports
expose private UI test state and have no remaining callers.
## What Changed
- Consolidate repeated runtime, workspace, portability, route,
tool-access, policy, gateway and state-service fixtures.
- Share repeated UI render frames and CLI/wiki-plugin setup while
retaining the original actions and expected results.
- Remove 15 repeated case executions only where the audit records an
exact stronger keeper.
- Repair weak HTTP/UI negative assertions and two AWS account-home lock
observations. Keep the existing durable results and cleanup behavior.
- Remove the unused `__inflightGetCount` and `__secondTickInternals`
inspection exports. Keep observable request coalescing and ticker
lifecycle checks.
- Canonicalize temporary worktree fixture paths without weakening
production path checks.
- Record the owner decisions, savings, independent preservation reviews
and validation in [the dated audit
report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-rounds.md)
and [the compact control
evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-controls.json).
## Verification
- Complete owner and retained-sibling baselines passed before each audit
cutover. Independent reviewers checked the full original tests, actual
helper bodies, exact inputs, receipt provenance, async order, fresh
allocations and case registrations.
- All 14 UI/route/wiki mutations failed at their intended assertions:
ten UI/API/ticker controls, one route control and three wiki
persistence/receipt controls. Each mutated production source was
restored to its exact original bytes.
- Both old AWS lock tests passed with their respective AWS-only lock
bypass. Both repaired tests failed at the intended assertions with the
same bypasses. These give 16 intended failures and two passing weak
controls across 18 executions. Each source was restored exactly.
- Final complete state-owner/sibling run: 329/329 passed at code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`.
- Final `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates` and `pnpm build`:
passed at the same code revision.
- Delivery head `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` includes the
evidence commit and master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded`.
All 27 audited test files and both application files match the locally
verified code revision byte-for-byte. Current-head CI validates the
integrated branch, including the incoming master changes.
- All eight production-owner SHA guards for the 16 deliberate failing
mutation controls still match the integrated delivery checkout. The
mutation receipts therefore apply to those current owners.
- Full default `pnpm test:run`: **failed** with exit 1 at frozen code
revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`; HEAD and tracked
source bytes remained unchanged. The first general-server group reported
878 passing files, four failing files and six skipped files; 17,846
passing cases, 24 failing cases and 105 skipped cases. Later groups did
not run. Failures were `http-log-redaction` (socket hangup),
`public-mcp` (initial 15-second timeout followed by hosted token
“Refresh before subscribing” failures), `remove-test-home` (macOS
`ENOTEMPTY` where permission errors were expected, plus cleanup
failure), and `workspace-git-snapshot-streaming` (300-second timeout).
All four failing test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP production
owners are unchanged by this audit. Full local success is not claimed.
- Focused complete-owner diagnosis at the same frozen revision: 149/152
passed, three failed, zero skipped. `public-mcp` passed 82/82 and
`http-log-redaction` passed 66/66 unchanged. The two `remove-test-home`
cases reproduced macOS `ENOTEMPTY` against an expected `EACCES`/`EPERM`
contract; the 32 MiB workspace snapshot case reproduced its existing
300,000 ms timeout. HEAD and tracked files stayed clean. Exact blob
comparison confirmed all four test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP
owners match both inspected master
`4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and the frozen local
revision. The three remaining local failures are unresolved; no timeout,
retry or assertion was weakened.
- Current-head CI: [workflow
38299262149](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38299262149)
has passed runner selection and created all downstream
test/typecheck/build gates; those gates are queued, with no failures
reported. Greptile completed successfully at
`58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` with [5/5 and zero
comments](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16022#issuecomment-6131457592).
All review threads are resolved or absent. This pull request will remain
open after verification.
Reviewers can reproduce the required workspace checks:
```sh
pnpm -r typecheck
pnpm check:token-gates
pnpm test:run
pnpm build
```
Browser suites were not run. Their sources and user journeys are
unchanged by this audit.
## Risks
- A fixture helper can hide a specialized input or change object
freshness. Full-program expansion checks and independent reviews
preserve the exact old inputs and execution order.
- Removing duplicate proof can remove a distinct contract by mistake.
The audit records the keeper for each deletion; all distinct security
and lifecycle cases remain.
- Concurrency checks can miss progress during a fixed delay. The AWS
repairs record actual provider entry, confirm holder entry, use measured
entry windows, require exact final event order and drain both operations
in `finally`.
- The full local default run failed. Focused diagnosis reproduced two
macOS cleanup failures and one existing snapshot timeout in unchanged
owners; these remain unresolved. Current-head CI is pending. No test
deadline, retry policy, skip or CI shard was weakened to obtain a pass.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex with GPT-6, reasoning, repository inspection, code
execution and delegated audit/review. The runtime does not expose the
exact served model identifier or context-window size; those values are
unavailable and are not inferred from the model catalog.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Storybook supports review of its production UI and proposed designs.
> - Its 223 story files have no consistent link to product capabilities
or record of component and mock provenance.
> - Old compositions can drift while they still look like current
product examples.
> - This pull request adds two maintenance skills and a catalog that
consumes the existing feature map.
> - The first audit preserves all stories and fixes proven fixture
drift.
> - Contributors can now find examples by feature and see what still
needs review.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Storybook maintenance, feature discovery, and the accuracy of isolated
UI examples.
**Current behavior**
Stories are already centralized under `ui/storybook/`, but their sidebar
has 51 top-level groups. Production components, local prototypes, and
historical designs are not consistently distinguished. The old guide
uses manual coverage claims. GitHub searches found no duplicate
feature-map catalog change.
**Proposed behavior**
Keep existing story locations and IDs. Add a downstream catalog keyed to
stable feature capabilities. Record product status, rendered subject,
data boundary, and declared review dependencies separately. Use
dedicated maintenance and review skills to reconcile drift and report
evidence.
**Reason and benefit**
The catalog makes existing examples reusable without treating mock
behavior or old designs as production acceptance. The feature map
remains independent of Storybook.
## What Changed
- Add `maintain-storybook` and `review-storybook` skills with
contributor guidance.
- Inventory all 223 story files. Generate a feature index and provide
searchable navigation in the existing Overview story. Track direct
subjects through relative imports and local wrappers, including the
primitives demonstrated by foundation suites.
- Add a checker for inventory, capability references, duplicate IDs, and
declared-source drift, with eight regression tests. The parser test
covers real nested CSF files, export filters, explicit IDs, and play
counts.
- Preserve historical designs and classify mixed wrappers. Record the
initial audit and remaining parity work.
- Align the question-dismiss/send fixture with production behavior. Add
dismissal and confirmation-reopen regressions and repair the editor
selector.
- Exclude three exported fast-response fixtures from story discovery and
add the missing render-time callback spy.
## Verification
- Passed: `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`, `node --test
scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs` (8 tests), and `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`.
- Passed: validators for both new skills, `pnpm check:token-gates`,
`pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`.
- Passed: final Storybook build; nine selected browser `play` cases;
three fast-response render cases; feature-guide search/link navigation;
question-fixture reset on reload.
- Built-index comparison preserved all 2,208 original story IDs and
added only two new regression cases.
- Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui` (728 files,
8,176 tests).
- The full `pnpm test:run` has reported a 15-second timeout in the
untouched backend case `connects advertised Workspace gmail.read without
mutating definitions in authenticated`. The exact test passed standalone
without changing code, expectations, or timeouts. The remaining broad
run was stopped after this failure. The full suite is not verified.
- Visual comparison is blocked by the existing empty baseline manifest.
The managed-accounts API/DB fixture was not started. See
`maps/storybook-map/REVIEW.md` for exact scope.
## Risks
- This is an initial inventory and targeted audit. 188 suites still
require deeper state and fixture parity review.
- Review hashes cover declared dependencies. They do not follow all
transitive production imports or prove semantic correctness.
- The catalog requires upkeep when stories, mapped recipes, or declared
subjects change. Shared mocks still need feature-by-feature contract
review.
- No production application source, database schema, or upstream
feature-map contract changes.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. Used reasoning, shell tools, file editing, and
Chromium browser verification. The exact runtime 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Retain source-bound regression and preview evidence, current pending gates, and the independent prerequisite split.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip uses CI to verify changes before release.
> - Trusted PR tests can run on isolated AWS workers.
> - Their runner-selection job currently waits for GitHub-hosted
capacity.
> - A large hosted test queue therefore blocks admission to AWS.
> - A dedicated routing workflow lets us reserve capacity for metadata
validation.
> - This PR moves the routing job to reserved AWS capacity after the
bootstrap workflow and pool are available.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Issue type**
CI reliability enhancement.
**Where is the issue?**
The Select trusted runner job in PR CI.
**What's wrong?**
The routing job competes with a large hosted test queue. Its sampled
median wait was about 20 minutes. AWS tests cannot begin before this job
finishes.
**Suggested fix**
Add a protected reusable routing workflow. Deploy its dedicated AWS
pool, then switch the PR caller in a follow-up PR. No overlapping open
PR or issue was found.
## What Changed
- Call ci-routing.yml on protected master from pr-trusted.yml.
- Check the canonical repository and approved PR author/sender before
allocating reserved AWS metadata capacity. Unapproved PRs continue to
use hosted routing.
- Permit approved manual routing canaries on protected master.
- Use a validated roster snapshot for placement. Invalid JSON, missing
settings, stale snapshots, and unapproved identities select hosted
routing without a placement-time JSON parse.
- Preserve the full in-job identity, rerun actor, repository, head,
merge, and stack checks.
- Update stack-scope and placement regression tests and document the
pool and rollback.
## Verification
- The routing scripts and placement expression tests passed (44 tests),
routing-plus-shard tests passed (56 tests), and the existing
.github/scripts suite passed (381 tests).
- Existing routing allow/deny scenarios passed with the extracted script
(16 cases).
- actionlint passed with the dedicated custom runner label declared in
its local configuration.
- git diff --check passed.
- Full pnpm typecheck/test/build cannot run in this worktree because
dependencies are not installed. The change is limited to workflow YAML
and Node tests.
- The dedicated pool is deployed with two warm On-Demand workers and a
four-worker ceiling. The routing qualification passed: it started about
five seconds after workflow creation, selected AWS, and finished while
the hosted gate in the same PR remained queued.
- Bootstrap https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16039 is
merged. The deployed group now authorizes only ci-routing.yml on
protected master, and its master canary passed.
## Risks
- The maintainer explicitly approved a queued-CI admin bypass after
current-head Greptile 5/5 and focused verification.
- Activation requires the deployed routing Fleet and its group to
authorize the routing workflow on protected master. Keep the bootstrap
dependency explicit.
- The group must authorize only ci-routing.yml on protected master and
canonical repository ID 1170821064.
- The routing workflow runs no checkout or PR code and has read-only
permissions. The test admission checks are unchanged.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and file editing.
The exact runtime 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 (focused routing and
workflow tests; full pnpm commands are blocked by missing worktree
dependencies)
- [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] Required CI status checked; the maintainer explicitly approved
admin bypass for queued CI after clean current-head review and focused
verification
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 on 993fbe695a with
no open findings or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep the discovery fixture truthful for unknown platforms and add a measured GNU2.39 ARM64 control. Record existing managed fixture, cost reporting and route qualification evidence without claiming missing live acceptance.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep explicit Legacy permission choices through automatic selection, import editing, draft reset and policy display. Use company-scoped measured immutable-image facts for automatic sandbox defaults without allocating resources during creation or discovery.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
* codex/runner-native-platform-prerequisites:
fix(runner): close review gaps in setup and platform qualification
Read inert exact-source target data before selecting hosted native jobs. Bound registration teardown and retain unconfirmed recovery state. Record company-scoped sandbox platform facts only for immutable OCI images after confirmed cleanup; preserve existing connection and runner behavior.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Slack connects a person to an agent through an installed app and a
verified identity.
> - Independent installations must remain usable without Paperclip Cloud
or manager credentials.
> - Approved Cloud deployments can use Slack manager grants to create
and install each agent's app.
> - Both paths should share credential storage, identity checks,
recovery, and the existing runtime.
> - This pull request adds gated managed setup and keeps independent app
setup under Advanced.
> - It also makes ongoing connection settings and personal test messages
easier to use.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Slack setup, connection settings, tenant credential storage, and the
Cloud connector handoff.
**Problem or motivation**
Approved deployments need an installation flow without pasted
configuration tokens. Open-source users must retain their independent
Slack app flow. A connection manager also needs a simple way to check a
bot from Settings.
**Proposed solution**
Use the managed path when the instance is configured to support it.
Choose agent and Connect are the two visible stops. Continue starts
authorization or installation. Use your own app remains under Advanced
before creation. Save personal manager grants by company, Paperclip
user, Slack user, workspace, and manager app. Reuse only verified
identities for test messages. Unknown identities must complete a private
Slack connection challenge before linking and receiving the test DM.
**Alternatives considered**
A shared bot would change each agent's Slack identity. Requiring Slack
CLI or a hosted service for self-hosted users would remove independent
installation.
**Roadmap alignment**
This maintainer-requested change improves Connected Apps and
experimental Agent Chat. It adds provisioning and management controls to
the existing Slack runtime.
**Additional context**
The companion Cloud broker profile is a separate deployment
prerequisite. Managed setup remains gated. Existing-app adoption is
deferred.
## What Changed
- Extract Slack registration, provider requests, completion,
customer-owned setup, managed setup, and personal manager grants into
focused services. Preserve the compatibility facade and independent
removal cleanup.
- Add company-scoped manager grants and a registration reference through
an additive, idempotent migration after current master. Keep runtime
credentials separate from app-registration secrets.
- Add authenticated manager authorization, sealed handoff, serialized
refresh and revocation, app creation, managed installation, and
installer-bound OAuth fallback.
- Preserve creation intent, block automatic uncertain recreation, save
credentials before downstream checks, and validate app, workspace, bot,
scopes, and installer identity.
- Add the two-stop production wizard and ordered stories. Keep the
own-app, manual, existing-app, and legacy-draft paths.
- Simplify Settings. Open Slack configuration targets the saved app. The
test-message action has its own row. Remove the old manual-avatar
section, channel-message section, and broken permissions link.
- Add paginated account discovery and a private connection challenge for
unknown accounts. Expired invitations stop waiting and offer a new
private invitation. Save send receipts before provider dispatch and
preserve confirmed delivery when activity logging fails.
- Reinstall the saved managed app on explicit reconnect, replace revoked
credentials, and resume completion. Persist reconnect intent and
duplicate-request receipts without creating another app.
- Update provider browser tests, recovery tests, secret redaction, setup
documentation, and the agent prompt. Preserve current master's durable
verification scheduling.
## Verification
- Full workspace typecheck and repository build passed on `56d389d47a`.
The subsequent reconnect retry fix in `288364eada` also passed UI
typecheck and UI build.
- 114 focused Slack registration cases and 13 production managed-wizard
cases passed, including fresh-token reconnect, retry after installation
failure, and duplicate reconnect requests.
- All nine affected Slack browser cases passed against the production UI
and a disposable fixture server. They cover managed setup, automatic
setup, own-app selection, refresh, recovery, mobile behavior, and
connection settings.
- Eight focused real-database test-message cases passed. They cover a
private ownership challenge, saved grant reuse, account pagination,
revoked and conflicting links, workspace mismatch, disabled DMs, revoked
membership, audit failure, ambiguous dispatch, and secret canaries.
- UI token gates and the production Storybook build passed.
- Greptile reviewed exact head
`288364eada5d9c114fad991ff634612639d06672` at 5/5 with no actionable
findings or unresolved review threads.
- The full repository test suite and current-head CI are running. Their
final results will replace this line before merge.
- Earlier live feature previews created two bots in the authorized
Paperclip Slack workspace and reused one personal manager grant. Local
managed Continue created and installed a bot without a configuration
token or a separate Add to Slack action. Avatars, welcome DMs, signed
callbacks, and direct replies were observed. A Settings test DM also
arrived in the signed-in user's Slack account.
- Earlier staging thread qualification required manual publication
recovery for one bot. Current-head live qualification remains required
before enabling the production default. Fixture results do not establish
Slack approval behavior in other workspaces.
## Risks
- Personal manager tokens can create apps. They stay in scoped vault
entries. The manager client secret stays at the broker. Company,
actor/session, origin, and app identity checks apply throughout setup.
- The additive migration must also work on qualification instances that
applied earlier branch migrations. Table, column, index, and constraint
creation is idempotent.
- Creation and message timeouts can leave uncertain outcomes. Saved
request IDs prevent automatic duplicate dispatch.
- Unknown Slack identities must receive and complete their private
challenge while signed in. Account selection alone does not grant
Paperclip permissions. Existing revoked or conflicting links are not
overwritten.
- A development-only manager transport uses an explicitly configured
private credential file for local qualification. Production ignores this
transport; no manager credentials are bundled with open source.
- Managed rollout requires Slack approval, the companion broker
deployment, configured secrets, and final live qualification. Removing a
connection does not delete its Slack app.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser
tools. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID or
context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] 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
- [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>
Extract the tested runtime and installed-package prerequisite without changing agent creation defaults or experimental gates.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product
capabilities.
> - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission
boundaries.
> - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared
capability IDs.
> - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance
ownership of both maps.
> - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product
behavior or permissions.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated
the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288
added the original feature map.
**Issue type**
Missing documentation and maintenance contract.
**Where is the issue?**
The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the
verification skills.
**What's wrong?**
There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points,
permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does
not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it.
**Suggested fix**
Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse
capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from
operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the
maintenance skill.
## What Changed
- Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its
recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion
links.
- Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching
capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths,
policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries
as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`.
- Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence,
agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately.
Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability
operation-reviewed.
- Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and
inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update
creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the
shared contract.
- Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching
areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path
examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency.
- Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation
policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI,
runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes.
## Verification
- Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171
matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve.
- Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests.
Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken
references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API
examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed
verification.
- Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill
and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license
blocks are unchanged.
- Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only
in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte
unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is
retained.
- Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and
contains only this contract change.
- Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for
this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access
was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the
structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are
pending.
## Risks
- The companions are representative source baselines. They are not
complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys.
- The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool
admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance
must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context.
- External links to the old product-map directory may need updates.
Repository references have been updated.
- Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This
contract does not change authority or implement missing paths.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does
not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size,
or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits,
shell commands, and structural regression tests.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Use the controller override only for matching remote OS and CPU, preserving explicit remote priority and strict target header verification.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Record stop-time ACP turn diagnostics (last-event age, oldest pending tool age, pending tool kinds) so wall-clock timeout events show whether the turn was stalled. Diagnostics only.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work.
> - Chat channels connect that work to provider conversations.
> - Provider workflows still fill the shared service.
> - Their authority and recovery rules need clear homes.
> - This PR lands five reviewed extractions into channel folders.
> - Shared authorization, state and worker lifetime stay explicit.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #15976, #15996, #15999, #16001 and #16002. This root PR now
contains all five extractions from batch three. The four upper PRs were
merged into their parents. The combined tree matches reviewed stack head
`789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exactly.
## What Changed
- Extract Slack session status and accepted-file receipt recovery.
- Extract Telegram publication drafts and Stop handling.
- Extract Photon events and native responses.
- Extract Teams file-transfer authority.
- Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 29,897 to 26,461 lines (3,436 lines,
11.5%).
- Preserve function bodies, runtime-map identity, leases and transaction
boundaries.
## Verification
- All 117 selected public-service cases passed before and after their
respective extractions.
- All 30 moved declarations and remaining service statements preserve
normalized syntax across the five slices.
- Server typecheck, module boundaries and whitespace checks passed.
- Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. Combined-head
CI and review are pending on `5de1b0b99d71049a72440e8c131bf4bb30bdf3f3`.
- Fixtures exercise assembled services and disposable databases, not
live third-party providers.
- Cumulative local `pnpm test:run` on
`789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exited 1: 32,414 passed, 125
skipped, one failure. `company-skills-routes.test.ts:1691` (`stars,
forks, and comments on skills through company-scoped endpoints`) failed
with `socket hang up`; that test and its route are unchanged by this
stack. The same 58-case suite then passed in isolation without code
changes. The original command did not reach 111 later serialized suites;
its failure is retained, so the full-local-test checklist remains
unchecked.
```sh
pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'Slack session|Slack turns to Idle|signed Slack session stop|denies guest Slack stops'
```
- Combined-head CI attempt 1: five runners received a shutdown signal at
19:13:08 UTC (server shard 10/12, serialized shards 2/9 and 7/9, E2E
shards 3/8 and 7/8). These jobs stopped during execution without a
failing test assertion. [Original
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38293566028).
The affected jobs will receive one unchanged retry after the other jobs
finish.
## Risks
- Changes cross durable provider recovery and authority boundaries. The
moved bodies preserve syntax, and 117 focused public-service cases
passed before and after their extractions.
- Shared workers, timers, runtime maps and generic authorization remain
in the service.
- The full local test run failed in an unchanged company-skills route
test; its result and the unrun suites are recorded above.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The
exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this
session. No separate agent was 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
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
