Jannik/PaperClipAI
1
0 Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-11-08 22:13:59 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
6,460 Commits 1,608 Branches 2,372 Tags
21640b6d514a5569cd76b2d3a3bb9e13e2a623d2
Commit Graph
6 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5 11ac90e31f fix(build): typecheck server/src/__tests__ and fix every type error (#18739) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The server has about 1,100 test and helper files in
`server/src/__tests__`
> - `server/tsconfig.json` excludes that directory, Vitest does not
check types, and no script runs the tsconfig in that directory
> - So a test can call a function with the wrong arguments and still
pass, and no tool reports it
> - This gap hid 2,168 real type errors, and some of them hid tests that
did not test what they claim
> - This pull request fixes all of these errors and adds the directory
to the server layers from paperclipai/paperclip#18737
> - The benefit is that a type error in a server test now fails the
typecheck, with no baseline and no backlog

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs paperclipai/paperclip#18737, which is merged and added the server
layers. Refs paperclipai/paperclip#18738, which is merged and checks the
test projects outside `pnpm -r`, so it is not a duplicate. Refs
paperclipai/paperclip#18137, which records that this directory has no
check.

**What happened?**

No tool checked the types of 1,074 of the 1,101 files in
`server/src/__tests__`. I searched `package.json`, the workflows, and
all tsconfig files. 27 files are in the program of another tsconfig, and
these 27 have 0 errors. 11 of the 27 are in
`helpers/maintenance/tsconfig.json`. No script ran that project when I
measured this. paperclipai/paperclip#18738 now runs it.

**Expected behavior**

The server typecheck checks these files, and a type error fails the
check.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. On the base commit, run `tsc -p server/src/__tests__/tsconfig.json
--noEmit`. It reports 6,536 errors and needs 12.3 GiB.
2. Add a type error to any file in `server/src/__tests__`.
3. Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`. It passes.

**Paperclip version or commit**

I measured the error breakdown below on commit `8dfd632452`, with
TypeScript 7.0.2. The branch now includes master up to
paperclipai/paperclip#18865.

**Deployment mode**

Not applicable. This issue applies to development and CI. No production
source file in the server changes.

### Error breakdown

Each row adds one change to the row above.

| Step | Total errors | Change | Cause |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Config as committed | 6,536 | | |
| Add `src/types/*.d.ts` | 4,447 | -2,089 | Config. The Express request
types were missing. |
| Set `rootDir` to the repository root | 2,436 | -2,011 | Config. |
| Set `allowImportingTsExtensions` | 2,181 | -255 | Config. Vitest
accepts `.ts` imports. |
| Add `ES2024.Promise` to `lib` | 2,138 | -43 | Config. Node 24 has
`Promise.withResolvers`. |
| Set `allowJs` for `.mjs` imports | 2,148 | +10 | Config. It removes 8
`TS7016` errors and shows new real errors. |
| Set `declaration` to false | 2,142 | -6 | Config. Tests emit nothing.
|
| Count only files in `server/src` | 2,058 | -84 | Other packages: 53
Daytona, 29 Runner test, 2 UI. |

So 4,478 of the 6,536 errors (69%) came from config or scope, and 2,058
are real type errors in 314 files. The 29 Runner test errors are also
real, which gives 2,087 errors. Tests that master added after this
measurement had 81 more errors, so this pull request fixes 2,168 errors.

This table classifies the first 2,058 errors.

| Kind of real error | Errors |
| --- | --- |
| Wrong argument or assignment type | 1,023 |
| Stale or partial fixture objects | 525 |
| Property that the type does not have | 317 |
| Missing narrowing of null or unknown | 101 |
| Implicit any | 60 |
| Missing name or module | 16 |
| Other | 16 |

### What the type errors hid

Most errors were stale fixtures and loose mocks. These errors hid real
test problems, and this pull request fixes them:

- **A test that never ran.** `instrumentation.test.ts` required
`sdk-trace-base`, which is not installed. So 3 span tests were skipped.
They now run and pass.
- **Assertions that could not fail.**
- `issue-thread-interactions-service` used a company ID as an issue ID.
- `status-card-evaluation-work` compared `[]` with `[]` in a rollback
check.
- `slack-conversation-lifecycle` read `item.issueId`, which does not
exist.
  - `email-channels` used a permission key that does not exist.
- `heartbeat-project-env` imported `LOW_TRUST_REVIEW_PRESET`, which is
not exported. The value was undefined.
- **Postgres processes that did not stop.** 11 test files called `stop`
on the test database helper. That method does not exist, and the helper
method is `cleanup`.
- **Arguments that the service ignored.**
- `methodKey` is now `connectionMethodKey` in the Daytona, Unikraft,
1Password, and Railway tests.
- 108 calls passed `"owner-user"` to a parameter that expects an options
object.
- 9 chat wizard fixtures passed `managementContext` as `source`, so they
ran `existing_app` and not `manifest`.
  - 2 tests passed a `{ userId }` actor that the function ignores.
- Inserts into `environments` passed a `companyId` column that the table
does not have.
- **Problems in tests that master added during this work.**
- `sandbox-creation-operations` read `database.connectionString` when an
external test database was set. In that mode `database` is undefined, so
the fixture would stop with a TypeError. It now uses the external URL.
- `idle-completed-history` set a Dot operation to `dispatched`. That is
a Muse status, and the Dot type does not have it. The fixture now uses
`admitted`, which is a real in-flight Dot status.

### Possible product problems, not changed

These may be real problems in production code or types. I did not change
them, because this pull request does not change production behavior:

- `decisions-service` `service.create` does not validate the lenient
`cancel_issue_tree` input.
- `createConnection` ignores `input.connectionPurpose`.
- The `createConnection` route schema default stores `{}` for
`transportConfig`.
- `prepareManagedAiRuntime` accepted the invalid value `mode:
"connection"`.
- `createBinding` accepts invalid `projectionClass` strings outside
class 3.
- `ensureManagedProjectWorkspace` forwards an untyped `repoRef` by
spread.
- `routineVariableSchema.label` is optional, but `RoutineVariable.label`
is required.
- `ToolRunContext.projectId` may be too strict.
- `withdrawInteraction` reads `issue.status`, which its type omits.
- `issueService.list` and `reconcileNativeFinalizations` omit fields
that they return at runtime.
- `createGitHubExternalObjectProvider` handles `tokenProvider: null`,
but its type forbids this value.

## What Changed

- Fixed the 2,168 type errors. The diff changes 322 test and helper
files.
- Corrected `server/src/__tests__/tsconfig.json`. Editors and the
typecheck now read the same options and report the same errors.
- Added three `test-tree` layers to
`server/scripts/typecheck-layers.mjs`. They read the server layers as
declarations, and any error fails them. A hash of the path selects the
shard, so a new file does not move other files.
- Added `server/scripts/typecheck-stubs/daytona-sdk.d.ts`. Server tests
reach Daytona plugin source, and the root install does not have
`@daytonaio/sdk`.
- Changed two imports in `ui/src/lib/issue-execution-policy.ts` to use
`.js` extensions, because server tests import this file.
- Made `declarationsConfig` and `--declarations-only` skip the
`test-tree` layers, because these layers emit nothing. Other projects
read only the source layers. Added a test for this.
- Updated `doc/DEVELOPING.md`.

## Verification

Run these commands:

```sh
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck
pnpm exec vitest run server/scripts/typecheck-layers.test.mjs
```

Results on macOS (arm64), Node 24, 16 cores. Each check ran after the
merge of paperclipai/paperclip#18738 unless the row says otherwise:

| Check | Commit | Result |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Server typecheck, `PAPERCLIP_TYPECHECK_LOW_MEMORY=1`, all 7 layers |
`6e45a08573` | Exit 0, 0 errors, 62 seconds, peak 3.52 GiB |
| `node scripts/typecheck-test-projects.mjs --low-memory` | `a3306bd13e`
| Exit 0, 0 errors, 42 seconds, peak 3.25 GiB |
| The same script with `--reuse-declarations` | `1b878aabc0` | Exit 0, 0
errors |
| `typecheck-layers.test.mjs` and `live-recovery-work.test.ts` |
`01db5634e4` | 90 passed. These include real compiler runs for a pass, a
type error, and an invalid tsconfig. |
| `tsconfig.declarations.json` after a full server typecheck |
`0fb1e4fb0a` | It references only `below`, `cycle`, and `above`. No
generated config names a `tsconfig.layers.json` file. |
| Owned runtime test in `idle-completed-history` | `e8f2f448ac` |
Passed, with the fix that master later replaced |
| `idle-incoming-wake`, `plugin-idle-manager`, and the changed
`chat-channels` test | `6e45a08573` | 30 passed |
| Runner `native-execution.test.ts` | `eab4dcc1f4` | 114 passed |
| The 19 server test files that changed since `eab4dcc1f4`, and
`typecheck-layers.test.mjs` | `259737b700` | 4,275 of 4,277 passed. The
2 failures are in `chat-channels` and are in the list of 7 below. |

The peak is the largest single process, from `/usr/bin/time -l`. Peaks
for the server typecheck were between 3.42 GiB and 3.56 GiB across 8
runs. Peaks for the test projects were 3.25 GiB and 3.37 GiB across 2
runs. I did not measure a cgroup.

**Runtime check of the fixes.** Types do not prove that a test still
works. So I ran all 309 changed server test files, 11,929 tests, before
the rebase onto paperclipai/paperclip#18737:

| Result | Tests | Detail |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Passed | 11,913 | Includes the 2 tests and the 54 `dot-runner` tests
that passed in a later run, as described below. |
| Failed | 7 | The same 7 tests also fail on the commit before the
fixes. |
| Skipped | 9 | These tests have their own skip conditions: `sentry` 5,
and 1 each in `bundled-plugin-registration`, `customer-success-cloud`,
`onepassword-connection`, and `workspace-runtime-https-live-exercise`. |

The 7 tests that fail with and without this change, on my machine:

- 3 tests in `chat-channels` and `email-channels` stop with `ENOENT` on
a `SKILL.md` file. The path is in the parent checkout, above the git
worktree that I used, so I expect that the worktree is the cause. I did
not prove this.
- `workspace-instance-cleanup` compares `/private/var/...` with
`/var/...`. This is a macOS symlink difference.
- 2 tests in `git-reproducible-managed-checkouts` get
`unknown_base_git_files` and expect `unpushed_managed_checkout`. I did
not find the cause.
- 1 more test in `chat-channels`, `materializes direct external-chat
finals once`, gets `undefined`. I did not find the cause.

CI is the check for these 7 tests. `ci / verify` passed on `eab4dcc1f4`.

Failures during this work:

- My fix to `agent-runtime-connector-access` changed an invalid
permission key in the setup, but not in the assertion. The runtime check
found this. I corrected the assertion, and the file passes.
- `heartbeat-plugin-environment` failed one wait in the full run. It
passed three times alone, so I think that load caused the failure. It
can fail again under load.
- `dot-runner` skipped all 54 tests in the full run because `cargo` was
not on my `PATH`. It then passed 54 of 54 with the toolchain on the
`PATH`.
- My first `lib` value removed the default DOM types, and the error
count went up by 375. I added the DOM libraries.
- My Daytona stub with bare `any` left 48 errors, because generic
helpers then inferred `unknown`. I added shapes that return promises.
- One fix to `agent-secrets-routes` used `class_3_static_lease`, and the
test failed. That class allows only specific paths. I reverted to
`unclassified`.
- `ci / General tests (server (8/12))` failed on `259737b700` because of
the flaky port in `idle-completed-history`. paperclipai/paperclip#18853
fixed this test on master, so this pull request keeps that fix.

**Audit of the diff.** I counted these patterns in added and removed
lines, to find fixes that only hide an error:

| Pattern | Added | Removed |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `@ts-ignore` | 0 | 0 |
| `@ts-expect-error` | 0 | 1 |
| `.skip` | 0 | 0 |
| `as any` | 9 | 9 |
| `: any` | 11 | 2 |
| `as never` | 8 | 2 |
| `as unknown as` | 35 | 4 |
| `Promise<unknown>` | 16 | 5 |
| `expect(` | 128 | 113 |

No hunk removes more `expect(` calls than it adds. Three removals of
test content were intentional, and I checked each one:

- `muse-control` removed `signalToken`. Line 1012 already asserts that
it is absent.
- `merged-pr-confirmation-sweep` removed legacy aliases. Other tests
cover them.
- `heartbeat-workspace-branch-containment` removed a `finalize` branch
that no test row can reach.

Some partial fixtures stay unchecked through `as unknown as` and
`Promise<unknown>`, mostly in `issue-agent-mutation-ownership-routes`
and `issue-comment-reopen-routes`.

**Accuracy of the check.** One program over the tree and the three
shards reported the same errors at the same positions. Memory, as the
peak of the largest process on one thread, was 3.93 GiB for one program
and 2.43 GiB for the largest shard. I measured these two values before
the fixes.

Not run or not proven:

- I did not run the full `pnpm test:run`, or a root `pnpm build`. I
expect CI to run the full suites.
- I did not run the 4 GiB container check, or the full
`scripts/typecheck-low-memory.mjs`. The peaks above come from macOS, so
they are not a Linux cgroup measurement.
- I did not run the UI typecheck after the merges.
- `workspace-runtime-https-live-exercise` is skipped, so its `cleanup`
fix did not run.

## Risks

- **A large diff in test files.** 328 files change. A pull request that
edits the same tests can get merge conflicts. New tests on master can
also add type errors before this merges. Any such error fails this check
and needs a fix here.
- **A higher cost for changes to source types.** A change to a type can
add errors in test files that the author did not touch. The author must
then fix them. This is the purpose of the check, but it is new work.
- **Changed test behavior.** Some tests now run paths that they did not
run before, such as the 9 chat wizard fixtures and the 3 span tests.
They pass here, but they can be more sensitive to timing or to the
environment.
- **The Daytona stub can go stale.** The stub is written by hand. If the
plugin uses a new SDK member, the typecheck reports an error until
someone updates the stub.
- **The release path.** `release-verify.yml` and `scripts/release.sh`
run `pnpm -r typecheck`, so they now run this check.
- **The tsconfig change.** The test transform reads
`server/src/__tests__/tsconfig.json`. The options that I changed are for
type checks, and the runs above passed.
- **A gap that remains.** Tsconfigs in `packages/paperclip-runner` and
in most sandbox provider plugins exclude `*.test.ts`. This check does
not read most of those test files, so they can still drift. That work is
separate from this pull request.

> 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

Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) through Claude Code, with
reasoning, tool use, code execution, and subagents. The runtime does not
show the context window size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass (7 tests fail locally, with
and without this change. See Verification.)
- [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

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
 2026-11-03 15:27:38 -08:00
DottaandPaperclip a1ab55a56d fix(agents): grant configuration access by default (#15283) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages agent work and permissions for a company.
> - Agent setup can require one agent to configure another agent.
> - New standard agents could create agents, but they had no direct
configuration grant.
> - Existing agents must keep their current permissions after an
upgrade.
> - The requested new-agent defaults include 13 more direct permissions
for suggestions, skills, tools, audit, inbox, and task assignment.
> - This pull request adds the 14-grant set at creation and approval
activation, retains it through invitations, and keeps existing agents
unchanged.
> - The change keeps low trust and built-in agents on their narrower
permissions.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The agent creation and approval flows, and the agent configuration
authorization path.

**Current behavior**

A new standard agent can create an agent. It cannot make protected
changes to a peer agent unless an operator adds an `agents:configure`
grant.

**Proposed behavior**

Add direct grants for `agents:configure`, `agents:suggest-changes`,
`skills:create`, `skills:suggest-changes`, `tools:manage_connections`,
`tools:manage_profiles`, `tools:view_audit`, `audit:view_agent_actions`,
`tools:use`, `tools:manage_runtime`, `inbox:manage`, `tasks:assign`,
`tasks:assign_scope`, and `tasks:manage_active_checkouts` to new
standard agents. Scope `tasks:assign_scope` to the agent’s reporting
subtree. Keep existing agents and their grants unchanged.

**Reason and benefit**

New standard agents can complete agent setup and the requested tool,
skill, inbox, and task workflows under existing route, scope, and
approval checks.

**Breaking changes**

Existing agents keep their current permissions. There is no permission
migration.

Related PR: #12212 adds scoped grant routes. This PR changes the default
grant.

## What Changed

- Add the 14 requested direct grants in agent creation and approval
activation. Keep them when invitation approval replaces grants,
preserving explicit scopes. Remove them when an agent is deleted.
- Apply defaults only to new agents. Remove the existing-agent
permission migration, its snapshot, and its journal entry. Preserve
existing scoped grants.
- Add permission, scope, invitation, and existing-agent regression
tests. Document all default and excluded permissions.
- Prevent agent keys from creating, changing, or restoring host-executed
process or local adapter command settings, and from restoring workspace
commands through rollback.

## Verification

- Run `node_modules/.bin/vitest run
server/src/__tests__/agent-default-configure-grants.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/invite-join-grants.test.ts
packages/db/src/migration-snapshot-drift.test.ts`. All 15 tests pass.
These cover new-agent defaults, unchanged existing grants, pending
approval, invitation grants, and migration history.
- Run `node_modules/.bin/tsc -p server/tsconfig.json --noEmit`. It
passes.
- Run `packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx
packages/db/src/check-migration-numbering.ts` and
`packages/db/node_modules/.bin/tsx
packages/db/src/check-migration-safety.ts`. Both pass.
- Confirm that this PR has no files under `packages/db/src/migrations/`
in its final diff.
- GitHub CI at `e8173b2c41` passes build, typecheck, server suites,
browser shards, and canary verification. One unchanged OpenCode
transport test reached its five-second timeout in the first Runner shard
run. That test passes locally in 2.55 seconds. The shard passed on one
retry. All 54 checks pass, with two expected skips.
- Greptile gives this exact head 5/5. Security review passes. The PR has
no unresolved review threads or merge conflicts.

## Risks

- The 14 default permissions apply only to new standard agents. Existing
permissions stay unchanged. Low trust and managed built-in agents are
excluded.
- New grants include connection, runtime, and active-checkout
management. Existing company, responsible-user, scope, and approval
checks remain in force. The default inbox grant carries a
responsible-user-only scope so it cannot override another user's inbox
settings.
- Protected changes still need the responsible user's authority when
that check applies. Company boundaries and approval gates still apply.
- Agent-authenticated requests cannot configure process adapters or host
command settings on local adapters. Known provider credential references
remain allowed, as do narrow plain authentication overrides on new peers
when the caller uses an AI connection pool. Arbitrary environment
settings remain blocked. Board operators retain the host configuration
paths.

> I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This is a narrow fix to existing agent
configuration behavior.

## Model Used

- OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 series. This runtime did not expose its exact
hosted model ID or context window. This revision uses OpenAI GPT-6
through Codex with tool use, code execution, and tests. The runtime does
not expose the exact hosted model ID or context window.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
 2026-10-06 05:28:48 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 30ff3d7c58 feat(routines): expose activity gate API (#9438) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Scheduled routines provide recurring control-plane work without
manual intervention
> - The new activity gate can suppress scheduled runs when no external
work occurred
> - The core scheduler and database support landed without a public
create/update contract
> - Agents, operators, and managed plugins need validated fields plus
discoverable semantics to opt in safely
> - This pull request exposes the activity gate through routine APIs,
revisions, plugin contracts, tests, and skill documentation
> - The benefit is backward-compatible control over idle scheduled work
without losing activity-triggered follow-up

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

- Refs #8534

## What Changed

- Added shared activity-gate policy and scope enums with create/PATCH
validation.
- Persisted activity-gate fields through routine creation, updates,
revision snapshots, pipeline snapshots, and revision restores.
- Defaulted legacy revision snapshots during restore and added
regression coverage for pre-field snapshots.
- Extended managed-plugin routine declarations, production
reconciliation, and the SDK test harness to preserve non-default gate
settings.
- Added end-to-end API coverage for create/PATCH/list/detail
round-trips, defaults, and invalid enum rejection.
- Documented schedule-only semantics, activity windows,
own-run/read-action exclusions, scopes, and an hourly quiet-night
watcher example.

## Verification

- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/routine.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts`
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts
packages/plugins/sdk/tests/testing-actions.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-managed-routines.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-service.test.ts -t 'activity
gate|preserves declared activity gate settings|resolves routine agent
and project refs'`
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/lib/workspace-routines.test.ts
ui/src/pages/Routines.test.tsx`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `pnpm check:token-gates`
- GitHub CI: all final-head checks green; Storybook visual regression
skipped by path rules.
- Greptile: 5/5 with no unresolved review threads.

## Risks

- Low risk: defaults remain `always` and `company`, preserving existing
routine behavior and old revision snapshots.
- Managed plugin manifests can now declare the same validated gate
settings as the public routine API; omitted values retain core defaults.
- Revision snapshots now include the new fields so policy changes are
not lost or treated as no-ops during restore.

> For core feature work, checked `ROADMAP.md`: this extends the existing
Scheduled Routines roadmap item and does not duplicate a separate
planned capability.

## Model Used

- OpenAI GPT-5.5 via Codex CLI, with repository tool use and code
execution; context-window size was not exposed by the runtime.

## 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>
 2026-07-24 16:47:24 -05:00
DottaPaperclipClaude Opus 4.8
 		ad961227f5 feat(secrets): add user-specific runtime secrets (#8825) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other
environment-bound secrets.
> - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not
model values that should differ by human operator.
> - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing
whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value.
> - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped
runtime checks deterministic and auditable.
> - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user
values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime
resolution gates.
> - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user
provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required
user secrets or active definitions are unavailable.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #224
Refs #6057

This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core
secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It
is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime
secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the
responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time.

Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as
#1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full
user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here.

## What Changed

- Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values,
keeping stored values out of access metadata.
- Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to
pick them alongside existing secret refs.
- Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve
against the human responsible for the run.
- Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter
dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are
inactive.
- Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access.
- Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user
attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be
resolved.
- Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures
surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures.
- Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes.
- Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered
incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`,
`0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127`
migrations.
- Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR
contains code/docs/tests only.

## Verification

- PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on
`paperclipai/paperclip:master`.
- PASS: `git diff --check`
- PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg
'^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true`
produced no files.
- PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130`
with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`,
`0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`,
`0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and
`0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`.
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts`
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests)
- PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final
Greptile cleanup fixes)
- PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run
src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests
after the final rebase CI fix)
- PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery,
project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors,
watchdog, and stale queue paths.
- PASS: GitHub checks are green on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck +
Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e,
Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review.
- PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on
`2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5,
and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated
threads.

## Risks

- Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible
user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs
before adapter dispatch.
- `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without
values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind
explicitly.
- External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically
provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side
access for non-local vaults.
- The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release
validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge.
- The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream
migrations; the branch migrations use guarded
column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older
draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects.

> 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, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter
with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal
reasoning mode are not exposed by the runtime.

## Checklist

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
 2026-07-05 05:58:20 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 746e287e33 feat(control-plane): add annotation and workspace controls (#8229) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI-agent
companies.
> - The control plane coordinates issues, workspaces, documents,
routines, and board review flows across company-scoped data.
> - The local source branch contained related schema, service, and UI
changes for workspace issue scoping and document/routine annotations.
> - These changes need to move together because db schema, shared types,
server services, and UI consumers form one contract.
> - This pull request extracts the migration-bearing control-plane work
from the source branch onto `origin/master`.
> - The benefit is a standalone branch with deterministic migration
order and focused review for the highest-risk part of the split.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No GitHub issue exists for this branch split. Internal source task:
[PAP-11234](/PAP/issues/PAP-11234).

Problem/motivation:
- Workspace operations need explicit issue scoping so readiness and
blocker handling can be derived correctly.
- Document annotations need reliable live updates, save failure
surfacing, normalized activity keys, and better comment panel behavior.
- Routine descriptions need the same annotation contract as issue
documents so operators can discuss and edit routine text without
special-case infrastructure.

Proposed solution:
- Add the workspace-operation `issueId` migration and readiness scoping.
- Add routine document/annotation schema, shared types, services,
routes, and UI editing support.
- Keep the related migrations in one PR so the renumbered `0106` and
`0107` migrations land in a deterministic order after current `master`.

Alternatives considered:
- Split migrations into separate PRs, rejected because that would create
migration-numbering conflicts and make each branch less standalone.
- Merge this with UI polish, rejected because this branch needs deeper
server/db review.

Roadmap alignment:
- Checked `ROADMAP.md`; the roadmap mentions future recurring routine
capabilities generally, but no duplicate implementation PR for these
annotation/workspace changes was found.

## What Changed

- Added `0106_workspace_operations_issue_id.sql` and
`0107_routine_description_annotations.sql`, plus schema exports.
- Scoped workspace readiness to blocker issues and attached workspace
operation issue ids.
- Scoped issue-thread interaction accept finalization to the source run.
- Added routine document annotation contracts across
db/shared/server/UI.
- Improved document annotation live updates, activity-key normalization,
save failure surfacing, and comment panel behavior.
- Added issue workspace property controls and compact
blocked-by/quick-control UI updates.
- Added focused server and UI regression tests for the new contracts.

## Verification

- `CI=true NODE_ENV=development pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
--prefer-offline`
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest
server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issue-thread-interactions-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routine-document-annotation-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts
ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx
ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx
ui/src/components/WorkspaceRuntimeControls.test.tsx
ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts --run` — 10 files, 273 tests
passed.
- `NODE_ENV=test pnpm -r --filter @paperclipai/db --filter
@paperclipai/shared --filter @paperclipai/server --filter
@paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed, including db migration numbering
check.

## Risks

- Migration-bearing PR; merge this branch before any later PR that adds
migrations with higher numbers.
- Cross-layer contract risk across db/shared/server/ui, mitigated with
targeted tests and affected-package typecheck.
- Review should pay special attention to company scoping in new
routine/document annotation paths.

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

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` / CodexCoder, GPT-5-class
coding model with tool use and shell execution. Exact runtime snapshot
and context-window setting were not exposed by the Paperclip run
context.

## 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 available from the run context)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A per source task: do not add screenshots/images unless
specifically part of the work)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A;
no public docs changed)
- [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>
 2026-06-23 12:00:03 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 3c73ed26b5 Expand plugin host surface (#5205) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - The plugin system is the extension boundary for optional product
capabilities
> - Rich plugins need more than a worker entrypoint: they need scoped
database storage, local project folders, managed agents/routines, host
navigation, and reusable UI components
> - The LLM Wiki work exposed those missing host surfaces while keeping
plugin code outside the core control plane
> - This pull request expands the core plugin host, SDK, server APIs,
and UI bridge so plugins can declare and use those surfaces
> - The benefit is that future plugins can integrate with Paperclip
through documented, validated contracts instead of bespoke server or UI
imports

## What Changed

- Added plugin-managed database namespaces and migration tracking,
including Drizzle schema/migration files and SQL validation for
namespace isolation.
- Added server support for plugin local folders, managed agents, managed
routines, scoped plugin APIs, and plugin operation visibility.
- Expanded shared plugin manifest/types/validators and SDK
host/testing/UI exports for richer plugin surfaces.
- Added reusable UI pieces for file trees, managed routines, resizable
sidebars, route sidebars, and plugin bridge initialization.
- Updated plugin docs and example plugins to use the expanded host and
SDK surface.

## Verification

- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`
- `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run
packages/shared/src/validators/plugin.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-database.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-local-folders.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-managed-agents.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-managed-routines.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/plugin-orchestration-apis.test.ts
ui/src/api/plugins.test.ts ui/src/components/FileTree.test.tsx
ui/src/components/ResizableSidebarPane.test.tsx
ui/src/pages/PluginPage.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/bridge.test.ts` passed:
11 files, 67 tests.
- Confirmed this PR changes 89 files and does not include
`pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*`.

## Risks

- Medium: this expands plugin host contracts across db/shared/server/ui
and includes a new core migration (`0076_useful_elektra.sql`).
- The plugin database namespace validator is intentionally restrictive;
plugin authors may need follow-up affordances for SQL patterns that
remain blocked.
- Merge this before the LLM Wiki plugin PR so the plugin can resolve the
new SDK and host APIs.

> 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-enabled shell/git/GitHub
workflow. Context window size was not exposed by the runtime.

## 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 run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
 2026-05-05 07:42:57 -05:00