7 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	931eec3fbf	feat(mcp) [split 4/8]: wire gateway runtime and Smoke Lab (#9559) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters, UI surfaces, and operator verification > - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated or human review > - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs stay below the 100-file review limit > - This pull request is split 4/8 and focuses on gateway runtime, Smoke Lab, plugins, and server wiring > - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Related parity reference: #9534 - Problem: The policy core needs runtime execution, endpoint guards, route registration, heartbeat integration, and adapter MCP injection to become operational. - Proposed solution: Adds the remaining server routes/wiring/consumers, runtime tests, adapter-utils MCP contracts, and Claude/Codex injection implementations required by the server layer. - Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves. - Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate roadmap initiative. - Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/03-server-tool-access`. - Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate remains empty. - Requested review: SecurityEngineer for gateway, endpoint guard, token issuance, and runtime wiring; Greptile on every PR. ## What Changed - Adds the remaining server routes/wiring/consumers, runtime tests, adapter-utils MCP contracts, and Claude/Codex injection implementations required by the server layer. - Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable. - Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven stack levels. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` - Changed server test set — 26 files, 382 tests passed - Affected server adapter tests — 38 tests passed after concrete adapter boundary move - Adapter-utils and Codex focused tests — 76 tests passed ## Risks - Remote endpoint validation, token handling, and runtime supervision are security-sensitive and can fail closed or deny legitimate access if misconfigured. - Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers; mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy. - Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from #9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge. > 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, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and code-execution tools enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link explicitly required for this coordinated split stack - [x] My branch name describes the change 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 ## Stack Coordination - Internal execution plan: [PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan) - Parity reference: #9534 - Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563 - Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff at #9563. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-07-14 15:07:30 -05:00
3 people	c4eb5339e7	fix(worktree): require target attestation before repair (#9414) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI agents for work > - Local agent execution uses isolated git worktrees with worktree-specific config, environment, storage, and ports > - Legacy worktree repair and runtime-port persistence must mutate only the worktree they are serving > - A leaked ambient `PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=true` could be combined with config resolution pointing at the default instance > - The server test suite reproduced that combination and repeatedly rewrote the live default instance `.env` with its old fixture name > - Existing PR #3071 guards configs under Paperclip home, but does not require the target itself to attest worktree ownership and does not cover runtime-port persistence > - This pull request requires both a worktree config layout and target-local persisted worktree attestation before either writer adopts the target > - The benefit is that ambient process state can never turn the main instance into a worktree on its next restart ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related implementation: Refs #3071 **Pre-submission checklist** - [x] Searched open and closed issues and pull requests; #3071 is the only direct related implementation. - [x] Reproduced on current `master` before applying the fix. - [x] Confirmed the mutation originates in Paperclip's worktree config repair path. **What happened?** A process with leaked `PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=true` could resolve `PAPERCLIP_CONFIG` to the default instance and cause worktree repair to rewrite that instance's `.env`. The recurring trigger was `server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts`: an ambient config path from the developer shell survived into a test whose fixture worktree name was `PAP-884-ai-commits-component`, explaining the stale name repeatedly written to the live file. **Expected behavior** Worktree repair and worktree runtime-port persistence must mutate a target only when that target is independently provisioned and persisted as a worktree. Ambient environment flags alone must never authorize writes to the default instance or a normal repository-local `.paperclip` config. **Steps to reproduce on unpatched `master`** 1. Export `PAPERCLIP_CONFIG` pointing to a default instance config and set `PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=true`. 2. Run `server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` from that shell. 3. Observe that the default instance `.env` is rewritten with the test fixture's worktree marker and name. **Environment** - Version: `master` at `e4e12bfb8` - Deployment/install: local source checkout with pnpm - Adapter: not adapter-specific; core server config - Database/access context: not applicable - OS: Linux **Privacy** - [x] All paths and values in this description are generic and contain no credentials or personally identifying data. ## What Changed - Reject config targets unless their parent directory is the worktree-specific `.paperclip` layout. - Require the target's own persisted `.env` to declare `PAPERCLIP_IN_WORKTREE=true` before repair or runtime-port persistence can mutate it. - Scrub ambient `PAPERCLIP_*` variables before every worktree-config test so developer-machine exports cannot escape test isolation. - Add regressions for default-instance config poisoning, runtime-port persistence, and unattested repository-local `.paperclip` targets. - Preserve valid provisioned worktree behavior by adding persisted worktree markers to the existing positive fixtures. ## Verification - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` — 12 tests passed. - Branch is based directly on current `origin/master`; only two server files changed. - No `pnpm-lock.yaml`, workflow, migration, UI, or generated asset changes. ## Risks - Low risk: the new guard intentionally refuses repair for targets that lack provisioning evidence. - A manually assembled worktree that sets only ambient flags but never writes its worktree marker will no longer be auto-repaired; the supported provisioning path already writes that marker. - No schema, API, migration, or user-facing command changes. > This is a focused correctness fix and does not overlap with planned core work in `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used - Implementation and root-cause investigation: Anthropic Claude through the `claude_local`/Claude Code runtime, reported by the producing agent as “Claude Fable 5”; the runtime did not expose a more specific provider model ID or context-window value. Capabilities used: extended reasoning, shell tool use, code editing, and test execution. - PR preparation and verification: OpenAI Codex CLI runtime; the harness did not expose the exact underlying model ID or context-window value. Capabilities used: repository inspection, shell tool use, Git/GitHub operations, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used with all model details exposed by the runtimes - [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 #3071 above - [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the bug report template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal ticket ID - [x] I have run the focused tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have assessed documentation impact; no documentation change is required for this internal guard - [x] I have considered and documented 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: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-07-14 10:59:06 -05:00
4 people	ece8a51e22	[codex] Bundle local branch fixes from PAP-10032 (#6604) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - This branch accumulated multiple already-tested control-plane, adapter runtime, invite, workspace, plugin, and UI quality fixes on the primary Paperclip checkout. > - `origin/master` advanced while those commits were still local, so the branch needed to be preserved and reconciled before review. > - Splitting the branch commit-by-commit against the new base produced overlapping conflicts with recently merged upstream PRs. > - This pull request keeps the remaining branch as one standalone PR because the final diff is 38 files after removing screenshot artifacts, under Greptile's 100-file cap, and can be merged independently after review. > - The benefit is that none of the local work is lost, the branch is now based on current `origin/master`, and reviewers can evaluate the reconciled changes in one place. ## What Changed - Merged the local accumulated branch with current `origin/master` and resolved the invite-flow overlaps from the newer upstream companies query helper. - Preserved the local fixes for invite existing-member behavior, invite link copy fallback, reusable workspace selection, worktree auth, static SPA fallback, markdown wrapping, plugin slot registration, cloud upstream UX/server polish, project sorting, and related tests. - Removed screenshot artifacts from the PR per review request. - Kept the PR under the requested file limit: 38 files changed, with no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` changes. ## Verification - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyInvites.test.tsx ui/src/pages/InviteLanding.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Projects.test.tsx ui/src/plugins/slots.test.ts ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx server/src/__tests__/invite-accept-existing-member.test.ts server/src/__tests__/static-index-html.test.ts server/src/__tests__/execution-workspaces-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/better-auth.test.ts server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `NODE_ENV=test pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - Confirmed `git diff --name-only origin/master...HEAD | wc -l` is `38`. - Confirmed no PR diff entries match `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `.github/workflows/*`, or `screenshots/*`. ## Risks - Medium review risk because this is a bundled rescue PR rather than several narrow feature PRs. - Invite flow and company cache behavior overlapped with newer upstream changes; the merge resolution intentionally keeps the shared `companiesListQueryOptions` helper while preserving local existing-member invite behavior. - Visual review evidence is no longer attached in-repo because screenshots were removed from this PR per review 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 - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent, with repository tool access, terminal execution, and git/GitHub CLI operations. ## 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] UI screenshots were intentionally removed from this PR per review request - [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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: CodexCoder <codexcoder@paperclip.local>	2026-05-25 07:25:26 -05:00
Devin Foley	08af830430	Tighten publicBaseUrl port rewriting (#4553) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a control plane for autonomous agent companies, so its local and authenticated deployment behavior has to stay predictable under port rebinding and worktree isolation. > - This change sits in the server/worktree configuration path that derives runtime URLs and auth origins from `auth.publicBaseUrl`. > - The original hostname-port rewrite change fixed one real gap for private/tailnet host:port worktree setups, but it widened the rewrite rule too far. > - Rewriting every explicit `auth.publicBaseUrl` can corrupt public or reverse-proxy URLs by turning a stable origin like `https://paperclip.example` into a local listen-port URL. > - Paperclip's auth and trusted-origin handling depend on that URL staying semantically correct, so this had to be narrowed before merge. > - This pull request tightens the rewrite rule to explicit-port URLs only and adds regression coverage across the CLI helper, worktree config persistence, and server startup path. > - The benefit is that private host:port worktree flows still work, while public/default-port URLs remain stable and safe. ## What Changed - Tightened `rewriteLocalUrlPort` in `cli/src/commands/worktree-lib.ts`, `server/src/worktree-config.ts`, and `server/src/index.ts` so it only rewrites URLs that already include an explicit port. - Removed the old loopback-only hostname gate from the CLI/worktree helpers and replaced it with the more precise `parsed.port` guard. - Updated CLI helper coverage to assert that explicit-port non-loopback URLs still rewrite while no-port public URLs stay unchanged. - Expanded `server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` to cover explicit-port rewrite and no-port stability for both persisted worktree config and in-memory runtime port selection. - Added startup-path coverage in `server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` for `detect-port` rebinding with both explicit-port and no-port `auth.publicBaseUrl` values. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk build` - `npx vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` - `npx vitest run cli/src/__tests__/worktree.test.ts server/src/__tests__/worktree-config.test.ts` - All of the above were run locally in this issue worktree and passed. ## Risks - Low risk. The behavior change is deliberately narrower than the reviewed broad-host rewrite and is guarded by regression coverage for both the explicit-port and no-port cases. - The main remaining risk is behavioral only if another code path starts depending on port rewriting for URLs that never declared a port, which would be a separate bug. > 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 local agent using `gpt-5.4` with high reasoning effort, tool use, shell execution, and file editing. - Anthropic Claude local agent using `claude-opus-4-6` for follow-up code review approval on the implementation issue. ## 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	2026-04-26 14:29:22 -07:00
4 people	b9a80dcf22	feat: implement multi-user access and invite flows (#3784) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies. > - V1 needs to stay local-first while also supporting shared, authenticated deployments. > - Human operators need real identities, company membership, invite flows, profile surfaces, and company-scoped access controls. > - Agents and operators also need the existing issue, inbox, workspace, approval, and plugin flows to keep working under those authenticated boundaries. > - This branch accumulated the multi-user implementation, follow-up QA fixes, workspace/runtime refinements, invite UX improvements, release-branch conflict resolution, and review hardening. > - This pull request consolidates that branch onto the current `master` branch as a single reviewable PR. > - The benefit is a complete multi-user implementation path with tests and docs carried forward without dropping existing branch work. ## What Changed - Added authenticated human-user access surfaces: auth/session routes, company user directory, profile settings, company access/member management, join requests, and invite management. - Added invite creation, invite landing, onboarding, logo/branding, invite grants, deduped join requests, and authenticated multi-user E2E coverage. - Tightened company-scoped and instance-admin authorization across board, plugin, adapter, access, issue, and workspace routes. - Added profile-image URL validation hardening, avatar preservation on name-only profile updates, and join-request uniqueness migration cleanup for pending human requests. - Added an atomic member role/status/grants update path so Company Access saves no longer leave partially updated permissions. - Improved issue chat, inbox, assignee identity rendering, sidebar/account/company navigation, workspace routing, and execution workspace reuse behavior for multi-user operation. - Added and updated server/UI tests covering auth, invites, membership, issue workspace inheritance, plugin authz, inbox/chat behavior, and multi-user flows. - Merged current `public-gh/master` into this branch, resolved all conflicts, and verified no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is included in this PR diff. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-service-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-validators.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authz-company-access.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/sidebar-preferences-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/auth-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm db:generate` - `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts --list` - Confirmed branch has no uncommitted changes and is `0` commits behind `public-gh/master` before PR creation. - Confirmed no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is staged or present in the PR diff. ## Risks - High review surface area: this PR contains the accumulated multi-user branch plus follow-up fixes, so reviewers should focus especially on company-boundary enforcement and authenticated-vs-local deployment behavior. - UI behavior changed across invites, inbox, issue chat, access settings, and sidebar navigation; no browser screenshots are included in this branch-consolidation PR. - Plugin install, upgrade, and lifecycle/config mutations now require instance-admin access, which is intentional but may change expectations for non-admin board users. - A join-request dedupe migration rejects duplicate pending human requests before creating unique indexes; deployments with unusual historical duplicates should review the migration behavior. - Company member role/status/grant saves now use a new combined endpoint; older separate endpoints remain for compatibility. - Full production build was not run locally in this heartbeat; CI should cover the full matrix. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5-based model, CLI/tool-use environment. Exact deployed model identifier and context window were 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 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 Note on screenshots: this is a branch-consolidation PR for an already-developed multi-user branch, and no browser screenshots were captured during this heartbeat. --------- Co-authored-by: dotta <dotta@example.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-04-17 09:44:19 -05:00
dottaandPaperclip	555f026c24	Avoid sibling worktree port collisions ... Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-03-26 11:12:39 -05:00
dottaandPaperclip	ab82e3f022	Fix worktree runtime isolation recovery ... Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-03-26 11:12:39 -05:00