mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-14 00:26:28 +01:00
3914d0c94a8b7ade00a1a93f275d80f706287be0
19
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
0b8ba1ac92 |
fix(queue): show messages a booting run's first turn takes as sent (#20822)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Task chat lets a person send follow-up messages to a running agent, and steer them into the live turn > - A sandboxed run (for example on Daytona) can take minutes to boot before its provider session exists > - A message sent during that boot cannot be steered, so it waits in the steering pane > - The runner then puts the message into its first turn, and the server removes it from the queue, but the view has no signal for this, so the message stays in the steering pane as "queued" > - That stale local entry also hides the queue id, so Steer and Discard fail for every later message > - This pull request tells the view which messages the first turn takes, and drops local queue entries whose run has settled > - The benefit is that a message sent while the sandbox boots shows as sent at once, and later messages keep working Steer and Discard ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A person sent a follow-up while the agent's sandbox was booting. The message stayed in the steering pane with Steer unavailable. After the agent started, the message stayed there. The agent had received it in its first turn. Later, Discard on that message failed with "Couldn't discard. Message is still queued.", and a new message also stayed in the steering pane. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Assign a task to a Paperclip Runner agent that runs in a Daytona sandbox. 2. While the sandbox boots, send a follow-up message. 3. Wait for the agent's first response. The message is still in the steering pane. 4. After the run hands off to a successor run, send another message and try to discard the first one. **Expected behavior** A message sent while the run is starting shows as a sent message. Later messages keep working Steer and Discard. **Actual behavior** The first message stays in the steering pane. Discard fails, and the new message cannot be steered until the page reloads. ## What Changed - `firstTurnQueuedCommentIds` (server, `first-turn-queued-input.ts`) returns the messages in a deferred queue that the target run's first turn already sealed, or will take while it is still starting. It uses the same eligibility rule as `claimFirstTurnQueuedInput`. It reads only lean columns, so the queue poll does not transfer run snapshots or large wake payloads. - The queue read path and the queue mutation path both put these ids in a new optional `firstTurnCommentIds` field on `IssueQueuedCommentQueue`. - The task view puts each of those messages in the conversation as input of that run, at its submission time, and not in the steering pane. - The task view no longer treats a saved message as a pending local queue entry after its target run is no longer live. A request that is still in flight keeps its original target. ## Verification - Red-green server test: `issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` "reports the messages a preparing/native run's first turn takes, before and after it seals them" and "reports no first-turn messages once the run's turn already started". Before the fix, `firstTurnCommentIds` was `undefined`. - Red-green UI tests: `IssueDetail.test.tsx` "shows a message the booting run's first turn takes as sent, not queued" (still starting, and sealed) and "keeps queue controls for a new message after the run that took an earlier one hands off". Before the fix, the queue held `['new-message', 'boot-message']` and the queue id was withheld. - Reproduced on staging first: the run's context held a first-turn receipt for the stuck message, and the server queue had no entries, while the view still showed it as queued. - `npx vitest run` for `issue-queued-comments-routes`, `queued-comment-consumption`, `queued-comment-postgres`, `queued-comment-use-cases`: 172 passed. The existing queue-poll byte budget tests still pass. - `npx vitest run src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx src/components/task-chat src/lib/issue-queued-comment-queue src/lib/optimistic-issue-comments`: 1288 passed. - `tsc --noEmit` for shared, server, and ui: no new errors. - `pnpm verify` exits 2 because the change touches `packages/shared`. Required CI supplies the broad coverage. ## Risks - Low risk. The new field is optional and only for display. Delivery still belongs to the first-turn claim and the deferred wake. - If a starting run fails before its first turn, the field goes away and the message shows in the queue again for the next run. This is correct, because the deferred wake still holds it. - The queue read adds one lean run read and one comment read only while a deferred queue targets a running run. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, browser). ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
github-actions[bot]andlockfile-bot
|
1d67e309e0 |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm lockfiles (#20845)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses a dependency lock for reproducible builds. > - Dependency changes on master need matching lock entries. > - Paid eval reports also pin a reviewed offline correction. > - Reports must install before paid model work starts. > - This automated PR keeps the lock and report proof together. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Dependency manifests on master changed after the last committed lock refresh. **Expected behavior** Frozen installs must match those manifests. Eval reports must retain matching offline lock proof. **Steps to reproduce** Run a frozen install before and after this lock refresh. ## What Changed - Refresh the dependency lock from the manifests on master. - Refresh the sandbox provider lockfiles from their manifests on master. - Include the matching offline report correction and hashes. - Resync the SDK public source proof's lock pins from the refreshed lock. ## Verification - Pinned pnpm resolution completed with lifecycle scripts disabled. - The report proof refresh accepted the reviewed committed baseline. - The workflow rejected changes outside the lock and report proof files. ## Risks The lockfile bot merges this PR without CI or review when every added package version is at least 3 days old on npm. Otherwise the PR waits for a maintainer, and the daily refresh tries again. The bot merges only the exact commit this workflow generated from manifests already reviewed on master. Unknown report lock baselines remain blocked. This update changes no permissions or paid enable gates. ## Model Used None — generated by pnpm and the deterministic report-lock updater. ## Checklist - [x] Thinking path and problem description included - [x] Generated lock and matching report proof included - [x] Release-age gate decides between bot merge and maintainer review Co-authored-by: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
ff8ec41e6a |
feat(runner): upgrade ACPX to 0.22.0 and move patched behavior into Paperclip (#20770)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Paperclip Runner and the shared `adapter-utils` engine run ACP agents through the embedded ACPX library > - Paperclip pins ACPX 0.13.1 and keeps a large patch (`patches/acpx@0.13.1.patch`) on it > - ACPX 0.22.0 adds host hooks (`onAcpMessage`, `assertActive`, `processLifecycle`, prompt-response `_meta`, `spawnAgent`-friendly launch) that make much of that patch unnecessary > - A large patch is expensive to port and hides behavior that belongs to Paperclip > - This pull request upgrades to ACPX 0.22.0 and moves most patched behavior into Runner and `adapter-utils` > - The benefit is a patch that is 484 lines instead of 1,334, with the moved behavior covered by Paperclip tests ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20675, #14430, #15075, #17942, #9980 **Proposed enhancement** Upgrade the embedded ACPX library from 0.13.1 to 0.22.0. Keep only the patch behavior that stock 0.22 cannot express. **Motivation** The 0.13.1 patch held behavior that Paperclip owns, for example usage receipts, Copilot policy, model checks and the agent environment. Each ACPX upgrade had to port all of it. ACPX 0.22 gives hooks that let Paperclip do this work itself. **Current behavior** Runner and `adapter-utils` depend on 1,334 lines of patched ACPX 0.13.1 code. **Expected behavior** Runner and `adapter-utils` use ACPX 0.22.0. The patch keeps only: extension methods, Cursor subagent routing, event `_meta` and the message boundary chunk, the protocol guard hook, `spawnAgent`, and `requestExtension`. ## What Changed - ACPX 0.13.1 → 0.22.0 in Runner, `adapter-utils`, the server, the Daytona runner images and the qualified profiles (`acpxVersion`). `@agentclientprotocol/sdk` moves to 1.9.0. - New `patches/acpx@0.22.0.patch` (484 lines). The 0.12.0 and 0.13.1 patches are removed. - Delivery receipts: Runner confirms a permission reply when `onAcpMessage` sees the exact outbound reply. Question and extension replies count as delivered when Runner hands them back to ACPX. New `interaction-delivery.ts`. - Copilot policy: the existing policy function runs from `onAcpMessage`. A violation stops the agent, cancels later permission requests and fails the next prompt through `assertActive`. - Model selection: stock 0.22 validation, plus a sidecar gate (`createAcpxEffectiveModelGate`) that refuses a prompt if the agent reports another model. Grok binds its model when the session opens. Antigravity adds its concrete model to the model list ACPX reads. - Typed session failures: Runner and `adapter-utils` read them from the turn result `_meta` and fail the turn. They advertise the capability themselves. - Pi and Cursor usage receipts: a collector (`prompt-receipts.ts`) binds them to the turn's own `session/prompt` reply. - Goal capability: Runner reads it from the `initialize` reply. It keeps it under `paperclip.goalCapability` in the saved agent capabilities `_meta` and restores it when a saved session loads. - Agent environment: Runner and `adapter-utils` set the agent environment in `spawnAgent`. ACP terminals keep their current environment. `adapter-utils` blocks inheritance of `XAI_API_KEY` and refuses to start if the server has an `ACPX_AUTH_*` variable. - `adapter-utils` spawn hooks (`spawnCwd`, stderr, `onAgentSpawn`): a new `stockAcpRuntimeOptions` maps them to stock `spawnAgent` and `processLifecycle`. - Windows: ACPX 0.22 rejects raw command strings on Windows. `adapter-utils` now passes an argv array there. - Grok rules: a Runner guard (`grok-session-rules.ts`) writes `session/new` `_meta.rules`. - Turn-dispatch journal (#20675): ACPX 0.22 ignores errors from `onAcpMessage`. The adapter keeps a failed `dispatched` write and throws it from the turn's `assertActive`. ACPX calls `assertActive` before the prompt write, so the write still stops. The real-ACPX test now checks this route. `docs/durable-recovery.md` is updated. - Plan events: the sidecar reads 0.22 `status` events tagged `plan`. - CI: the backup-checkpoint lane now installs through the shared `setup-ci-dependencies` action, like PR CI, so it resolves a stale `pnpm-lock.yaml` in place. It runs on any root `package.json` change, and pull requests never commit the lockfile, so its own frozen install failed on dependency changes. - Tests that checked removed patch internals are removed or rewritten: the response-delivery, Cursor-usage and Pi-receipt package contracts, and the goal-persistence packaging test. New unit tests cover the moved behavior. ## Verification Local runs on macOS (darwin-arm64), Node 26, on the rebased head: - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/drivers/acpx src/cli`: 2,000 passed. - `tsc -p packages/paperclip-runner/tsconfig.json` and `tsconfig.test.json`: no errors, except the existing `@paperclipai/paperclip-eval-kernel` build gap in `workflow-harness.ts`. - Runner package contracts (`node --test test/acpx-*-package-contract.test.mjs test/acpx-sidecar-contract.test.mjs`), `scripts/build-inputs.test.mjs`, `scripts/contracts/contract-fingerprints.test.mjs`, `scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs`: all pass. `node scripts/generate-acpx-sidecar-contract.mjs --check` passes. - `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --test acpx_park_preparation --test acpx_park_readiness --test acpx_warm_attachment --test native_provider_backend`: 86 passed. `cargo fmt --check` passes. - `adapter-utils`: `tsc` clean. `vitest run src/acpx-engine src/mcp-isolation.integration.test.ts`: 457 passed (one Gemini flag test failed once under load and passes when run alone). - Adapters: `claude-local` and `codex-local` `acp.quota.test.ts` (23 and 39 passed), `grok-local` (149 passed). - Server: `scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.test.mjs`, `native-session-executor.test.ts`, `quarantined-task-retry.test.ts` (1,416 passed). - `cargo test -p paperclip-runner-core --lib -- previous_acpx_release acpx_upgrade unrestorable_saved_sessions`: 3 passed. `node --test test/acpx-session-carry-forward-package-contract.test.mjs`: passes. - `patch -p1 --forward` on a clean `acpx-0.22.0.tgz` gives output identical to the port. - Under full-suite load, some Runner live and recovery tests time out. Each one passes when run alone. Full regression is left to CI. Not run: live provider runs (they need provider credentials), the opt-in Kimi live peer test, the Gemini filesystem smoke test, and Windows. ## Risks - Previous-release story: sessions saved by the previous release (ACPX 0.13.1) carry forward. ACPX 0.22 loads the session records 0.13.1 wrote. Runner moves a saved descriptor that names 0.13.1 (`CARRIED_ACPX_RELEASES`) to 0.22.0, and the sidecar keeps 0.13.1 as the ACPX value in the session identity, so the saved session key and identity record still match. The existing launch-profile rebind still decides which sessions resume: a settled session, or the same run's interrupted turn through lost-turn recovery. A session saved by any other ACPX release is still refused as `provider_state_incompatible`. `rules/acpx-profile-identity.mdc` and `docs/durable-recovery.md` now describe this. - Proof: `acpx-session-carry-forward-package-contract.test.mjs` resumes a session record written by the real ACPX 0.13.1 with its Paperclip patch. 0.22 loads the same provider session (no `session/new`), runs a turn and keeps the earlier turn. Rust tests cover a settled 0.13.1 session that the next run attaches to, and a turn interrupted by the upgrade. A recovery-identity test checks that the session key and identity record match across the versions. - `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not committed. CI resolves it for each run, and the lockfile refresh workflow updates it after merge. - Behavior change on the server: `adapter-utils` refuses to create an ACPX runtime if the server environment has an `ACPX_AUTH_*` variable. Before, ACPX ignored such variables. Stock 0.22 would use them to authenticate agents with server credentials. - Delivery confirmation is now Runner-owned. A permission reply is confirmed by the exact outbound message. Question and extension replies are confirmed when Runner hands them to ACPX, not when the pipe accepts them. - Users can select only models that the agent advertises. Stock 0.22 rejects other model IDs (Claude is exempt). - ACP terminals keep the sidecar or server environment, as before. This existing exposure is not changed by this pull request. - The `adapter-utils` Gemini version probe now runs with the server environment plus the run variables, not the run variables alone. - The pack contract digest and profile `acpxVersion` change, so Daytona needs a new runner image. - Grok launch flags (`--model`, `--reasoning-effort`) were checked on 1.0.13 but session open needs a login, so Grok keeps the existing `_meta` path. > 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 Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file editing, subagents). Extended reasoning 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 - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
34f2bb78ee |
feat(connections): connect Sentry with a long-lived user auth token (#20823)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agents use app connections to call provider tools, such as the
Sentry MCP server
> - The Sentry connection has only one method: browser sign-in through
the hosted MCP OAuth server
> - That grant expires. An unattended triage agent loses Sentry access
until a person signs in again
> - During that time, a scheduled triage routine completes each run but
reads no Sentry data
> - This pull request adds a second Sentry method that uses a user auth
token
> - The benefit is a Sentry connection that stays valid until a person
revokes the token
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
App connections: the Sentry entry in the connection catalog.
**Problem or motivation**
A Sentry connection that was created with browser sign-in on 2026-10-11
changed to "OAuth authorization expired. Reconnect this app to
continue." at 04:01 UTC on 2026-11-10. The agent that used it had no
Sentry tools after that time. Each hourly triage run reported the
blocker but could not continue. Unattended agents need a Sentry
connection that does not need a person to sign in again each month.
**Proposed solution**
The hosted Sentry MCP server accepts a Sentry user auth token in the
`Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <token>` header. It reserves `Bearer` for
its own OAuth tokens. Paperclip API-key methods already support a custom
header prefix. Add a Sentry API-key method that uses this header.
**Alternatives considered**
Reconnect with browser sign-in again. That restores access only until
the next grant expiry.
## What Changed
- Add the `mcp-user-token` method ("Use a user auth token") to Sentry in
`scripts/ingest-app-definitions.mjs`. It uses the same server URL and
sends the token as `Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <token>`.
- Regenerate `packages/shared/src/app-definitions/sentry.json`. I did
not include unrelated output that the content corpus drift caused for
other providers.
- Add a permission review entry for the new method in
`doc/connections/tool-method-permission-reviews.json`.
- Add a test for the new method and its header prefix.
- Document the token method, its required scopes, and its ownership risk
in `doc/connections/SENTRY.md`.
## Verification
- `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/app-definitions.test.ts`: 40
passed. The new assertion fails on `master` because Sentry has only one
method there.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts -t
Sentry` (server): 2 passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/pages/apps/app-connect-policy.test.ts
server/src/__tests__/satisfied-connection-intents.test.ts`: 64 passed.
- `pnpm verify` returned exit 2 (a doc is a global CI input). Required
CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Live probe of `https://mcp.sentry.dev/mcp` with an `initialize`
request: `Authorization: Sentry-Bearer <invalid token>` starts an MCP
session (the token is checked on tool calls). `Authorization: Bearer
<same token>` returns `401 invalid_token`. This confirms the server
accepts the header scheme.
- Not done yet: a real agent tool call with a real token after
deployment.
## Risks
- Low risk. This adds a method. The existing OAuth method and saved
connections do not change.
- A user auth token acts as its creator and lasts until revoked. The
method guidance and docs say this. Rotate the token when that person
leaves.
- If Sentry changes the `Sentry-Bearer` scheme, connections that use
this method fail on tool calls. The OAuth method still works.
> 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
- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) in Claude Code, with tool use
(shell, browser, web search).
## 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
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandClaude Opus 5.5
|
6ce953ca52 |
fix(runner-e2e): resync the SDK lockfile pins to master's current lock (#20834)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Runner support suite proves the plugin SDK public types from pins in `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json` > - Two of those pins follow the root lockfile: the `pnpm-lock.yaml` blob, and `lockSha256`, which must equal the `outputSha256` in `tests/runner-e2e/report-lock.json` > - The lockfile refresh #20824 changed the lockfile and `report-lock.json`. The registry kept the old values > - #20623 makes the refresh resync these pins, but its registry values come from the refresh before #20824 > - The refresh resyncs only when it commits a lockfile change. The lockfile is current, so the refresh after #20623 did nothing, and the pins stay stale > - This pull request regenerates the two pins with the existing `--write` command > - The benefit is that `ci / Runner support suite` passes again on master and on new pull requests ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20824. Refs #20623. **What happened?** `ci / Runner support suite` fails on master at `e2cf9a670f` and on pull requests that merge master. `source-sdk-public-type.test.ts` and `source-sdk-evidence.test.ts` fail with "Reviewed SDK reference policy does not match public proof". `source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs` reports `pnpm-lock.yaml (changed)`. The refresh run after #20623 merged (run 43043576648) logged "Lockfiles and reporting-lock proof unchanged, nothing to do". **Expected behavior** The registry pins the committed lockfile, and `lockSha256` equals the `outputSha256` in `report-lock.json`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Check out master at `e2cf9a670f`. 2. Run `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs`. 3. See the "Reviewed SDK reference policy does not match public proof" failure. ## What Changed - `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`: regenerated with `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs $(git rev-parse HEAD) --write`. Only two values change: - `inputs["pnpm-lock.yaml"]`: `6d825f97…` → `d24edac1…`, the committed lockfile blob. - `lockSha256`: `b3208306…` → `17625672…`, the `outputSha256` in `report-lock.json`. - No other pin changes. The lockfile and `report-lock.json` do not change. ## Verification - Before the change, the three SDK proof test files fail with the policy mismatch. After the change, they pass. - `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.test.mjs tests/runner-e2e/prepare-report-lock.test.ts`: 4 files, 68 tests pass. - `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs $(git rev-parse HEAD) --check` reports `changed: false`. - Local run on macOS (darwin-arm64). Full regression is left to CI. ## Risks - Low risk. The change is test data only, and it uses the values that the registry command derives from the committed lockfile and the reviewed `report-lock.json`. - The same two values are in #20770. Whichever pull request merges first, the other one merges cleanly. - The refresh still resyncs these pins only when it commits a lockfile change. If the pins become stale with no lockfile change, the refresh does not repair them, and the support suite shows the failure and the fix command. > 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 Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file editing). Extended reasoning 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 - [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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
4d141cdf64 | Carry plugin task refusals and batch project reads (#20762) | ||
|
DottaandClaude
|
9574065a28 |
fix(workspaces): hand on a proven-unchanged preparation epoch instead of abandoning it (#20736)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - A native run on a remote sandbox first restores its workspace's saved version, publishes that root as its dirty epoch, and only then starts work > - A restart that kills the run in that window leaves the epoch dirty. The ownership settle (`settlePreparationOnlyRemoteWorkspaceEpoch`) always abandons it: the root is forgotten and the retry restores the saved version into a new directory > - The saved provider session still names the old directory, which is what #20712 and #20723 now have to handle > - In the common case the killed preparation only restored the saved version and changed nothing. A durable proof for exactly that already exists (`proveRemoteWorkspaceUnchanged`, used when the next admission finds an ended writer) > - This pull request makes the settle use that proof first, and keeps abandoning whenever the proof fails > - The benefit is a stable workspace root across a restart during preparation, with no change for anything unproven ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20712 **What happened?** In restart-chaos waves, a server kill during a follow-up's preparation (right after the workspace restore published) made the ownership settle abandon the epoch. The retry restored into `<workspace>-<epoch>-<lease>` instead of the published root, and the inherited session checkpoint named a root that no longer existed. **Expected behavior** When durable records prove the killed preparation only restored the saved version, the workspace is handed on at that saved version and keeps its root. Anything unproven is abandoned exactly as before. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a remote native task to a saved version, then start a follow-up or continuation run. 2. Kill the server after the follow-up's restore publishes (crash point `remote_workspace.prepare.after_publish_before_provision`). 3. Let ownership reconciliation settle the dirty epoch, then let the retry prepare. ## What Changed - `recovery/remote-workspace-unsaved-files-settlement.ts`: before it abandons a preparation-only epoch, the settle calls the existing `releaseUnchangedRemoteWorkspaceWriterById` (lock the workspace, check the writer, then `releaseUnchangedRemoteWorkspaceWriter`). That releases the writer at its saved version (dirty false, writer cleared, location and root kept, baseline marked released, run reference set to `saved`) only when `proveRemoteWorkspaceUnchanged` holds. The proof requires all of these durable records: - the unchanged-baseline marker for this exact epoch, run and saved version. It is written in the same transaction that publishes the restored root, so a kill mid-restore leaves no marker; - no recorded process, process group, process start or provider session; - no execution-start run event, no native result and no native runner checkpoint (the controller writes one before every runner command); - no workspace operation other than the file-neutral restore, finalize and recovery receipts (provisioning and saves record theirs before they touch files); - every workspace repository already in the saved version. - If the proof fails for any reason, the settle abandons the epoch exactly as before. The existing settle preconditions (run terminal, still `preparing`, no finalization, no work-started event, no save in flight) are unchanged and run first. - `packages/shared/src/crash-point-registry.ts` and `remote-workspaces.ts`: add the crash point `remote_workspace.prepare.after_publish_before_provision`, so the chaos harness can kill exactly at this boundary. It counts only a preparation that published an unchanged baseline (a restore of a saved version), and it is a no-op unless a test arms it. `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json` is refreshed because the registry file is a pinned SDK input. - Test `ownership-reconciliation-report.test.ts`: a proven-clean epoch is handed on with its root kept, with no abandonment receipt, and the writer hold is free for the retry. These cases are still abandoned exactly as before: no baseline (an epoch saved by the previous release), a baseline for another epoch, an already-released baseline, a provisioning operation. A run with a recorded process is still neither handed on nor abandoned by this settle. Previous-release story: an epoch saved by a release that did not write the baseline marker has no proof, so it is abandoned as before. No persisted shape changes; the marker already exists on master. ## Verification - Red: with the release branch disabled, the new test fails on the clean case (the epoch is abandoned). Green with the change. - `cd server && npx vitest run src/__tests__/ownership-reconciliation-report.test.ts src/services/remote-workspace-snapshot-reuse.test.ts src/__tests__/crash-point-call-sites.test.ts` passes. `packages/shared` `crash-points.test.ts` passes. `tsc --noEmit -p server` passes. - Live Daytona waves (claude, workload S1, the new crash point at the continuation's preparation (`:2` before the point was gated to saved restores; `:1` now), image built from master `e039be9202`, one task each): | | before (release disabled) | after | | --- | --- | --- | | Killed epoch 2 | abandoned (`workspace.remote_epoch_abandoned`) | handed on (`workspace.snapshot_skipped_unchanged`, epoch 2) | | Retry root | new root `…-4-ecf1c81e…` | same published root `…-1-33e93b90…` | | Retry `task.prepare` | 4598 ms | 4731 ms | | Retry restore / environment acquire | 1141 / 1381 ms | 1106 / 1478 ms | | Task result | done, no Retry | done, no Retry | | Stopped or orphan sandbox at rest | none | none | Preparation time does not change in this setup. The Chaos Lab environment uses ephemeral leases, so every run gets a fresh sandbox and a full restore with or without this change, and the killed run's sandbox is destroyed either way. The gain is the stable root, which keeps the saved session's working directory valid. ## Risks - Low. The release path is the same one admission already uses for an ended writer, under the same proof. The settle now tries it first. - A proof false positive would keep a root whose files changed. The proof refuses on every record that precedes a write, and on any missing or older-release evidence. > 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 - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, used through Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edit, 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 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Nicky Leach
|
0d4b1d8c89 | Gate agent plugin tabs by execution environment (#20657) | ||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
f30ac226d6 |
Keep project environment mappings independent of shared defaults (#20651)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A project supplies work context and repository storage to task runs. > - Creation selected a storage owner but did not retain the selected environment on the project. > - Configuration stored an environment inside checkout policy, but policy reads and run selection dropped it. > - Projects therefore continued to follow shared agent and instance defaults. > - This pull request saves placement on each project and uses it for new runs. > - The benefit is an independent Project to Environment association with the existing storage, trust, and recovery safeguards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20459 and #11644. Follow-up to #20587. The reported journey is Project > Configuration: changing one project's environment must not change another project's mapping or shared defaults. Related open PR #18176 repairs placement through the legacy workspace-policy field. This follow-up introduces a separate project association, saves creation defaults, and migrates saved legacy references. It overlaps that PR's placement, permission, and recovery safeguards. The changes should be reviewed together. #9588 concerns environment-variable response privacy and does not address placement. ROADMAP.md has no separate project-association work planned. ## What Changed - Add nullable `projects.environment_id` and expose `Project.environmentId`. Save the effective creation default once on the project. Keep environment placement separate from checkout/isolation policy. - Read and write Environment directly in Project Configuration. Keep the control available with isolated workspaces disabled. Each form reads its project's value, even when environment choices share a query cache. - Offer environments compatible with the current storage owner. Change the target and storage together when the existing storage selector attaches a core project to a plugin. Preserve retained-data restrictions and validate the observed storage owner again on save. - Resolve new task runs from their organizational project's target before agent and instance defaults. File sources from another project do not change placement. Explicit low-trust sandbox choices and enforced sandbox policies retain precedence. External provider placement remains separate. - Restore admitted native runs from their owned environment lease. Later project edits apply to new admissions. Require workspace-write permission for environment changes and clears. Check company bindings before runtime admission and during lease creation. - Migrate valid saved policy references into the project column. Normalize legacy API writes. Count and clear matching project references when an environment is deleted. Update API and behavior documentation. - Refresh the maintained SDK source registry for the two changed shared files. Runtime pins are unchanged. ## Verification - [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42908045146) is green on `8b3b7d5b5aed51fc4c8e9c2e3506508bbaf9e00c`: **60 successful checks**, three skipped gates, no failures, and `ci / verify` passed. GitHub reports no merge conflicts. Standard Greptile scored the same commit **5/5** with both review threads resolved. - Source checkout on macOS arm64, Node 26.12.0, with fresh isolated PostgreSQL. No production data or live provider calls. - The two-project component test changes the first form with isolation disabled and a shared query cache. The second form keeps its target. Storage changes update only the selected project. A saved target remains selected while the list loads, and an explicit clear remains possible. - API integration creates two projects from the same default, patches one, reads both, and checks that agent and instance defaults remain unchanged. A later instance-default change does not rewrite either saved project target. Tests cover unavailable/incompatible choices, anonymous and cross-company denials, and storage preconditions. - The migration test runs the actual SQL against an existing project row and verifies its environment and disabled checkout policy survive. Deletion accounting and clearing affect only matching project references. - The final guard set passes **53 tests across four files**: `project-environments.test.ts`, `environment-selection-route-guards.test.ts`, `heartbeat/environment-selection.test.ts`, and `ProjectProperties.environment.test.tsx`. All **64 environment-run-orchestrator tests** pass, including direct lease acquisition without an extra caller argument. The broader affected set passed **109 tests across eight files** before the additional admission guards. These sets overlap. - UI typecheck, migration numbering/safety, token gates, module boundaries, query-error rendering, and diff checks pass. `pnpm verify --explain` returns exit 2 and requires broad CI because shared schema/runtime paths and behavior documentation changed. Broad coverage is delegated to current-head CI. - Early iterations failed due to a legacy parser that drops the environment field, a fixture without real company membership, and incorrect expectations for privacy-preserving 404 denials. The service now reads legacy references before normalization, the API fixture has real membership, and denial assertions match the existing privacy contract. The orchestrator mock also needed the reused company-binding guard in its service contract. The focused suites above pass after those corrections. - Local server typecheck remains blocked by installed ACPX, Slack, AI SDK, and Runner type mismatches in unchanged dependency-facing code. It reports no errors in the changed production paths. This is not a full local typecheck or suite pass. Hosted CI supplies full current-head coverage. - SDK source-proof and privacy qualification passes **56 tests across three files**, including the real built SDK. The maintained source registry matches the committed revision; runtime pins are unchanged. - Review reproduced two failures: an incoming policy without a storage owner could be validated before the existing owner was restored, and uppercase legacy UUIDs missed migration matching. Preserve the owner before validation and compare normalized UUID text. Both regressions now pass. The post-fix project/storage/orchestrator batch passes **107 tests**: `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run server/src/__tests__/project-environments.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-workspace-provider.integration.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts --silent`. - The first hosted run failed build, typecheck, and canary at the same `run-completion.test.ts` call because lease acquisition required a new argument. The lease method now enforces binding internally. Its existing caller compiles without a new field, and the orchestrator tests prove the binding flag reaches the runtime. The full server check no longer reports that error; the local dependency errors above remain. ## Risks - Apply the normal database migration before serving the new revision. The migration adds a nullable foreign key and copies valid legacy project selections. It does not move repository data or resize provider storage. The five newest schema snapshots are retained. - New projects retain their creation target when shared defaults change. Existing projects without a saved selection continue to inherit defaults. A null target explicitly opts into inheritance. - Existing saved project selections now affect placement. Missing, archived, incompatible, and foreign-company targets fail validation; they do not silently choose another storage owner. A running admitted process keeps its original owned lease. - Local dependency limitations are listed above. No live-provider, deployed-browser, or production rollout qualification is claimed. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
353945c86d |
fix(tool-gateway): let agents create gateway tokens without receiving the value (#20613)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Tool gateways let external MCP clients use a company's tools with a
gateway client token
> - Since delegated connection management (#17737), an agent can create
and revoke gateway client tokens for its responsible person
> - #20581 stopped agents from getting the one-time token value, but it
did this by making token creation person-only
> - The product decision is that agents keep their delegated authority
to create and revoke tokens
> - This pull request restores agent token creation, but the agent never
receives the token value: the person reveals the value once on the
gateway's Tokens page
> - The benefit is that an agent can do the rotation work for the
person, and the secret still never enters chat, run events, logs or tool
output
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17737
Refs #20581
**What happened**
After #20581, `POST /api/tool-gateway/gateways/{gatewayId}/tokens`
returns 403 `gateway_token_requires_person` to every agent caller.
Agents lost the delegated authority to create gateway client tokens that
#17737 gave them. Before #20581, an agent that created a token received
the plaintext value in its tool result and could repeat it in chat.
**Expected behavior**
An agent with delegated connection management can create and revoke
gateway client tokens. The agent never receives a token value. The
responsible person gets the value once, on the gateway's Tokens page.
Person callers keep today's behavior.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Give an agent delegated connection management for a responsible
person with `tools:admin`.
2. As the agent, call `POST
/api/tool-gateway/gateways/{gatewayId}/tokens` (for example through
`call_api`).
3. See 403 `gateway_token_requires_person`.
## What Changed
- Agent create: `POST /api/tool-gateway/gateways/:gatewayId/tokens` from
an agent with delegated authority returns 201 with token metadata only
(`id`, `tokenPrefix`, `expiresAt`, `pendingReveal: true`), plus
`tokensPath`, a `reveal_credential` `requiredUserAction` for the
responsible person, and a `nextStep` instruction. The saved row has no
usable value: its stored hash is of a value that is generated and then
discarded. Gateway authentication also rejects `pendingReveal` rows.
- Person reveal: new person-only `POST
/api/tool-gateway/gateway-tokens/:tokenId/reveal`. It generates the
value, stores its hash, clears `pendingReveal` and returns the value
once. A conditional update makes a second or concurrent reveal return
409. Only the token's responsible person can reveal it (403
`gateway_token_reveal_requires_responsible_person`). Agent callers get
403 `gateway_token_requires_person`. A token revoked before reveal
cannot be revealed.
- Why a reveal that generates the value: no stored plaintext existed to
reveal, and storing one (even encrypted) for later display adds a secret
at rest. Generating the value at reveal time keeps the existing one-time
display and stores only a hash.
- Schema: `tool_mcp_gateway_tokens.pending_reveal boolean not null
default false` (migration `0460_gateway_token_pending_reveal`). Shared
`ToolMcpGatewayToken.pendingReveal`, and `ConnectionRequiredUserAction`
gets `reveal_credential` / `gateway_token`.
- UI: the Tokens page shows a "Waiting for you to reveal" section for
pending tokens with a "Reveal token" button. The value appears in the
existing "New token — copy now" one-time block. Pending tokens show the
status "Not revealed".
- Agent gateway create: the 201 for agent callers also includes
`gatewayPath`, `tokensPath` and a `nextStep` that tells the agent to
link the saved gateway.
- The agent create-token `nextStep` and the catalog say not to revoke
the old token in the same turn: its client keeps working on it until the
person installs the new value.
- The reveal update and its `tool_gateway.token_revealed` activity entry
commit in one transaction. The Tokens page offers Reveal only for tokens
that act for the signed-in person.
- API reference: new `docs/api/tool-gateway-tokens.md` (create, reveal,
revoke) in the docs nav.
- Revoke stays allowed for agents with delegated authority (unchanged
route).
- API catalog: create-gateway, create-token, reveal and revoke
descriptions now say who acts, that agents never receive values, the
page paths, and that the old token is revoked only after the client
works with the new one.
- Agent access map: create-token policy note and a new reveal entry.
- Evals `gateways-profiles.create-gateway` and
`gateways-profiles.rotate-token`:
- Remove the keyword grader (`human|operator|admin|manage`) and the
handoff text checks. Grade saved state, rendered links and secret
absence. A plain reply or a question card is accepted.
- Remove the setup probes that called the create routes as the agent.
Under delegated authority, those probes created a real gateway
("Forbidden agent gateway"), which failed create-gateway before the
agent ran.
- create-gateway: exactly one gateway for the intended profile and
company, created by the agent (or by the person after a handoff); the
person opens it from a rendered link; attribution matches the creator;
any agent-created token is still pending reveal; no token value in chat,
cards or run events.
- rotate-token: after the agent's turn, both setup tokens still work and
any replacement the agent created is pending the person's reveal; the
person follows the rendered Tokens page link and reveals (or issues) the
value in a private browser; the new value works before the old token is
revoked; the unrelated client keeps access; no token value appears
anywhere, including a regex scan for any full `pcgw_<id>.<secret>`
value.
- The changed scenario context and outcomes are recorded in
`chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.json` `changedFields` and pinned in
the manifest test. The inventory digest, descriptors (`oracleVersion`
v2, `sourceFiles`) and SDK public input pins are updated. The unused
`external-gateway-handoff.ts` module is removed.
- Fixture realism: the create-gateway profile now allows a real read
tool (an empty profile made the agent ask which apps to add instead of
finishing), and the rotation tokens get a neutral owner note instead of
"Disposable rotation fixture" (the agent read that note as an eval
hint).
- Shared private-browser helpers (`external-private-browser.ts`,
`external-private-browser-worker.ts`) get one optional `pendingTokenId`
input and one `revealedPending` receipt field.
## Verification
- Red: on `master` route code, the new integration tests `lets agents
create and revoke gateway client tokens without ever receiving a token
value` and `reveals an agent-created gateway token value only to its
responsible person` fail (403 `gateway_token_requires_person`).
- Green: `cd server && npx vitest run
src/__tests__/connection-management.integration.test.ts -t gateway` (25
passed). The test checks that the agent `call_api` result has no `token`
field and no token-shaped value, that the agent cannot reveal, that the
person reveals once (second reveal 409) and the value authenticates,
that agent revoke works and stops the value, that a token revoked before
reveal never gets a value, and that person create still returns the
value.
- `npx vitest run src/__tests__/tool-gateway.test.ts
src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts
src/services/native-runtime/runner-api.test.ts` (2247 passed).
- `cd ui && npx vitest run
src/pages/apps/gateways/panels/TokensPanel.test.tsx
src/pages/apps/gateways/gateway-helpers.test.ts` (16 passed); `pnpm
check:token-gates` clean.
- Eval graders and catalog: `pnpm exec vitest run --config
tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts` on the gateway oracle tests,
`external.test.ts`, catalog consistency/contract, TestOps
export/retained, phase/clock callers and SDK input/type tests (all
pass); `node --test` on the TestOps manifest, adapter, contract,
streaming and reconcile tests (all pass); `node
tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`
(unchanged).
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` passes. `tsc --noEmit` for `server`,
`ui` and `tests/runner-e2e`: no errors in changed files.
- Paid end-to-end run of both eval cases, run
[42872921890](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42872921890)
on
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
8148fc0b1e |
fix(release): fetch draft-notes PR summaries in batches (#20602)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release workflow drafts the next stable's release notes when a beta publishes (`draft_stable_notes`) > - The draft nests each referenced PR's summary under its commit subject, and it fetches each summary with its own `gh pr view` call > - A beta range now references more than 1,500 PRs, so these serial calls do not finish inside the job's 10-minute timeout > - This pull request fetches the summaries in batches of 50 per GraphQL query > - The benefit is that the job finishes in under a minute and pushes the notes branch again ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The `draft_stable_notes` job of [run 42763789753](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42763789753) (beta `2026.1110.0-beta.0`) reached its 10-minute timeout. GitHub cancelled it during "Draft stable notes from the published beta", while a `gh` process was still running. The beta itself published and its smoke tests passed. The `release-notes/v2026.1110.0-beta.0` branch was not pushed. **Expected behavior** The job writes the notes draft and pushes the branch for every beta, whatever the size of the commit range. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Publish a beta whose range from the last stable has many PR-referencing commits. This range has 1,586 commits, and 1,583 different PRs. 2. `draft-stable-notes.sh` calls `gh pr view <n>` once for each commit, one after another. 3. The job reaches `timeout-minutes: 10` before the loop ends. **Paperclip version or commit** `09e24dd12c36251dd12af2d73dbc715ce990f922` (beta `2026.1110.0-beta.0`). This was the first beta to run the job after #12124 added the PR summaries; earlier betas skipped it. ## What Changed - `scripts/draft-stable-notes.sh`: - Collects the unique PR numbers first. Fetches their bodies 50 per `gh api graphql` query (aliased `pullRequest(number:)` fields), into a temporary cache that `enrich_pr` reads. - Parses the raw response with `jq`, not with `gh --jq`. When any number in a batch is not a PR (for example, an issue reference), gh exits non-zero and does not apply its `--jq` filter. The other PRs in the batch still have usable data. - The output format does not change. A missing `gh` or `jq`, a failed batch, a cache directory that `mktemp` cannot create, or `DRAFT_NOTES_SKIP_PR_ENRICHMENT=1` still gives bare subjects. - No code comments are added (per `CONTRIBUTING.md`); this description holds the explanation. - `scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs`: - The enrichment tests now use a fake `gh` that answers GraphQL like GitHub. - New tests: batching (120 PRs make 3 queries, and a repeated PR is fetched once); a batch with a non-PR number; a failed batch; a failed `mktemp`; prose-only and empty bodies; the opt-out. - Range tests now run with enrichment disabled, so an authenticated `gh` on the test machine cannot reach GitHub. - `package.json`: adds the test file to `test:release-registry`. These tests did not run in CI before. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs`: 17 pass. They also pass with macOS bash 3.2 first on `PATH`. - `node scripts/ci-profile/node-test.mjs scripts/draft-stable-notes.test.mjs scripts/release-lib.test.mjs`: 31 pass. - Red check: the new tests against the old script fail 5 cases (all batching and enrichment cases). The `mktemp` test fails against an unguarded `mktemp` call. - Live run on the real range: `./scripts/draft-stable-notes.sh 2026.1110.0-beta.0` finished in 47 seconds. It wrote 4,596 excerpt lines for 1,583 PRs. - Parity: for 40 randomly sampled PRs from that range, the new excerpts are byte-identical to the old per-PR `gh pr view` output. - `shellcheck`: no new findings. The two remaining notices were there before this change. ## Risks - Low. The change touches only the post-publish draft job, and every failure still gives the bare-subject draft. - `jq` is now needed for the PR summaries. GitHub's Ubuntu runners include it. Without `jq`, the draft has no summaries, the same as without `gh`. - I did not change `release.yml`. The job already checks out `master`, so after this merges, re-running the failed job of run 42763789753 should push the missing notes branch with the fixed script. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) via Claude Code, with tool use (shell, file editing, test runs, read-only GitHub API calls). ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
89ec4e7614 |
feat(links): add cached GitHub pull request previews (#20593)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task conversations contain links to pull requests and other work. > - A URL alone cannot tell the operator whether a PR is open, merged, or blocked by conflicts. > - Fetching every link at render time wastes API calls and can expose private data through a shared cache. > - This pull request adds a demand-driven links service and a GitHub PR adapter. > - Each viewer and company has a separate cache. Repeated links share one request and result. > - Operators get context when they hover or focus a link. Normal links stay useful when a provider is unavailable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Task Markdown links, shared link metadata, and the server GitHub API boundary. **Problem or motivation** PR links have compact labels and neutral icons. They do not provide a rich hover card or a common status source across repeated mentions. A background resolver cannot borrow a person's GitHub connection because it has no viewer identity. **Proposed solution** Recognize supported links locally. Request metadata after a delayed hover or keyboard focus. Show a card at the first line of the link, aligned with its icon. Share the result across all mentions in the current viewer and company. Keep the exact original navigation URL. The first adapter supports GitHub pull requests. Open is green, merged is purple, and merge conflicts are orange. Draft, closed, unknown, loading and unavailable states remain quiet. **Alternatives considered** Eager page scans would spend API quota on links the operator does not inspect. Company-wide caching of personal GitHub results would cross the credential boundary. This change uses neither approach. **Roadmap alignment** ROADMAP.md was checked. This extends existing task links and the GitHub resolver. It adds no deployment adapter or new background worker. Searches of open and closed PRs for link previews and PR hover cards found no matching implementation. ## What Changed - Add host-owned link recognition and a normalized preview contract. The service selects an adapter by provider. - Add a board-only company read endpoint. It checks company access before cache reads and sends a private, no-store response. - Use the current viewer's eligible GitHub connection. A configured connection that cannot supply credentials fails closed. With no managed connection, reuse existing company credentials or public access. Instance credentials retain the public-repository check. - Reuse the GitHub external-object resolver for API transport and response parsing. Add title and mergeability to its normalized snapshot without changing its existing state contract. - Coalesce requests by company, viewer and canonical PR URL. Bound cached entries and concurrent work. Cache success for one minute and failures for a short period or the provider retry window. - Add an abortable request deadline. Timed-out work stays in the concurrency budget until it settles. No periodic worker or idle polling is added. - Add a shared browser query and anchored preview card. Repeated Markdown links observe the same result. There are no automatic retries, window-focus refreshes, toasts or connection prompts. - Add ten production-component Storybook examples and real pointer/keyboard browser checks. Document the API and verification route. ## Verification - Linux source checkout: 233 focused tests passed in nine suites. They cover recognition, fixed API destinations, provider states, access failures, credential selection, viewer/company isolation, request coalescing, expiry, cache bounds, concurrency bounds and mounted OpenAPI coverage. - A live public GitHub smoke returned this PR's correct title and open state. Two equivalent URLs shared one real network request. Personal connection access was not part of that smoke. - A controlled HTTP server stalls a real response body. The test proves cancellation while another lookup completes. - UI typecheck and the server layered typecheck passed. The UI production build passed. - Token gates and query policy gates passed. All 30 map/catalog support checks passed. The three new server test files also passed a focused TypeScript check. - All 27 focused browser checks passed on the reviewed source tree. They cover light/dark themes, narrow layouts, open/merged/conflict/draft/closed/loading/unavailable/failed states, fixed positioning during pointer movement, exact navigation and keyboard access. A real browser HTTP interception counts one deferred lookup for two equivalent PR links. - The first browser attempt lacked Chromium. A later combined build/test attempt exhausted the sandbox's 8 GiB memory limit and killed Storybook. Those attempts supply no pass evidence. Chromium is installed, and the final browser checks run with the build stopped. One initial Storybook dependency reload interrupted a streaming check. All eight existing inline-link cases passed on the warmed server, followed by a complete 27-case pass. - Synthetic Storybook pointer events did not exercise the native hover boundary. The assertions now run through real Playwright pointer and keyboard actions. The fixture stories retain the production components. - Review fixes preserve the Draft label when GitHub reports both draft and conflicts. They also preserve neutral link colors in dark mode. The 25 affected service checks pass, including the added combined-state regression. Browser checks compare unknown, draft and closed links with the muted theme color. - The first CI policy run rejected a literal retry opt-out. The code now uses the existing explicit zero-retry helper. A new test-spy type error was also corrected. These failures are fixed; their earlier runs remain failed. - `pnpm verify --explain` returned exit 2 because the browser test path selects broad CI. No full local suite is claimed. The final CI run supplies that coverage. - The previous head `437913c797963aa113bb82e2ae8b836969317ef9` passed CI and received a 5/5 Greptile score. All four review threads are resolved. Master then advanced. The current head `ae2a1c2adbd61a621cca9bdd160561952613df6e` resolves the source-manifest conflict against master `9b21dcbdda01296349f3cfe0a3a6891e79df6130`. Fresh CI and review are running. - The previous CI run found a lost class on decorated PR links and a stale SDK source manifest. Both are fixed. The existing CommentThread integration test and 26 focused link service tests pass. All 45 SDK source/privacy tests pass. All eight source-manifest helper tests pass. The manifest helper changed only source identities and added the two new shared files. Runtime, compiler, parser and library pins stay unchanged. - A later review found that expired timeouts could reuse a settled promise. The service now removes settled requests from its shared-request map and counts unfinished provider work separately. The new regression failed before the fix and passes after it. The concurrency-bound and real stalled-HTTP tests also pass. - UI typecheck and token gates pass after these fixes. The browser rerun needed Chromium in the new session. That first attempt did not exercise the UI. The complete 27-case browser rerun passed before the master merge with retries disabled. All 27 browser cases also passed on the merge revision with retries disabled. - After the master merge, all 84 focused link, OpenAPI and integration tests pass. All 55 SDK source/privacy/manifest tests pass. UI typecheck and token gates pass again. The source manifest retains master's reviewed runtime pins and includes both sets of source changes. GitHub confirms the PR can merge cleanly. The preflight helper rebuilt the shared package and plugin SDK; Cargo is unavailable locally. Final CI supplies Rust coverage. - The latest master update changed the reviewed report-lock policy but left the SDK lock hash at its previous value. The SDK source/evidence checks reproduced the mismatch. This change sets only the SDK lock hash to the authenticated output of the existing master policy and patch. Compiler, parser and Zod pins stay unchanged. All 56 SDK source/evidence/manifest tests now pass. All 84 focused link/API/integration tests, UI typecheck and token gates also pass on the updated source. ## Risks - This cache is process-local. Separate server replicas can make separate GitHub requests. - A cached result can remain visible for its short lifetime after GitHub changes. A later hover refreshes expired data. - GitHub can report unknown mergeability. The UI shows conflicts only when GitHub explicitly reports them. - Personal preview data stays in viewer/company caches. It is not written to company external-object records or persisted browser query storage. - Stories simulate the API. They do not prove a live GitHub login or private-repository access. - No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The runtime does not expose the exact serving model ID or context-window limit. Used reasoning, repository inspection, source editing, shell execution and browser tools. No subagents were used. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] 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> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
42d4499489 |
fix(daytona): force a stuck stop before starting a retained sandbox (#20609)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - On Daytona, a follow-up task resumes the agent's retained sandbox before the agent starts > - The host stops an idle sandbox gracefully. A process that ignores SIGTERM can leave Daytona in `stopping` for many minutes > - Resume waited for that state change until its 300 s start deadline. It never escalated, so each attempt failed after five minutes, and the bounded retries did the same > - On staging, a user comment waited about 21 minutes before the agent started. Two resume attempts each used 299.7 s in the plugin dispatch > - This pull request forces a stuck stop once, then starts the sandbox within the same deadline. It also traces the wait with the observed state > - The benefit is that a stuck stop costs about 30 s instead of failing the run, and the next case is diagnosable from the trace ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A user commented on a task that used a retained Daytona sandbox. The first run and its first retry each failed after about 5 min 20 s with `reusable_sandbox_resume_failed (cause=provider_error)`. The Honeycomb trace shows `execution.plugin_dispatch` at 299.7 s in both. Inside it there is only `lease.lookup` (44 ms) and `lease.channel_cleanup`, and no `lease.start`. So the whole budget went to `waitOutSandboxTransition`, which polled a sandbox that stayed in a transition state. The later attempt, after a control-plane restart, found the sandbox `stopped`. Its `lease.start` took 1.3 s. A transition that ends in `stopped` is a stop. **Expected behavior** A sandbox that stays `stopping` for longer than the host's own graceful-stop budget is forced to stop, then starts. The run does not fail on the start deadline. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Retain a Daytona sandbox whose graceful stop does not finish (Daytona reports `stopping`). 2. Resume or realize the lease. 3. Before this change, the call polls until the 300 s deadline and fails with "is still stopping at its start deadline". ## What Changed - `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/src/plugin.ts`: `waitOutSandboxTransition` tracks how long the sandbox stays `stopping`. After `STUCK_STOPPING_FORCE_AFTER_MS` (30 s) it calls `sandbox.stop(seconds, true)` once, then keeps polling. A refused force stop keeps the old wait within the same deadline. - The wait is a `lease.wait_transition` span. The force stop is a `lease.force_stop` child span. - `lease-tracing.ts`: the closed `paperclip.sandbox.startup.state` label also records `starting`, `stopping`, `restoring`, `archiving` and `resizing`. Before, these were all `other`. - `server/src/services/plugin-host-services.ts`: the host admits the two new span names and the new closed state values. - `doc/observability.md`: documents the new spans and states. ## Verification - Red/green: with the plugin change stashed, the three new stuck-`stopping` tests (realize, refused force stop, resume) fail by hanging to the deadline. With the change they pass. The "settles on its own" test confirms that no force stop happens for a normal stop. - `vitest run` in `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona`: 14 files, 618 tests passed (8 skipped). `tsc --noEmit` passed. - `server/src/__tests__/plugin-host-services-span.test.ts`: red before the allowlist change, 25/25 after. - `pnpm verify` exited 2 (the doc is a global CI input), so CI supplies the broad coverage. - Not verified on a live Daytona sandbox. Hosted acceptance needs the change deployed to staging. ## Risks - The force stop sends SIGKILL to processes in a sandbox that is already stopping and is about to start. The disk persists across a stop, so the retained workspace is kept. A graceful stop that is still running past 30 s is killed. The host's own graceful stop budget is 30 s, so the host had already given up on it. - Daytona can refuse a stop while a state change is in progress. Then the code waits as before, so the result is no worse than today. - The root cause is inferred from the trace (a transition that ends in `stopped`). The new state label confirms or refutes it the next time it happens. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, browser, 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 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
9b21dcbdda |
refactor: remove SPEC docs and repoint spec citations (#20565)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Contributors and agents read the docs under `doc/` before they change code > - `doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` were out of date. `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` became an append-only log: in 60 days it got about 1,645 new lines and lost 181, across 140 commits > - #20557 changed `AGENTS.md` so the code and its tests are the source of truth, and the specs are only background > - This pull request removes the two spec docs. It moves only the sections that live code comments cite into focused docs, and it repoints all other references > - The benefit is one less stale document that agents read and append to ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20557 (merged). This PR is the follow-up that removes the docs. It is based on `master`, which already contains #20557. **Issue type** Outdated content. The docs are out of date and conflict with the code. **Where is the issue?** `doc/SPEC.md`, `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`, and the code comments and docs that cite them. **What's wrong?** `doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md` are out of date, but agents still read them and append a paragraph with each fix. **Suggested fix** Delete both files. Move the sections that code cites into focused docs. Repoint the references. ## What Changed - Deleted `doc/SPEC.md` and `doc/SPEC-implementation.md`. - Moved these spec sections, because live code comments cite them: - §9.3.1 "Shared default-open issue writes" → new section in `doc/agent-permission-defaults.md`. - §9.8.1 "Issue-thread interaction resolver contract" → `doc/execution-semantics.md`, "Issue-thread interaction resolution". That section already had most of the contract. I added only the missing parts: the `supersedeOnUserComment` default, the canonical policy list, the addressee and cap rules, the rule that surfaces show the server's effective audience, and the cross-issue budget charge. The short policy summary at the top of the section now points to the list, so the definitions occur one time only. - §9.9 "Task Watchdog Authority Contract" → new "Authority contract" section in `doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`. It holds the allowed and disallowed mutation lists and the deferred capabilities. The atomic recovery batch, restoration verification, and interaction rules were already in `doc/execution-semantics.md` §11, so the new section links there and does not repeat them. I did not move the "Downstream acceptance criteria" checklist or the sentence about the CTO and Security sign-off. These were implementation-time notes; the tests now hold that coverage. - §9.10 "Company Skill Policy Contract" → new `doc/company-skill-policy.md`. No focused doc had this contract. I did not move the "Required regression tests" phase checklist. - Did not move any other part of the specs. - Repointed code comments that cited spec sections: - `packages/shared/src/issue-write-denial.ts` (§9.3) → `doc/agent-permission-defaults.md` - `server/src/routes/issues.ts` (§9.9) → `doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`, "Authority contract" - `server/src/routes/issues.ts` (§9.3, §9.8.1 cross-issue budget) → `doc/agent-permission-defaults.md` - `ui/src/lib/interaction-audience.ts` and `ui/src/components/InteractionGovernancePanel.tsx` (§9.8.1) → `doc/execution-semantics.md` - `ui/src/lib/skill-policy-denial.ts`, `ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.tsx`, `ui/src/pages/CompanySkills.production.tsx`, `ui/src/pages/SkillStudio.tsx` (§9.10) → `doc/company-skill-policy.md` - `server/src/services/recovery/ownership-invariant-report.ts` (monitor deadline wait path) → `doc/execution-semantics.md` §8. That section already lists the one-shot monitor as a valid wait path. - Resynced the git blob pin for `packages/shared/src/issue-write-denial.ts` in `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json`. The comment edit changed the file's hash, and the Runner support suite checks that pin. I used `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --write`; only that one pin changed. - Updated `AGENTS.md` §1 so it does not name the deleted files. - Removed the links to the deleted files from `doc/plugins/PLUGIN_SPEC.md`. - Updated the `doc-maintenance` agent skill (`.agents/skills/doc-maintenance/`) so it no longer audits or stages `doc/SPEC.md`. - Removed or replaced references in `maps/README.md`, `maps/feature-map/README.md`, `maps/storybook-map/README.md`, `doc/PRODUCT.md`, `doc/CLIPHUB.md`, `doc/DEPLOYMENT-MODES.md`, `doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/evals.md`, `doc/spec/agent-runs.md`, `doc/AGENTCOMPANIES_SPEC_INVENTORY.md`, `doc/connections/CONNECTOR-PLAYBOOK.md`, `doc/plugins/ideas-from-opencode.md`, `doc/execution-semantics.md`, `doc/TASK-WATCHDOG.md`, and `.devin/wiki.json`. - In `doc/execution-semantics.md`, the "admission is independent of cleanup and accounting" reference now states the rule inline: only a hard stop, an explicit pause, or an inactive company refuses admission. - Kept these references as they are: dated plans in `doc/plans/` and `docs/plans/`, the dated log `doc/logs/2026-05-24-cli-api-parity-e2e-log.md`, `releases/`, the transcript fixture `ui/src/fixtures/runTranscriptFixtures.ts` (it uses the filename only as sample text), and `docs/specs/external-task-protocol.md` (it refers to the Symphony project's own `SPEC.md`). ## Verification - `git grep -n "SPEC-implementation\|SPEC\.md"` (without `releases/`, and ignoring `PLUGIN_SPEC.md` citations) finds only the kept references listed above. - `grep -rn "§9\.\(3\|8\|9\|10\)" ui/src server/src packages/shared/src` finds no results. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: "Maps aligned: 35 areas, 192 capability IDs". - `pnpm check:token-gates`: "All gates clean". - `pnpm exec vitest run --config tests/runner-e2e/vitest.config.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-type.test.ts tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-evidence.test.ts`: 45 passed. These failed in CI before the pin resync. - `pnpm verify`: exit 2 ("Broader verification required") because `AGENTS.md` is a global CI input. Required CI supplies the broad coverage for this revision. - All code changes are comments only. No runtime behavior changes. The title uses `refactor:` because comments in source files changed. ## Risks - Low risk. The change removes docs and edits comments only. - A reader can lose context from spec sections that I did not move. The text stays in git history. The code and its tests are the source of truth. - External links to the two deleted files will return 404. > 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`), in Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits). Standard 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 (focused checks above; CI supplies broad coverage) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (not applicable: docs and comments only) - [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> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
98ce93dd4e |
Choose project storage from compatible environments (#20587)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Projects supply repository files to agent runs through core staging or a storage plugin. > - A storage plugin's default claim silently attached new projects even when their agents used a different environment. > - An environment name or driver type does not establish shared storage access. The existing binding and task-driver contracts do. > - This pull request groups creation choices by that contract and selects storage from the creator's effective environment. > - The benefit is a visible, validated choice and a clear error before an incompatible managed workspace operation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Fixes #20459. Related: #20156 covers a separate provider-failure diagnostic. The PR search found no other fix for #20459. ROADMAP.md has no duplicate project-creation change. ## What Changed - Show **Available in** when configured environments require different project storage. Each option names the environments that can use the same storage owner. Hide the selector when all choices are compatible. - Derive compatibility from repository staging and managed binding ownership. Local, SSH, and sandbox environments use core staging. Managed storage requires a registered task driver from the same installed storage plugin. Separate storage plugins remain incompatible. Unknown plugin contracts and the fake sandbox are excluded. - Follow the creating agent's environment, or the person's primary agent, then the instance default and local fallback. Apply managed-only and forced Kubernetes policy. The product has no separate user or company environment-default field today. - Add a company-authorized discovery endpoint and an optional creation `environmentId`. Validate the choice again on save. Store the storage owner without overriding agent run environments. Preserve explicit API storage choices and existing project ownership. - Keep the hidden repository-free private-task project independent of environment availability. Submit the observed storage owner as `expectedStorageProviderPluginId` so a changed contract fails at save without setting a workspace policy. Instance task-isolation defaults stay inherited. - Reject an incompatible managed workspace before a provider operation. Name the storage and selected environment in the error. Add regression tests, API documentation, creation-story fixtures, and minimal corrections to obsolete map text. ## Verification - **102 tests passed across 7 files:** project environment integration, installed storage policy, repository persistence, project environment routes, project creation telemetry routes, OpenAPI, and NewProjectDialog. Run with `node node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run server/src/__tests__/project-environments.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-workspace-provider.integration.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-repositories-persistence.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-routes-env.test.ts server/src/__tests__/project-goal-telemetry-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/openapi-routes.test.ts ui/src/components/NewProjectDialog.test.tsx --silent`. - The review fixes cover both archived-default private-task cases and changed-storage rejection. With both instance isolation flags enabled, a new core repository project keeps a null policy and resolves to an isolated Git worktree. The complete affected set passes all 102 tests. - The CI query-error policy failure was fixed by using the shared query view. The form and shared query-view suites pass **24 tests**, including cached choices during a transient refetch failure. `node scripts/check-query-error-rendering.mjs --enforce --summary` reports zero findings. - CI exposed stale SDK source hashes and heartbeat fixtures that paired plugin storage with Local. Refreshed exactly four shared-source hashes with the maintained generator (runtime pins unchanged). All **53 SDK privacy/source-proof tests**, including real built SDK output, pass. All **7 corrected managed-storage heartbeat scenarios** pass; the fixtures declare the owning plugin's task environment and substitute transport at the existing execution seam. - Shared and UI TypeScript checks pass. The UI production build passes. `pnpm check:token-gates`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs`, and diff checks pass. - Tested UI states: compatible choices, incompatible groups, default within a group, manual override, create failure, loading, discovery failure and retry, and an unavailable default. Tests use the production form and existing design tokens. - The integration tests use real isolated PostgreSQL on macOS arm64 with Node 26.12.0. They cover user/agent defaults, storage persistence, policy restrictions, company and authentication denials, and rejection before a provider call. Discovery uses saved configuration and makes no worker or provider requests. - Local verification limits: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` stop in unchanged adapter-utils code because the installed ACPX types lack `inheritProcessEnv`. A direct server check also finds an unchanged AI SDK type-version mismatch. The existing heartbeat test `inherits the instance default environment across companies while preserving explicit agent overrides` times out at line 518 on both this change and unmodified master with the same dependencies. The full `pnpm test:run` attempt passed all six chat shards (1,948 tests), then the Git workspace expiration suite reported 14 failures. I stopped that broad run. Two sampled failures reproduce on unchanged master with the same `unknown_worktree_git_files` refusal; the other expiration failures were not independently compared. A later broad workspace-preparation run also hit workspace validation failures and was stopped; the seven corrected fixture scenarios pass independently. These limits do not establish a full local suite pass. Hosted CI remains required. - Initial missing-package and loopback-denial failures were resolved by repairing isolated dependency links, building the SDK, and running database tests with loopback access. No deployed or live-provider execution is claimed. ## Risks - Creation defaults now follow the effective environment. A plugin's `defaultForProjects` claim alone no longer selects storage. This is the intended behavior change. - Compatibility covers repository project storage. It does not guarantee arbitrary host paths, retained-workspace moves, adapter/image support, credentials, or worker readiness. Matching provider configs cannot prove a cross-plugin storage contract. - A person's primary agent supplies the personal default because there is no separate personal environment setting. An unavailable configured default requires a valid explicit choice or a configuration repair. - No migration runs. Existing projects keep their storage owner. This change does not detach existing managed data or provide a storage migration. - Full local verification has the limits listed above. CI and standard Greptile review are pending. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandClaude
|
84007892e9 |
refactor: move AGENTS.md section detail to docs and rules, add a bug-fixing section (#20585)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - `AGENTS.md` is the instruction file that each human and AI contributor reads before a change > - Pull request #20557 shortened the file, but several sections still held detail that applies to only some changes > - The scoped-rules section told agents to read each matching rule in full, and most changes match five rules > - The core engineering rules mixed three product invariants with process conventions > - This pull request moves that detail to the docs and to scoped rules, and adds a section on how to fix a bug > - The benefit is a 211-line file that states what applies to every change and points to the rest ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20557 **Issue type** Outdated or unclear contributor documentation. **Where is the issue?** `AGENTS.md` at the repository root, and `rules/`. **What's wrong?** - The scoped-rules section made agents read the full body of each matching rule before a change. The rule bodies total about 47 KB. - Sections 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 repeated detail that belongs in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/DATABASE.md`, a route rule, `DESIGN.md` and `CONTRIBUTING.md`. - Section 4 had a database reset command for `data/pglite`. That directory does not exist. - Section 5 had seven rules. Four of them were process conventions or path-specific detail. - The file did not say how to fix a bug. **Suggested fix** Make the rule headers the index. Move section detail to the document or rule that owns it. Keep only the three invariants in section 5. Add a bug-fixing section. ## What Changed - The scoped-rules section now tells agents to list the rule headers with one `grep` command. Agents read a rule body only for a design decision in its area, when the description is not sufficient, or when a reviewer cites it. - `rules/README.md` says that each `description` must state the required behavior in one sentence. - `rules/pull-request-review.mdc` has a description that states its requirements. - Section 4 (dev setup) and section 11 (pull requests) now point to `doc/DEVELOPING.md` and `CONTRIBUTING.md`. - The schema change workflow moved from section 6 to `doc/DATABASE.md`. - The API and auth expectations moved from section 8 to the new `rules/api-route-expectations.mdc`. - Section 9 links to `DESIGN.md` for design rules. `AGENTS.md` no longer tells contributors to run `pnpm check:token-gates`. - Added section 10, "Fixing a Bug": reproduce the error, write a failing test, write the fix, see the test pass, and verify the fix. - Section 5 now has three rules: company scope, contract synchronization, and the control-plane invariants. - The company-scope exceptions moved to the new `rules/company-scope-exceptions.mdc`. - Removed the strategic-docs rule. The plan-doc convention moved to the repo map. The artifact rule moved to section 7. - Removed rule 7. Five code comments that cited `AGENTS.md §5.7` now cite `rules/data-paths.mdc`. - Regenerated the SDK public source pin, because one of those comments is in `packages/shared/src/crash-points.ts`. - Added both new rules to `.greptile/files.json`. - The API route rule applies only to routes that read or write company data. Its status code list is a list of common codes. - The company-scope rule lists the sidebar company order as an instance-wide exception. - The `honeycomb-tracing` skill now points to `rules/data-paths.mdc` for the Telemetry workflow. ## Verification - Open `AGENTS.md` and confirm that each link resolves. A local script checked this. - Run `grep -E '^(description|globs|alwaysApply):' rules/*.mdc` and confirm that each rule prints a description. - Run `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`. It passes locally. - `packages/shared/src/crash-points.test.ts` passed locally before the rebase onto `master`. - Five source files changed in comments only. No other test suite ran locally. ## Risks - An agent that reads only rule descriptions can miss a detail in a rule body. Reviewers still apply the full rules. - Pull requests and the definition of done are now sections 11 and 12. Sections 1 to 9 keep their numbers. - Dated plan documents under `doc/plans/` still cite `AGENTS.md §5.7`. They are historical records. - Pull request #20565 also changes `AGENTS.md`. The second one to merge needs a conflict fix in section 1 and section 2. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), in Claude Code with tool use. - `claude-fable-5-2`. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ce1ee9e89f |
fix: stop prompts from encouraging subtasks (#20362)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agents read runtime prompts, tool help, skills, and role instructions. > - Several of these texts tell agents to create child tasks as a normal next step. > - One accepted-plan prompt even forbids work on the current task. > - Task parentage is useful, but it does not need a prompt that encourages task creation. > - This pull request removes those prompts and keeps the task APIs available. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10642. This change adjusts prompt wording; it does not add delegation-cycle guards. **Current behavior** Prompts tell agents to create children after plan approval, use children for long work, and create a task just to pass context. Onboarding requires a child even for a single request. **Proposed behavior** Continue work on the current task. Keep explicit assignments, optional task creation, parentage, dependencies, and approval gates. Use the separate-task recipes when the user requests that structure or when continuing existing work. **Reason and benefit** Reduce needless task trees without removing subtask support. Keep the patch limited to wording, existing test expectations, and generated catalog data. ## What Changed - Align accepted-plan prompts and remove direct child-creation advice from runtime and error text. - Make task tool descriptions neutral. Keep their fields, defaults, and handlers. - Update the main skill, onboarding, CEO instructions, company templates, specialist workflows, and matching guides. - Keep historical release snapshots intact. Refresh the explicitly seeded schema fixture's catalog digest; the server still verifies historical release snapshot hashes. - Refresh the affected generated catalogs, capability inventory, semantic contracts, and fixture manifest. ## Verification - Final tested head: `c6e304d0c105cdbfbe0b2ab0a233307fcd91a04b`. - All 66 check runs are complete: 60 pass, one is neutral, and five are skipped by CI conditions. Snyk also passes. No checks fail or remain pending. - [PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226554) passes typecheck, build, server/general tests, all eight E2E shards, Runner support, Runner Rust, and the aggregate verify gate. [Windows](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226546) and [Docker Runner](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42846226108) also pass. - [Greptile](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751419835) and [Paperclip review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20362#issuecomment-6751454010) give this exact head 5/5. All six inline threads are resolved. Neither current summary has findings. - Merged master `bf0220d34a156c81853755c3d1365ddc527037de`. Resolved three generated-file conflicts with the canonical generators. - Local verification passes: 473 focused prompt, continuation, UI, catalog, runtime and native-execution tests; Runner TypeScript build; generated metadata; UI token gates; and diff checks. - The prior head `c22018cb0f` failed three SDK evidence tests because two source hashes were stale. Reproduced all three failures locally. The existing generator refreshed only the hashes for the denial-copy file and its test. All 53 affected evidence/source-pin tests then passed, including private-value rejection. No scanner logic, assertions, or runtime dependency pins changed. Current CI confirms the support suite passes. - A prior commit failed the Rust process reaping test. Its cause remains unproven. No Rust code or assertions changed. Later Rust runs pass; this does not establish the cause of the earlier failure. - Local preflight built shared/plugin SDK packages, then stopped because `cargo` is absent. Current-head CI supplies Rust and full build coverage. `pnpm verify --explain` selects broad required CI; full local suites were not repeated. ## Risks - Wording changes guide the model; they do not enforce a ban on subtasks. - Existing installed skill versions and saved custom instructions need their normal refresh process. This PR does not migrate company configuration. - Existing approved task assignments and approval gates remain in effect. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact routed model ID and context-window size were not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandClaude
|
8d2bf78323 |
test(runner-e2e): resync the SDK public source pins with master (#20550)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Runner support suite checks that the plugin SDK's public types come only from reviewed source inputs, pinned by git blob hash in `tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.json` > - #19614 landed those pins, generated against an older master; since then `package.json` and ten files under `packages/shared/src` changed > - So `source-sdk-public-type.test.ts` (2 tests) and `source-sdk-evidence.test.ts` (1 test) fail the `ci / Runner support suite` check on every PR merge ref > - This pull request regenerates the source pins with the script made for that job > - The benefit is a green Runner support suite for every open PR again ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Since #19614 merged, `ci / Runner support suite` fails on every PR (for example #20047 and #20538) with `SDK public source proof unavailable` and `Source SDK evidence privacy check failed`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. On master at |
||
|
|
f4337bb5fb |
test(evals): land the chat catalog eval harness on master (#19614)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The chat-feature evals measure whether agents complete real chat requests through the product > - The chat catalog eval harness and its repairs live on the `chat-eval/master-candidate` branch, not on master > - Today's work made 139 of 242 chat evals pass in verified single-case live runs. Each product fix landed on master as its own pull request > - The eval-side changes (setups, graders, fault seams, evidence capture) still exist only on the candidate > - This pull request lands the harness on master. Master stays the source of truth for product behavior > - The benefit is one tree: evals run against master commits, and product fixes reach the evals as soon as they merge ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #19441, Refs #19599, Refs #20270, Refs #20334, Refs #20342, Refs #20344, Refs #20354, Refs #20360, Refs #20373, Refs #20382, Refs #20409 **What existing behavior does this improve?** The chat catalog eval harness and the product it evaluates live on a long-running branch outside master. Eval fixes do not reach master, so master-based eval runs use old setups and graders. **Subsystem affected** `tests/runner-e2e` chat catalog harness, plus a small set of product changes that exist only on the candidate. **Proposed change** Land the harness on master. Every product fix from this eval work already merged to master as its own pull request. Conflicts keep master's product behavior. ## What Changed - Most of the diff (808 of 851 files) is under `tests/runner-e2e/`: chat-catalog domains, scenarios, descriptors, the TestOps manifest, private evidence tooling, and their tests. - Graders now check saved state, setup literals and rendered or clicked links. Many keyword and regex checks on free-form replies are removed. Each changed grader has a bumped `oracleVersion` and calibration tests (a valid reply, a reworded valid reply, and broken variants that must fail). - The shared link helper `hasLink` no longer treats a list link (for example `/COM/issues?view=mine`) as a link to every task without a URL key. - Setup fixes build real state through supported product routes: routine history, agent grants through the board grant route, budget holds with a real cap, and a storage-layer archive fault for `inbox-search.archive-partial-failure`. - Browser boundary journeys (sign-in, chat-disabled, onboarding) now write the standard pass evidence files. - Retargeted cases, approved by the maintainer: `agent-chat.chat-disabled` (Conference Room gate), `agents.restore-instructions` (no saved instruction history), `access.manage-membership` (member permission edits stay board-only). - The private evidence trusted files (`manual-private-handoff.ts`, `manual-private-retention.ts`, `manual-private-report-assets.ts`) are byte-identical to master. - Product files outside `tests/` (43 files, +1,328 −49) carry candidate-only changes that master does not yet have. Most are tests. The main code changes are in `request-human-input.ts`, `heartbeat-run-summary.ts`, `native-completion-feedback.ts`, `native-run-finalizer.ts`, `openapi.ts`, `secrets.ts` and `IssueChatLongThreadPerf.tsx`. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run chat-catalog-domains chat-catalog-contract.test.ts chat-catalog-consistency.test.ts unit-launcher.test.mjs --testTimeout=180000` in `tests/runner-e2e`: 269 files pass, 3,550 tests pass. - `node --test chat-full-catalog-testops-manifest.test.mjs`: 10 pass. - `node tests/runner-e2e/source-sdk-public-inputs.mjs <HEAD> --check`: no change. - `tsc` for `server` and `tests/runner-e2e`: clean. - Live single-case verification: 139 of 242 cases passed on paid runs, and a person read the saved evidence for each. These are single-case runs, not one full-cohort run. ## Risks - Large diff. Most of it is test-only, but the 43 non-test files change product code paths. Review those files first. - Some graders are now less strict on reply wording. A person must read replies for meaning on those cases. - 42 cases need disposable outside accounts (Notion, Slack, GitHub, Daytona and others) and stay blocked. `access.invite-teammate` stays failing until local agent isolation lands, because the runner's durable state keeps a live invite token. - The paid workflow compares the trusted private-evidence files with master. They are unchanged, so this risk is low. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), with tool use and code execution, in Claude Code. Subagents used the same model. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |